X

The Colossian Forum Subscription Form

| Resume a previously saved form
Resume Later

In order to be able to resume this form later, please enter your email and choose a password.

Subscriber Information







Subscriptions

Resources

The Colossian Forum offers free resources to help you transform polarizing cultural conflicts into opportunities for spiritual growth and witness.

Mailing Address







Please enter the required value for your country.

Colossian Blog
April 17, 2012 | Andy Saur

Book Review – Should Christians Embrace Evolution? Biblical & Scientific Responses, Edited by Norman C. Nevin

Book Review By Tim Morris

 

Should Christians Embrace Evolution? Biblical & Scientific Responses. Edited by Norman C. Nevin.  Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2011.  Pp. 192

 

 

 


April 17th, 2012


Should Christians Embrace Evolution?
is a collection of essays responding to a book by Denis Alexander entitled Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose? Alexander’s book is one of a number recently-published works that attempt to reconcile evolutionary biology and Christian belief in one way or another.  The authors of Should Christians Embrace Evolution? provide a survey of a variety of biblical and theological concerns about “reconciliation” proposals like Alexander’s. They argue that such an embrace requires significant alteration of historical Christian understandings of the goodness of the original creation, the status of Adam and Eve as the representatives of humankind, and the meaning and consequences of their Fall into sin. They conclude that an embrace of evolution by Christians is a thus a serious mistake.

 

A brief overview of the contents of Should Christians Embrace Evolution?

The authors of the essays in the first section of the book contend that the clear teachings of a variety of biblical passages become muddled when attempts are made to understand Scripture in a way that would be consistent with an evolutionary picture.  Alistair McKittrick  (Chapter 2) argues that the events described in Genesis 1-3 are clearly intended by the author of this portion of Scripture to be literal in an historical and chronological sense. Likewise Michael Reeves (Chapter 3) and Greg Haslam (Chapter 4) present arguments that the biblical authors of both Testaments assumed that an historic couple, Adam and Eve, were the first human beings, that sin entered the world through their rebellion, and that this historical act had physical consequences. Particularly helpful in my view was the writers’ demonstration that an appreciation of the affinities of the Genesis account with other Ancient Near Eastern creation accounts need not of itself lead to a rejection of historicity and chronology in the Genesis account.[callout title=Callout Title]They argue that ahistorical positions regarding Adam and Eve and the Fall inevitably begin to alter orthodox understandings of salvation…[/callout]Further they show that the recognition of symbolic and literary treatments of these events and people elsewhere in Scripture doesn’t in and of itself eliminate from consideration a literal and historical basis of those events and people as well. Those arguing for the reconciliation of Genesis and evolution often seem to assume that simply pointing out affinities between Genesis and ANE literature or showing cases of symbolic/literary elements in the creation narrative clinches the case against any literal sense in terms of people, events, and chronology in the creation narrative. The authors helpfully highlight this mistake. 

Several essays (chapters 4, 5, and 6) focus on essential theological elements that the authors argue are put at risk by attempts to reconcile Christian theology with evolutionary theory.

They helpfully survey a variety of theological difficulties that accrue if an historical Adam and Eve and an historical Fall with attendant physical consequences are eliminated in order to accommodate evolutionary explanations. They argue that ahistorical positions regarding Adam and Eve and the Fall inevitably begin to alter orthodox understandings of salvation (i.e. saved from what, if there is no “real” Fall) and thus impact traditional Christian understanding of the work, significance and historical reality of Christ, the second Adam.  Further, the authors argue that in order to provide a necessary ontological basis for all humans being fallen “in Adam,” Christian theology must insist that Adam is not only the spiritual head, but also the biological head of all humanity. In Chapter 5, entitled  “Creation, Redemption and Eschatology,” David Anderson argues that theistic evolution proposals like Alexander’s lead to an isolation of the spiritual from the physical in redemptive history that resonates with sub-Christian physical/spiritual dualisms, including those found in the Gnostic movements of early church history. Anderson says:

“When it [a theistic evolutionary perspective] turns its attention to matters of redemption and the new creation, [it] is a …Gnostic scheme …[which] consistently separates …theology from history, fact from idea, spiritual from physical. … If evolutionary theory gives an accurate history of the past…then the fall must necessarily be an event with no significant impact on the physical order or humanity or his exposure to death in particular. The curse cannot have involved physical penalties. By consequence the scope of redemption cannot include anything in these realms. …The physical resurrection cannot be a recovery and glorification of a life that Adam lost our access to, but becomes instead a neutral doorway into a different mode of existence. (pp. 90-91)”

Lastly, there is a section (chaps 9-11) that suggests alternative interpretations for some scientific data that are widely considered to be significant evidence for an evolutionary picture of origins. Norman Nevins reviews some familiar critiques in regard to the judgments evolutionary biologists make concerning homologous and analogous features in different organisms (similarities in structures taken to indicate common ancestry vs. structures that are similar but are taken to have developed independently) and in regard to the relative scarcity of “transitional” forms in the fossil record. John Walton critiques naturalistic approaches in origin of life research, and Andy McIntosh raises issues concerning biological information and thermodynamics, in regard to whether natural processes have the capacity to increase biological information over time.  Of particular interest to me as a molecular biologist was Geoff Barnard’s discussion of recent genomic data (regarding chromosome fusions, pseudogenes, and mobile genetic elements) usually taken as confirmation of common ancestry for humans and animals. He raises a variety of questions concerning assumptions being made in the evolutionary interpretation of these features, and suggests several alternative non-evolutionary explanations for these data.

