> "…but we fully understand that for conservative Evangelicals, this is a long-term proposition. -"
Don’t you think this is a bit of hubris? At least how it sounds like to me.
" For instance, we asked whether the reverse order of creation in Genesis 2 is meant to be read as plainly as Genesis 1, - "
The reverse order is an ill-founded conclusion, so this is a leading question, something like, when did you stop beating your wife?
For those who struggled to understand how “the Fall” could make sense in light of evolution, I attempted to show how the goodness of Creation does not mean that it was an exact replica of Heaven at any point -
Overstating creation as necessarily a replica of Heaven disqualifies the remark, Brad. It is not the creation as a replica of heaven that is the issue, which I have not heard people generally state. It is only whether there was sin in the world, and a curse of death, disease, deception, murder, and demanding work to cause sweat of man’s brow, before man’s fall into sin.
> Whale evolution, in particular, is a great go-to example of an “impossible” transition being accomplished through small changes over a long time span. - See more at: http://biologos.org/blogs/brad-kramer-the-evolving-evangelical/5-common-objections-to-evolutionary-creationism#sthash.uDpnufVX.dpuf
Anything can be theorized, and anything can have nice imaginary diagrams, including whale evolution. But theorizing is not the same as proving it. A drawn picture of an alien does not mean that aliens exist. So this impossible transition could not be accomplished by drawing nice pictures about it.
*But yet nobody feels the need to hypothesize about when and how God “intervenes” to accomplish this, on a biological level - *
Perhaps there is not a lot of hypothesizing going on. But people who believe that God controls things, knows that God allowed Satan to test Job. God could have prevented it. In the same way, God allows certain mutations to take place, whether in the mother or the unborn baby. Sometimes certain genetic effects are carried over, and sometimes they are not. God could prevent it, by not permitting particular mutations, and by selecting the genetic inheritance for the particular baby. In a global or universe situation, God allowed certain reactions and prevented others, even though they might have been theoretically possible. So God permitted dinosaurs to go extinct, even though he seems to have used natural means to do so; those natural means could have been changed, so that dinosaurs did not go extinct.
"*evolution is first and foremost a “secular”, “worldly” belief system and not a scientific theory backed by mountains of real evidence. - "
Evolution as a theory backed by mountains of evidence (real or perceived or misperceived), would not have the faith assumptions attached to it that it does. While many scientists perceive that it is an anomalous theory, ambivalent to world views, yet in my experience, this is not at all true. It is indeed a theory driven by a world view, and driven in order to support a world view. This is true no matter how much syncretization is done to amalgamate it with a Christian perspective.
This colors the way that evidence is interpreted, ie. the imaginary whale evolution, the imaginary hominid transitions, the assumed (incorrectly) slow gradual depostion of sediment, the absence of fossils when the species is still known to exist, the postulation of transitional animals or species in the same absence of fossils, etc.
There is much evidence, and much of it does not back or support the evolutionary theory.