Ken Ham writes:
"God’s people need to know what the BioLogos Foundation (founded by Francis Collins) is teaching, and what in essence Dr. Waltke (either wittingly or unwittingly) was endorsing.
...They do not believe in a literal Fall of Genesis 3, and they do not believe in the historicity of Adam.
...in regard to what the BioLogos Foundation calls “the literalist interpretation” , they state:
The scientific evidence suggests a dramatically larger population at this point in history. Recently acquired genetic evidence also points to a population of several thousand people from whom all humans have descended, not just two. Finally, fossil and DNA records point strongly to a more unified creation reflected in the relatedness of humans and other animals. The comparison of human and chimp chromosomes provides one of many compelling pieces of evidence for this unity. The chromosomes of the two species match up almost exactly, except for human chromosome 2, which appears to be a fusion of two chromosomes that were distinct in a primate ancestor of our species. This remarkable claim was confirmed when sequences that are normally found only at the ends of chromosomes were discovered in the middle of human chromosome 2, right where the fusion was thought to have taken place. Today, we carry in our bodies this evidence of our relatedness to other species. The evidence argues strongly against a literalist interpretation of the Genesis creation account of humans.
Then in regard to what they call “The Everyman Reading,” they state:
The Everyman Reading of the creation story understands understands [sic] the Fall as an allegory representing every human’s individual rejection of God. In this light, the Fall was not a historical event but an illustration of the common human condition that virtually everyone agrees is deeply flawed and sinful. In this view, Adam and Eve were not intended to be presented as historical figures. Their deeds simply represent the actions of all humans and remind us of this troubling part of our natures.
They then state:
This interpretation is less popular among many Christians, for the historicity of Adam seems to be assumed by the apostle Paul. In Romans 5 (and somewhat in 1 Corinthians 15), Paul draws an analogy between Adam and Paul, both of whom are representative of humanity, but in different senses: Adam brings death to all, whereas Jesus brings life; Adam was disobedient, Jesus was obedient; Adam’s disobedience affects all, whereas Jesus’ obedience affects “all”. Since Jesus is an historical figure, it is argued that Adam, too, must be an historical figure in the very same sense. You cannot have one part of the analogy be symbolic and the other historical. Plus, if Paul believed in an historical Adam as the first human, Christians should too. The difficulty with this understanding of Paul, however, is that it is difficult to reconcile with the scientific data, which has lead Christian thinkers to consider different ways of handling Paul’s words.
If you want to see where compromising evolution/millions of years with the Bible leads to, go to the BioLogos website and read their question and answer section."