Jesus Creed Admin: October 2009 Archives

We began a discussion Tuesday on the real and perceived barriers to the acceptance of  an evolutionary mechanism of creation amongst evangelical theologians.  The basis for our discussion is a recent survey by Bruce Waltke (or here), an Old Testament scholar, author of a Genesis commentary and other books. The results of his survey are available here: Waltke Scholarly Essay.  

Waltke has a few conclusions and a few suggestions. These are well worth considering in some depth. The presentation that follows below is a paraphrase - not a quote from the white paper. The material is reorganized around three main themes according to my thinking at this time.

First - The caricature of evangelicalism as demanding Young Earth Creationism (YEC) is a gross oversimplification Some 46% of the evangelical theologians surveyed are comfortable with evolutionary creation. More than half are comfortable with some form of old earth creation, evolutionary or progressive. Many have nuanced and carefully considered views. The same general trend is found in other surveys as well.  But it is a deep divide, and in some respects the division increases the heatedness of the discussion.

Like many evangelical OT scholars, Waltke sees a truth in Genesis that is goes beyond literal historicity.  Reflecting on the first barrier and the 44% who found the interpretation of Genesis 1-2 to be a barrier to acceptance of evolutionary creation Waltke notes:

The first barrier can be lowered, I suggest, by recognizing the two levels of literature: the historical story level and the interpretive, creative plot level. On the story level the accounts of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 are historical; on the plot level they are creative representations of the historical reality.

[He uses an illustration of a glass half full of water, half full of air and continues] ... the additional creative element expresses truth beyond the historical reality. Similarly, the accounts of creation are based on real history, but presented creatively, using the form of ancient Near Eastern cosmogonies.

This is a big question for many of us these days.

What are the barriers to the acceptance of evolution amongst evangelicals? Can we (or should we) dismantle the "Great Wall" and overcome these barriers?

Biologos has planned a working group symposium (exclusive and invitation only or I would have it on my calendar as a must) to look at just this issue.  The workshop will bring together 15 leading scientists, 15 leading pastors and 15 leading theologians to explore this issue.  Tim Keller, Francis Collins, and Alister McGrath are among the "names" involved.

This is a critical conversation as we move forward - although I am convinced of both an old earth and an evolutionary mechanism of creation, this is not the end of the story.  The theological ramifications must be considered thoughtfully, prayerfully - and with pastoral sensitivity. We must have conversation amongst sisters and brothers - fellow believers.

As part of the preparation for this workshop Bruce Waltke (or here), Old Testament scholar, author of a Genesis commentary and other books, was commissioned to write a white paper identifying barriers for the typical evangelical theologians to accepting the possibility of creation by means of an evolutionary process.  The results of his research are available here: Waltke Scholarly Essay.  The results of his survey provide the focus for the discussion I would like to have today (and Thursday).

Here is the question for today - Do you read books by or about women? Intentionally?

This is the third and last in a series of posts centered around a short volume Are Women Human? containing two essays by Dorothy Sayers.  Today I am going to give a couple of quotes from Sayers' essays, make an observation, a suggestion, and open a conversation.

From the essay "The Human-Not-Quite-Human" (page numbers from the 1981 printing of "Are Women Human?")

The first task, when undertaking the study of any phenomenon, is to observe its most obvious feature; and it is here that most students fail. It is here that most students of "The Woman Question" have failed, and the Church more lamentably than most, and with less excuse. That is why it is necessary, from time to time, to speak plainly, and perhaps even brutally, to the Church.

The first thing that strikes the careless observer is that women are unlike men. ... But the fundamental thing is that women are more like men than anything else in the world. They are human beings. Vir is male and Femina is female: but Homo is male and female.

This is the equality that is claimed and the fact that is persistently evaded and denied. No matter what arguments are used, the discussion is vitiated from the start, because Man is always dealt with as both Homo and Vir, but woman as only Femina. (p. 37)

Last Thursday (see here) I started a short series of posts focused on Dorothy Sayers' essays published in the volume Are Women Human?. The first essay in this volume is an address given to a women's society in 1938.  Sayers starts the essay by relating her invitation to speak to the group and noting that she did not consider herself a feminist and did not wish to be identified with feminism.  She did, however, think that "a woman is as good as a man", but goes on to explain what she means by this phrase:

What, I feel, we ought to mean is something so obvious that it is apt to escape attention altogether, viz: not that every woman is, in virtue of her sex, as strong, clever, artistic, level-headed, industrious,and so forth as any man that can be mentioned; but, that a woman is just as much an ordinary human being as a man, with the same individual preferences, and with just as much right to the tastes and preferences of an individual.  What is repugnant to every human being is to be reckoned always as a member of a class and not as an individual. (19)

Classifications and generalizations can be useful - Sayers does not deny this - women tend to be smaller, Swedes tend to be blond ... we can go beyond this to personality traits and abilities. But  such classifications do not define any individual human, male or female,

What does it mean to affirm (for those of us who do) that all men and women are created equal in the image of God? If you don't, why don't you?

We've had extensive conversations on this blog on the issue of women in ministry. The topic comprises the last third of Scot's book The Blue Parakeet: Rethinking How You Read the Bible , and is at the root of many of the contemporary conflicts within our church, including those over tribal translations.  I generally stay on the periphery of these discussion because they always leave me feeling sick - and just a little dirty.

But this is an issue that we cannot avoid - not in the context of "Christian Virtue": and not in the context of "Missional Campus Ministry." One of the most potent criticisms of the church within the academy is directed at the view of women presented by some who purpose to speak for the church - for God - on this matter. As a Christian, a scientist, an academic, and a woman - I find this conflict particularly troubling.  I have been asked how I can be a thinking woman and a Christian much more often than I have been asked how I can be a scientist and a Christian.

A few weeks ago Scot posted a series in Chris Armstrong's book  Patron Saints for Postmoderns: Ten from the Past Who Speak to Our Future.  The final "saint" Armstrong highlighted was Dorothy Sayers, a woman many know as the author of the still popular Lord Peter Wimsey detective novels ... but who also translated Dante and wrote on theology. Dorothy Sayers was an amazing woman, a trailblazer, and a great thinker. She was far from perfect - but that only makes her human.  Or does it? 

There is a short volume Are Women Human? containing two essays by Sayers on this very topic.  Anyone who reads both this book and her novel Gaudy Night will immediately recognize the coherence of her overall view.

I am going to put up a few posts on this book over the next week or so, focused on some of  Sayers' key points. Today  I would like to put forward a brief excerpt from this book and open the floor for discussion.

It has been a while - but the Missional Campus Ministry series will continue on an occasional basis as resources or topics appear.  Today I would like to focus conversation around a recent blog post by John Stackhouse - Campus...

[We've added the captcha text because we were bombarded by a spammer Monday. We hope the captcha text will disappear with the spammer soon.]Last week I posted a question by a reader asking about categories of biblical literature and their...

A "spam storm": of a hundred comments an hour or more requires the catcha back on for a time. Bear with us and join the conversation. (Copy a long comment before posting, so you won't lose the thought if the...

A couple of weeks ago I had a brief post asking why the scientific theory of evolution was a challenge for faith, but a scientific theory explaining weather was not a problem. (See here for the post: God, Science,...