I disagree. I grant that the blog post is too simple to develop carefully the similarities between various reasoning strategies in evolutionary biology and, say, biblical archeology. However, I think they are different in degree, not kind. Check out Timothy McGrew’s paper in The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology entitled, “The Argument from Miracles: A Cumulative Case for the Resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth.” PM me and I can share the chapter with you.
It isn’t the Bayesian framework that I am too terribly interested in, but that a cumulative case or a consilience of inductions or an inference to the best explanation is developed for the resurrection. How is this methodologically neutral approach any different than when a paleontologist begins discussing what caused the extinction of the dinosaurs? Philosopher Carol Cleland has done some interesting work on historical explanation in the sciences.
Yep, I totally agree. And your “Bigger Questions” are great ones to discuss. But, in relation to my blog post, it would seem that those questions are going to put one down the slope of negative apologetics as you attempt to get a biologist or whoever to question the foundation and/or rationality of scientific beliefs. And here is the rub, are you willing to allow your interlocutor to raise those very same questions, slightly modified, for Christian beliefs?
For example:
Is something true just because the Bible claims it is?
How trust worthy is “established theology” in historical matters?
How trust worthy are theologians when they make public claims about reality?
To what extent do philosophical assumptions create bias in theological conclusions?
Are claims that are presented as a result of theological method actually the result of theological method?
To what extent is the current theological consensus the result of reproducible science?
If you are willing to admit these questions, then how would one decide whether science or theology gives the better answers?
I agree with this sentiment. In fact, we have seen @swamidass struggle with this on this very site! However, and I realize that this is distinctly Lutheran, but I can’t follow the downsize God, downsize Jesus. A Lutheran would say downsize Jesus and you downsize (or better, outright lose) God. Does evolutionary theory downsize Jesus? I do not think so, and to some extent that was the thrust of my blog post.