A commenter at Telic Thoughts had this to say:
Theologically, my own position is somewhere between progressive (old earth) creationism and some form of theistic evolution. I certainly believe science has shown that the earth is billions of years old and that there is some kind natural evolutionary process has been responsible for the development of life. (Those things for me are almost beyond question.) However, I pretty much reject two extreme views as unfeasible (1) that the earth is only 6-10 thousand years old and that all the major kinds of flora and fauna were specially created, and (2) the so-called blind watchmaker thesis that an unplanned and unguided natural process acting alone can account for the evolutionary development of life. However, between those two extremes I am pretty open to anything. For example, I am open to some kind front loaded evolution or some kind of limited interventionism. But, I haven’t learned anything scientifically that would compel me to become committed to either one of these views. I don’t see how I can be more open-minded than that.
That is why I am a little confused by the Biologos brand of theistic evolution. It appears that they are essentially accepting the blind watchmaker thesis with God as an add-on. But if you accept the blind watchmaker thesis, then God becomes superfluous. Doesn’t he? Sure you might introduce God on the cosmological side to account for the big-bang, fine tuning etc. But it is hard to reconcile that deistic conception of God with a personal God who according to Christian theology has intervened in history as the redeemer. They do have that view of Christ, don’t they?
Yet from what I have learned about Biologos, they are almost as dogmatically committed to their position as the YEC’s are to theirs.
So I am not so much put off by their [Biologos’s] theistic evolution. Rather it is their narrowness about what kind of theistic evolution that is theologically acceptable that bothers me. It seems to be a very poorly thought out view, both scientifically and theologically. Does anyone else see it that way?