Re: [asa] New IVP book Should Christians Embrace Evolution

If a review is made, I hope it isn't simply a defense of evolution. The
thrust of this book seems to be a claim that, if evolution is true,
Christianity is false - and that seems like the vastly more wrong-headed,
not to mention dire claim. I also fail to see why a TE would have to embrace
a number of those claims listed in the portion Dave excerpted - and 6 in
particular seems strange.

On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 2:50 PM, Dennis Venema <Dennis.Venema@twu.ca> wrote:

> Skimmed the website and the few posted quotes from the book. Yikes.
> Fossils don’t support evolution, the genome doesn’t support evolution,
> theistic evolutionists avoid/hide data, etc etc. And not a real biologist in
> the bunch as far as I can tell – a clinical geneticist and a vet is as close
> as it gets – wonder why?
>
> May I please review this one for PSCF too?
>
> Or perhaps share the review with a paleontologist (*cough* Keith? *cough*)?
>
> Anyone over there in the UK willing to post me a copy if I send you the
> funds? I notice Amazon UK has it bundled as a special with Meyer’s *Signature
> in the Cell* book as well – since I need that one too, maybe I should get
> them together?
>
> Michael, would you be willing to order them and send them my way?
>
> Best,
>
> Dennis
>
>
>
>
>
> On 27/11/09 11:15 AM, "Dave Wallace" <wmdavid.wallace@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Should Christians Embrace Evolution
>
> Appears that IVP is pushing this book hard. Anyone in the UK read it yet?
>
> http://www.shouldchristiansembraceevolution.com/
>
> It may at first seem easy to say ‘God simply used evolution to bring about
> the results he desired’, as some are proposing today. That view is called
> ‘theistic evolution’. However, the contributors to this volume, both
> scientists and biblical scholars, show that adopting theistic evolution
> leads to many positions contrary to the teaching of the Bible, such as
> these: (1) Adam and Eve were not the first human beings, but they were just
> two Neolithic farmers among about ten million other human beings on earth at
> that time, and God just chose to reveal himself to them in a personal way.
> (2) Those other human beings had already been seeking to worship and serve
> God or gods in their own ways. (3) Adam was not specially formed by God of
> ‘dust from the ground’ (Gen. 2:7) but had two human parents. (4) Eve was not
> directly made by God out of a ‘rib that the Lord God had taken from the man’
> (Gen. 2:22), but she also had two human parents. (5) Many human beings both
> then and now are not descended from Adam and Eve. (6) Adam and Eve’s sin was
> not the first sin. (7) Human physical death had occurred for thousands of
> years before Adam and Eve’s sin – it was part of the way living things had
> always existed. (8) God did not impose any alteration in the natural world
> when he cursed the ground because of Adam’s sin.
>
> Dave W
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe
> asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Nov 27 14:56:12 2009