What is "Drawing a Line?"

(S. Joshua Swamidass) #1

So, I have question. I could use some help on it actually. (@jongarvey, @J.E.S, @dga471, @Philosurfer, @pevaquark)

Recently, BioLogos Edits Their Response to Keller. Good changes, but they still claim that Keller is “Drawing a Line.” You can listen to the video here. Keller on Adam and Eve. I watched it again, and did some more research. Neither The Gospel Coalition or Tim Keller require affirmation of the de novo creation of Adam and Eve in their beliefs statements (speaking of Keller’s church here, and TGC). For the life of me, I don’t understand how this is “drawing a line,” in need of rebuke. It instead looks like an unscripted panel where three leaders discussed what they personally thought was important in origins, in agreement with one another. Keller and TGC were not proposing policy, nor have they proposed policy, that is drawing a line or exclusionary based on the de novo creation of Adam.

Now, it is possible that Duncan and the other guy is drawing line (I didn’t look into them, but they are YECs I believe), but line drawing wasn’t the point of the exchange. Rather they were discussing what they personally thought were the essentials of creation, and how they had common ground with each other. That is, ultimately, a good thing. It helps understand what the core issues are for different communities so we can engage with them better.

What am I missing? Why is this “drawing a line”?

(Jon Garvey) #2


Clearly you’re right - I was surprised at Keller’s obviously personal red lines when I first heard the conversation, but didn’t feel at all threatened by what seemed (and maybe still is, though I’ve not heard him explain firther) to be a disagreement with my own position.

If I’m honest, BioLogos’ response seems to be the common modern thing of implying it’s not being enough to be well disposed towards those who disagree with you - you have to affirm their views or it makes them feel uncomfortable. Either that, or it’s the related idea that anyone who doesn’t agree with your own position is falling short of the mark: real ECs believe XYZ, not ABC.

1 Like
(S. Joshua Swamidass) #3

I was a bit taken a back by @jay313’s response to your article. He was very angry about his supposed line to. What do you make of it?

(Jon Garvey) #4

Well, I try not to do motives… but Jay is a non-literal Adam guy, and was a moderator at BioLogos, and was responding to criticism of his own writing. Let’s just say he can be bristly sometimes.

1 Like
(Jonathan) #5

Although I’m not too familiar with Keller and his theological views, in the video (~8:00-11) it seems pretty clear that Keller thinks that, while interpretation of the timescale etc. of Genesis can be altered and still be orthodox, he “draws the line” (to borrow this thread’s terminology) at a literal Adam and Eve (when it comes to alternative interpretations). I would agree with @swamidass’s observation that the video was an unscripted panel where the speakers discussed what they personally thought. Ultimately, I don’t see why the video would incite a “response,” per se. Perhaps there is some background here I am unaware of?

That would be my 2 cents worth concerning the video…

P.S: I’ve talked with @Jay313 a bit on BioLogos, and I think it would be fun if he were to consider dropping in on the forum here! :slight_smile:

1 Like
(S. Joshua Swamidass) #6

Yes he is drawing a personal line, but doesn’t seem anything more than a personal line.

Invite him over. I honestly want to know why BioLogos folk were and are objecting to Keller. We’ve shown he isn’t afoul of the science, so what exactly is the objection?