> BioLogos takes a cheap shot at biblical creation … and misses… says Paul Price of creation.com
I think the problem (one problem among several) is that when bad arguments are cited, even when not used or held to by significant players in the debate, unless clearly indicated that main players do not use these arguments, is that it is a misleading type of strawman which diverts and misleads.
But the article above by Paul Price on creation.com, which does not seem to have been mentioned, is worth reading to better understand the objections to what Jim Stump has written. …creation.com/response-jim-stump-theistic-evolution* is the link to this article.
Paul Price indicates that Jim Stump has used bad hermeneutics in citing his examples of non-literal texts, that he ignores the evidence of “Expelled” and “Slaughter of the Dissidents”, that rather than genetics demonstrating evolution, it actually disproves evolution, and points out that Jim Stumps position on unguided added genetic information is actually contrary to Biologos stated position of evolution being God’s method of creating the creation God wanted to exist. If it is unguided, then it does not appear to be a method at all. At least not a method for God to use. Like saying, I want to get to New York so I will put a mouse on the road, and maybe it will eventually change to a horse which will pick me up accidentally by its tail and in its wandering eventually get me to New York… Quite the method.
Anyway, Paul Price has made some good comments in his retort to Jim Stump.