Reply #24: Perhaps your own insistence on ideological purity leads you to misrepresent Collins' views,

[struggle4progress]

because what I find at the website does not closely resemble your caricatures:

" ... Sociobiology and evolutionary models can account for some elements of altruism, but radical altruism poses additional challenges ..." http://biologos.org/questions/evolution-of-morality/

"... Mathematical models developed by theorists like Martin Nowak have established that natural selection can produce genes for altruism, but the radical self sacrifice of great saints like Mother Theresa of Calcutta seems to go beyond what the models can account for. A completely natural account of our origins may be insufficient to explain present observations of human behavior ..." http://biologos.org/questions/god-of-the-gaps/

As another example, the website actually seems to argue against "G-d of the gaps" theorizing:

" ... the danger of using a .. gaps argument for .. action or existence .. is that it lacks the foresight of future scientific discoveries. With the continuing advancement of science, .. gaps explanations often get replaced by natural mechanisms. Therefore, when such arguments are used as apologetic tools, scientific research can unnecessarily be placed at odds with belief ..." http://biologos.org/questions/god-of-the-gaps/