Or is there some misunderstanding?
If so, why now, for crying out loud, when even atheists are checking out at various points?:
They are saying that Darwin’s theory (whether someone wants to call it neo-Darwinism instead or claim to not be “that kind of Darwinist” or whatever) has maxed out its value in the world of ideas.
Michael Flannery, writes to say,
I was very disappointed to see this exchange by William Lane Craig. Sadly, Craig claims that “most Christians have come to terms with Darwinian evolution” and then proceeds to describe a wholly unDarwinian process of evolution that any plain reading of Descent of Man would reject. Actually, the position that Craig outlined was much closer to Wallace’s, which earned him an “Ehue!, Ehue,Ehue! – Your miserable friend Darwin.” Craig’s whole response is an uncharacteristically jumbled mess.
Darwinism does that to people, especially now that the stench from the head is reaching the pectoral fins.
From philosopher/photographer Laszlo Bencze, who noted the same vid:
As soon as you say, “God used evolution…” as Craig does, you’re not talking about evolution as understood by any Darwinian. What you’re talking about is some form of creation. If you’re talking about creation, you are not a Darwinian and you have not “come to terms with evolution.” You are merely a muddled Christian who can’t see a contradiction staring him in the face.
The great mid-twentieth century apologist C.S. Lewis tried playing footsie with Darwin, and ended up regretting it. Worse, he ended up selectively quoted in order that Darwin’s truer followers could pretend he was really a supporter—of a system of thought that is in fact the creation story of an increasingly isolated and fanatical brand of materialist atheism.
Maybe Craig needs someone to put him in the picture about what’s been happening in the last few years?