I must admit, I am less willing to critique all the intelligent design folks the way Venema does at the end of his last chapter. I think there is far more to some of their arguments than some would allow. Some of these folks are actual scientists who are also people of faith and are struggling to make sense of both the Bible and evolution. Good for them. We need more, not less efforts to bring the two disciplines together for dialogue, and that does not include and assumption the science and its theories should go unchallenged, and that Bible interpretation should simply adapt to the brave new world of genetic truth. <\/p>\n
The third principle Scot mentions is sensitivity to students of science, and again, I totally agree. I do not know if Scots claim on p. 104 that the number 1 reason kids leave the faith is because of questions about science, is true, but certainly some do. In light of the second half of this book, one should be equally concerned about students leaving the faith because someone told them that Adam and Eve did not exist as historical persons. The undercutting of the historical foundations of the Bible can be equally damaging to someones faith. <\/p>\n
Scots fourth principle is also a useful one Scot says prima Scriptura is better than sola Scriptura, and I agree if we are talking about knowledge or truth in general. If we are talking salvation, sola Scriptura is closer to the truth. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Read more from the original source: I must admit, I am less willing to critique all the intelligent design folks the way Venema does at the end of his last chapter. I think there is far more to some of their arguments than some would allow Continue reading
\nAdam and the Genome Part Nine - Patheos (blog)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"