Baptist Press has published a story about Southern Seminary President Al Mohler's statements to Time Magazine about creation and evolution. Mohler argues the case for young-Earth creationism in six literal days. Here is an excerpt from the BP story:
Mohler, a young-Earth creationist, says the Bible is clear about the way in which God created the earth in six days. He argues that Christianity and evolution offer opposing views of human origins.
"Given the human tendency toward inconsistency, there are people who will say they hold both positions," Mohler writes. "But you cannot coherently affirm the Christian-truth claim and the dominant model of evolutionary theory at the same time.
"... I believe the Bible is adequately clear about how God created the world, and that its most natural reading points to a six-day creation that included not just the animal and plant species but the earth itself.
"But there have always been Evangelicals who asserted that it might have taken longer. What they should not be asserting is the idea of God's having set the rules for evolution and then stepped back. And even less so, the model held by much of the scientific academy: of evolution as the result of a random process of mutation and selection."
It's obvious that Mohler's chief concern is for hermeneutical consistency. He wants to be consistent about interpreting the Bible literally. The problem with that hermeneutical approach is that it is impossible to do that and be a Baptist (unless, of course, you are Al Mohler and can define Baptist beliefs as whatever you believe. Paige Patterson himself once labelled Al the "Baptist pope").
What is consistent about interpreting the "days" in the first chapter of Genesis literally and interpreting "body" and "blood" in the Eucharist (lord's supper) symbolically? If Baptists can interpret "body" and "blood" symbolically while the vast majority of Christians interpret it literally, why can't they interpret the six days in Genesis symbolically?
I'd say that Mohler's logic is taking Baptists yet another step toward the theology of Roman Catholicism -- except, Roman Catholics have no problem reconciling creation with evolution. They have had the benefit of centuries to reflect on the errors of logically consistent theologians like Mohler who, in the days of Copernicus and Galileo, once insisted that Christianity was irreconcilable with a heliocentric solar system.