A few weeks ago WLC started a series in his Defender's class (which, btw, is one of the best overviews of conservative Christian doctrine I've ever seen - even though he isn't a systematic theologian, WLC does a fantastic job of surveying and commenting on the major categories of doctrine in this series)
on Creation and Evolution, a topic he didn't cover in Defenders 1. The first twelve pods of this series were on various interpretations of Genesis 1 which I found only mildly interesting and am not recommending other than as a subject of general interest.

However, in his latest pod, found here:

http://feeds.feedburner.com/DefendersPodcast

which is number 13, he begins a section on evolution, which was what I thought he would do from the start. Now that he's arrived at evolution, I think it will be very interesting to get his take on how to square science and Genesis, especially on the evolution question.

Number 13 is only 10 minutes, the shortest pod I think in all his Defenders series. Even so, he already has one somewhat antagonistic response from the class due to his statement that he thinks Eve's creation isn't a literal description but is figurative and so fits into an evolutionary view. Though I agree with what he said before that, and is similar to what I said in an earlier thread about "process", my initial reaction is that he may be going too far concerning Eve's creation.

Anyway, for those interested, I think it will be worth following the discussion. He posts new pods in the series every Sunday, very late, or early Monday.

I recently saw a YT clip where he alluded to this and gave a brief summary. He said he thought the DNA evidence was very compelling, but not the evidence that evolution was caused by random mutations and natural selection. I think "random" is the sticking point because it is a problem to the idea of divine guidance.

Yeah, he mentioned that in the pod.

About 1870 Charles Hodge wrote a pamphlet called What is Darwinism. Though in a footnote he voiced some problems with reconciling Darwinism with Genesis, by far his main problem was with the issue of guided vs. unguided. What is most important is the fact that, by its own terms, science can never even give an opinion on whether or not evolution is guided, at least not when it involves a supernatural power. So to that extent evolution is unscientific.

Hahahahaha