Friday, March 3, 2017


The Biologos foundation and theistic evolutionists (TE) insist that we need to be humble about the way we interpret the Scriptures. Why? Because it’s only our subjective interpretation! The absolute interpretation can only come from above.

However, subjective interpretations need not imply uncertainty. For example, I am certain that I am married and that I am sitting at my computer typing out an essay. I am interpreting millions of bits of sensory data to come up with this confident conclusion.

More importantly, we can also be confident about our interpretation of Scripture. In fact, obedience depends upon being confident that we know what Scripture is communicating to us. We must be confident, because we are graded by our response to Scripture.

Besides, Scripture explicitly tells us that its meaning and intentions are well within our grasp:

·       Deuteronomy 30:11-16  “For this commandment that I command you today is not too hard for you, neither is it far off.  It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend to heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Neither is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ But the word is very NEAR you. It is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can do it. See, I have set before you today life and good, death and evil. If you obey the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you today, by loving the LORD your God, by walking in his ways, and by keeping his commandments and his statutes and his rules, then you shall live and multiply, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land that you are entering to take possession of it.”

Why does Biologos preach “humility” regarding our understanding of Scripture? Because it preaches certainty in regards to evolution. Consequently, what we are certain about will prevail over what we are humble and uncertain about.


  1. There is a new documentary film described on the Institute for Creation Research site, which presents evidence by scientists for the Genesis account of creation. The article did mention chapters 1-11. Apparently the controversial doctrine about that passage has been around for a long time. I believe there are alot of reasons for it, which I still want to learn more about. np

    1. Neil, There is absolutely no Biblical evidence to take Genesis 1-11 as non-historical. They simply do so in order to remove any historical data that might contradict evolution.

      This is not legitimate interpretation but an attempt to impose an alien philosophy upon the Bible, making it agree with evolution. This does not honor God. It can only elicit His condemnation.

  2. I believe it is historical. There are different ways to interpret historical information, as well as scientific information. I think that no single individual in this world now knows or understands all Biblical truth. As I once wrote on your blog, I tend to be eclectic about Theology. I also think it's important that I try to be honest. np

    1. Neil,

      there are different ways to interpret history. However, the way the NT interprets the OT accounts should govern the way we interpret them.