What is point 1?
The issue for them is two fold, and it is clear if you read the link.
-
They are inclined to take the de novo creation of Adam and Eve literally, as in the traditional reading. That is certainly not natural processes.
-
They are resistant to an understanding of evolution that is entirely sufficient and exclude’s God’s action. We’ve worked this out in the past, though it is not a major feature in my book: Would God's Guidance Be DNA-Detectable?.
#1 ends up begin a very important point, because taking ahold of this, #2 becomes much less of a challenge, both scientifically and theologically. Note, they don’t care at all if science demonstrate God’s guidance, so that is why they are not ID. They just reject an account that outright rules it out, as EC usually does.
@dga471, you might want to see this.