Charles DarwinUh-oh, this news is more than just a little concerning as the visible church slides deeper into the mire of compromise with the world.  Since we have noticed the trend toward political leftist activism within NAE leadership, this might not come as a surprise:

images

Via A Daughter of the Reformation  (first of two articles)

Connecting the Dots: the NAE, the PCA, and BioLogos

“Over at WORLD Magazine, Marvin Olasky has an interesting piece about a new collaboration between the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE ) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) for the purpose of building “better dialogue and understanding between the scientific and evangelical communities.” Dr. Olasky’s concern is whether there will be real dialogue or whether the goal of the collaboration is to sell evolution to evangelical holdouts:

Dialogue, sure: But let’s make it a real dialogue, with proponents of Intelligent Design not frozen out. Better understanding, of course: But let’s focus on God and not make Charles Darwin a god. ‘Collaboration’? Not if the goal is to sell evolution to the three-fourths of evangelicals who still keep faith with the Bible’s teaching that God made Adam from the dust of the earth. Is this overly critical of what could be a good thing? Not if we take into account the 2006 AAAS ‘Statement on the Teaching of Evolution,’ which sees critiques of evolution as ‘attacks on the integrity of science.’ Not if we take into account Templeton’s ‘Science for Ministry’ funding of ‘programs that will help ministers and the congregations they serve to move away from … simplistic solutions and polarizing stereotypes.’

The above is from an article last year, but I’m sharing it now in case you may have missed it. But after you read it, you’ll want to check out the latest from this author. It’s an update with some additional information in an article titled, Theistic Evolution: A Sinful Compromise (A Review).