I just read the Christianity Today article on Adam and Eve. My short initial reaction: It is very one-sided. It functions as a promotional piece for Biologos, which is too bad. We need an alternative that actually helps Evangelicals to think and gives them the tools to do so.
The article largely uses the tired old method of pitting scientists against theologians. Unless it is scientist against scientist, it is a poor debate.
Fazale Rana, who is quoted in the article, commented on the article:
Honesty, it is poorly researched . . . They completely have ignored the fact that there is a strong scientific response . . . to the genomic evidence . . .
I do not think the article quotes a single scientist who is formally trained in the methodology of the historical sciences. When Darrel Falk and Dennis Venema state dogmatically that the human population “was definitely never as small as two,” their ignorance of the limitations of the historical sciences becomes clear. Stephen Jay Gould understood the limitations, as I discuss here: “We must be able to determine whether our hypotheses are definitely wrong or probably correct (we leave assertions of certainty to preachers and politicians) .”