The next day, J. R. Daniel Kirk (assistant professor of New Testament at Fuller Seminary) seemed quite eager \u00a0to oblige<\/a> Smith in his quest for\u00a0conversation. Kirk was none too happy with Smith for advancing a theological approach to the science\/faith issue that he felt simply circumvents the difficult and unavoidable historical challenges that beset the Bible\u2019s presentation of human origins.<\/p>\n I have always (and still do) respect Smith\u2019s contributions to Christian thought, which are many and often penetrating. In this instance, however, Kirk anticipated some (not all) of my own significant reservations with Smith\u2019s theological approach to the historical phenomena of\u00a0Scripture.<\/p>\n I plan to contribute to this conversation in the next few days. In the meantime, perhaps the\u00a0exchange\u00a0between Smith and Kirk will be of benefit to some of you. (Note, too, that Smith has a lengthy comment on Kirk\u2019s post, which you may want to look at.)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/peteenns.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/04\/evolution-of-adam.jpeg?ssl=1\" "\\"evolution")
<\/a>A couple of days ago, James K. A. Smith posted a review<\/a> of The Evolution of Adam<\/a><\/em> on his new science\/faith website \u201cThe Colossian Forum.\u201d Smith is professor of\u00a0philosophy\u00a0at\u00a0Calvin\u00a0College and senior fellow at newly minted Colossian Forum, which hopes to provide a \u201cnew kind of conversation\u201d free of fear and\u00a0animosity\u2013an admirable goal.<\/p>\n