There are several issues, of which I believe the biggest issue is the common practice of people without science backgrounds instructing Christians on science. Science should be data driven, use the scientific methods and be based on conclusions published in peer reviewed journals. The dissemination of non-science quickly leads to a bubble bursting when confronted with actual science and data. The use of non-science by non-scientist is seeing the same negative results in the issue of climate change. People’s experiences are not matching the exaggerated claims by non-scientists (Al Gore for one) and determining they do not “believe” in Climate Change, as scientific theory is being taken by the public as political platform issue, which can be agreed with or opposed.
The Bible is not the problem, it is rigid assumptions of what the Bible actually says when there is no need for this interpretation. I have shown in my book, Genesis and Evolution, that it is more consistent with scripture that Genesis 1 and 2 are consecutive and therefore there is no conflict with evolution. The creation of Adam, Eve and the Garden was a local creation (the local creation interpretation is being now taught at Dallas Theological Seminary).
The article says “there was no global flood”, I do not believe you can definitively say the Bible requires a global flood (the Bible uses the term whole world to describe a the world known to the authors more frequently than it uses this term to apply to the global earth) or you cannot definitively say that no global flood ever occurred (scientifically, a lack of evidence does not prove nonoccurrence). Neither can you definitively conclude the Biblical account does not describe a global flood.
With regard to death not existing prior to the sin of Adam, Paul makes it very clear in Romans and 1Corinthians that the Bible is talking about spiritual life and spiritual death. Paul clearly states that where Adam brought death, Jesus brings life. If you conclude that there was not physical death before Adam, you would need to conclude there was no life before Jesus.
I agree with the article in that we should let science be science and the Bible be the Bible.
Important Greek language distinctions between biological life (BIOS) and spiritual life (ZAO) tend to be lost in English language Bible translations because the word LIFE in English has a very wide semantic domain and encompasses these and other kinds of life (e.g., that of the Greek word PSUCHE, referring to the “soul-life” of every human: the emotions, the mind, the will.)
I explored these linguistic/exegetical factors in my post last November at: