Pete Enns has responded to Kevin DeYoung’s post offering ten reasons for believing in a historical Adam. Like me, Pete is not impressed, and he interacts with my response in the process of articulating his own. Click through to read it!
The Blog of Dr. James F. McGrath, Clarence L. Goodwin Chair in New Testament Language and Literature at Butler University, Indianapolis
Interesting Posts Elsewhere
- Darwin quote-mining in latest book from the Discovery Institute
- How Taking a Hike Can Lead to Metaphysics
- Job, Tragedy, Natural Disasters, Lament
- The Problem with Blaming God for Oklahoma
- The Samaritan-Jewish Background Commentary on John’s Gospel (LiteVersion)
- John Piper, Miserable Comforter
- Boy Scouts lift ban on gay scouts
- Pope Francis embraces Anonymous Christians
- The Boy Scouts Have Made the Correct Choice
- ‘A theory for the godless’: Is the bark of ‘Darwin’s bulldogs’ worse than their bite?
Other Patheos Progressive Christian Blogs
Follow Patheos on
Copyright 2008-2013, Patheos. All rights reserved. Terms of Service | Patheos Privacy Policy | Site developed by Avalon Consulting, LLC
Follow Patheos
Progressive Christian: