They absolutely do not care about Scripture. They never discuss scripture. When they ask for "Evidence" they are not asking for Scriptural Evidence, but they want NATURAL evidence. Imagine that. What ever scripture supports or insists on creatio ex nihilo, creation out of nothing, they dispense with as "prescientific," or allegorical, etc. Also, they do not believe that the Text has a particular meaning, but that it is a matter of personal preference and multiple choice.
They do not know the Scriptures nor the power of God.
I am really on the fence about this.
Some TEs truly have just denied anything of substance in scripture, other than its poetic value, its ability to speak to the human condition or whatever noncommittal academic language is in vogue. That seems to be a small portion of the folks there.
(Now, the morals of the Gospel are awesome things to have, but as Paul said, if Jesus is not raised, it is all in vain.)
If you accept the resurrection of Jesus, you may say it is based the natural evidence, but it really has to be based on receiving the Word and loving it. Of course, I would say, not all of the Word, except to the extent that embracing Jesus is all of the Word.
And, it bears noting that lots of TEs have a great deal of Bible under their belt. That is not trivial. That is serious academics. Is it seriousness about the Bible? There is a lot of passion in the TE crowd about their Christian convictions and about their walk. That comes of embracing the resurrection and lordship of Jesus. And as much as I think it is inconsistent with their view of Genesis, that is a real dedication to the Word, and the Word is Jesus. I just don't think the "evidence" can do that. It must be the Word itself.
I do have to say that if you are serious about the Word that should make the Word at least troubling to an evolutionary perspective. Even if you accept evolution, shouldn't you have this lingering discomfort with the bad "fit"? Without that, lots of the "seriousness" seems to have left at this point.
We also see lots of comparisons between Gilgamesh or whatever and the Bible. The Bible speaks of a such a clear distinction with Pagan sensibility, that I cannot fathom why Pagan literature would teach anyone anything about whether the Bible is true.
And all those psalms about what the Word means! How do you just blow by that stuff?
But, then again,
1Jo 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1Cr 12:3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and [that] no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost
Granted, the Kingdom of God is full of leaven, pearls, birds and other things that are not kosher. But, somehow, Jesus has managed to arrange things such that the unclean things do not define the redeemed state of Kingdom, but God does. When evolution is spoken in the spirit of confessing that Jesus came in the flesh as God, what else do you have but a serious and redeemed view of the Word?
I actually got booted from another site for defending Benny Hinn on the same grounds -- a guy I don't even like, listen to or follow. But, the Body is a strange thing. The gifts are not revokable, as scripture teaches.
I like you.
