I am very pleasantly surprised by the conversation so far and by Sean Mcdowell’s interaction. He seems more tolerant by far than I had presumed. I enjoyed Evidence and other speaking by His father a lot in the 80s to 90s. His way of overhauling ETDV also is very appropriate and relevant. I have purchased a copy for reference.
His suggestion that we use Scripture to interpret science frightened me for a moment. However, if he only means that he is willing to hold some things that are relatively uncertain in tension, that seems reasonable. The “it’s only a theory” is a big pitfall that can come on with this sort of thinking though, and the important point here may be how to determine the devil of communicating details like what scientific certainty is.
It seems to me as well that if we really have confidence that God, if he exists, is the God of reason and truth and justice, we will not refuse to question certain basics of doctrine. If we wish to demand that other faiths examine the evidence without holding back, we have to do so with equal self reflection. It is like his dad told him…with honest questioning, even if the conclusion is different, he and his mom still would love him…and I do believe that God still loves us.
I was also impressed at Dr Stump’s kind and humble interaction with him, acknowledging a lack of understanding from our part that can occur.
I also have about 20 minutes left, but hope to finish tomorrow morning
It would be educational and pleasant to interact with Dr McDowell on our discourse sometime…or at least to hear more from him. Thank you!