The commenters at the Inside Higher Ed site despair over how Christians refuse to come out of the bronze age, and until these "literalists" awaken to the reality of how things are in the scientific world, more and more tragic situations like Dr. Waltke will only continue to litter the evangelical waste land, embarrassing Jesus and making Christians look stupid.
USA Today online cites Darrel Falk, professor of biology at a liberal Nazarene college and president of the even more theologically devoid BioLogos website, who likens Waltke to a modern day Amos or some other prophet who had the courage to stand up and tell us young earth creationists dullards how it is:
"Decades from now, when the Evangelical Church has come to terms with the reality of evolution, we hope she will look back at those who were the pioneers on its journey toward a fuller understanding of the manner by which God has created. I could list other pioneers, a number of whom are good friends and colleagues.
"Right there alongside them will be Dr. Bruce Waltke who, in the latter phase of an extremely distinguished career, had the courage to tell the Church what it needed to hear. The fact that he did so with a remarkably gentle spirit of love will be a reminder to all that the real battles are won when we simply live the reality of the Gospel. To do this — in the face of adversity — is the ultimate in courage."
First, they don't care a lick about academic freedom. If one of their fellow "academics" endorsed ID over evolution, they would be the first ones running to get their tar buckets and cutting open pillows. To theological liberals like the folks at BioLogos, academic freedom is only truly free if the person in question comes to the exact conclusions they already believe. But, if you question those conclusions, you're denying scientific reality. There is no other choice but to censor such a person and force him out of his position.
Second, many of these supporters of theistic evolution claim to be strong believers in the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture. They will often drop that announcement down right in the middle of these discussions with their creationist dissenters in order to confirm to them their orthodoxy. They aren't rabid atheists just because they are theistic evolutionists, or so they say. They merely recognize the overwhelming evidence for evolution and Christians would be foolish to ignore it.
However, at what point does the so-called "overwhelming evidence" give way to the theistic evolutionary affirmation of inspiration and inerrancy? Bart Ehrman certainly claims to be examining the evidence of textual criticism. In fact, every wack-a-doodle heretical group that denies the orthodox views of Christianity claim they are "examining the evidence." Would the Nazarene college where Darrel Falk teaches biology allow John Dominic Crossan the "academic freedom" to spew his anti-Christ views of Jesus? Well.... Now that I think about it, more than likely they would, but you get my point.
Last week I had a theistic evolutionist leave some comments under a post I wrote on the topic of theistic evolution and personal salvation. During my exchange with him the commenter made one comment that I thought was spot on as he outlined the basic disagreement between myself, a biblical creationist, and himself, a theistic evolutionist. He wrote,
But I can see that one fundamental difference we have -- and please correct me if I'm wrong -- is that I see the scientific data, or more specifically the interpretation of it, as theologically or teleologically neutral, whereas most of you feel that the interpretation of that same data comes loaded with antisupernatural presuppositions and atheistic/antitheistic baggage. And I really think that's going to be a big point of disagreement right there.
I don't think I could have stated that any better.