Yes, it was Talk of the Nation on NPR, not All Things Considered, to which yesterday's post referred. 

The discussion led by Neil Conan raises a number of significant questions that Evangelicals do not always face squarely and with genuine curiosity.

For example, is it really necessary for there to have been an actual original human couple and a "fall" into sin for Christ to be the hope of the world?  Dr. Mohler's particular definition of Christianity hangs on his literal interpretation of Genesis and all of the Bible. But from the beginning of Christianity there have been other understandings of the gospel that do not share his assumption. 

Brian McLaren, in A New Kind of Christianity, explains how Mohler's concept of the gospel comes from his assuming an old Greek philosophical narrative through which he interprets the Bible. That's  where he gets the sharp opposition between natural and supernatural, for example. 

Through careful scientific inquiry, we know much more than the writers of Genesis or the apostle Paul did. Since all truth is God's truth, new knowledge about human origins and the formation of the Bible can only clarify our faith by helping to rid it of mistaken ideas based on ignorance. There is no reason to embrace unnecessary ignorance. 

I'll post links tomorrow to a couple of sites that treat both the gospel and knowledge with appropriate care.