 

Several strengths and several weaknesses of Should Christians Embrace Evolution?

In terms of specific strengths of the book, I was impressed by the evident cooperation of a group of scientists, theologians, and pastors/teachers in producing this volume.[callout title=Callout Title]I was impressed by the evident cooperation of a group of scientists, theologians, and pastors/teachers in producing this volume.[/callout]Often in these discussions in the church, one group (e.g those with scientific training or those with theological training, or lay people who haven’t been “corrupted” by advanced study) assumes that its own insights or expertise uniquely equips it to declare the right path for the church. Often one group (for instance, the scientists or the theologians) takes control of the discussion rather than recognizing that God equips his church with a variety of gifts and that all might be utilized in seeking a faithful direction for a particular denomination or fellowship.

Secondly, this volume provides a helpful reminder that our lives are lived in the context of a real spiritual battle that touches all aspects of our lives and thought, certainly including contemporary scientific claims, and our responses as believers to them. While I might disagree with some of the particular lines being drawn in the volume, the point remains that Christians will be required to take countercultural positions at some point or other, and we should not duck from this prophetic task when it is indicated.

A third strength is the authors’ insistence that our fundamental theological commitments derived from the teachings of Scripture should frame our understanding of the natural world, and should explicitly inform the judgments we make about the deliverances of scientific work.  While it is often difficult to pinpoint exactly where our judgments as Christians should begin to diverge from the consensus judgments of the evolutionary disciplines, the authors make a strong case that taking the evolutionary picture of human origins at face value seems to require significant alteration of some deeply rooted elements of basic Christian theology.

Along with the strengths given above, however, the book also exhibits, to a certain degree, some of the dysfunctions that seem to me to characterize the origins discussion among evangelicals.

Firstly, (although not overbearingly so) there were a variety of places where evolutionary “reconcilers” in general (and Denis Alexander in particular) are considered to be disingenuous in some way or other in their work. The implication given is that they somehow lack the courage of their convictions and thus resort to “shrewd” arguments, apparently to avoid the embarrassment of properly owning the offense of Christ (see an example on p. 52). This kind of insinuation is in my view unjust and should be studiously avoided in the “in-house” debates concerning these issues in the church. Though not excessive in the book, this undercurrent is present and the book would have been improved by eliminating it altogether. It seems to me good and right that various origins proposals by God’s people should be put before fellow believers and evaluated at face value on their merits alone.

Secondly, although it varies in degree from author to author, the book too quickly passes over the complexities of faithfully navigating the relationship between scriptural and creational revelation. Although Scripture is to be taken as foundational to Christian understanding of all things, there are a variety of “feedback loops” whereby our understanding of Scripture is inevitably and in many ways properly informed and refined by creational revelation.[callout title=Callout Title]…the general impression left by this volume is that evolutionary biology is like an omnibus bill that must be embraced or rejected as a whole.[/callout]It would have been helpful to see this complexity explored a bit more, rather than leaving the dominant impression that in these issues, it is simply a matter of either being loyal to Scripture or being loyal to the worldly consensus of science.  A related issue is that, although the authors do give a definition of the specific notion of “evolution” being opposed early in the book (p.13, “the Darwinian mechanisms of mutation and natural selection and [a] commitment to common ancestry”), there are a wide range of “theistic evolution” or “evolutionary creation” proposals in play on the contemporary scene, and these proposals vary quite a bit in their “embrace” of different aspects of evolutionary biology. Unfortunately, the general impression left by this volume is that evolutionary biology is like an omnibus bill that must be embraced or rejected as a whole. This type of either/or assumption is an oversimplification and tends to short circuit the discussion of these issues among believers.

Thirdly, the book could have profited from a more coherent handling of philosophy of science issues. On the one hand the book strongly (and properly in my view) encourages the idea that we Christians should fundamentally frame our thinking along Scriptural lines. On the other hand it claims in regard to science that we should desire simply to “follow the evidence wherever it leads” (p. 14). It turns out that no one simply “follows the evidence where ever it leads.” Data don’t come to us with tags affixed, telling us what it is evidence for. We humans develop arguments to try to convince one another that particular data are best interpreted as evidence for some particular explanation and our judgments about the success of those arguments are strongly impacted by our worldview level convictions and background beliefs. From this standpoint the “follow the evidence wherever it leads” rhetoric is unhelpful.

Finally, there were several passages that seem to encourage the idea that the evolutionary biology consensus is in the process of crumbling because it is so obviously contrary to the data, and further, that the exposure of the vacuity of evolutionary theory and wholesale defection in the ranks is prevented only by the political stranglehold of evolutionists in the scientific world. I’m convinced that these “evolution conspiracy theories” are serious distortions of the real situation and as a rhetorical device serve only to damage productive discussion. The evolutionary consensus (right or wrong) is not in the process of crumbling and although there certainly are (as in all human endeavors) a variety of political and ideological streams flowing through the origins discussion, to reduce it all to ideology and politics is a serious error.

In the end, with the caveats noted above, I think this book well worth reading and digesting for those interested in engaging these issues. Though I am not convinced by all of the arguments presented, I do think the book helpfully focuses a variety of cautions that need to be taken seriously by those who want to move their Christian communities full speed ahead in the project to reconcile contemporary evolutionary theory and a Christian theology.

 

A few general comments about engaging origins issues

Every time I engage these issues, I’m always made aware of how much more I have to learn about God’s Word and God’s world and the varied ways that God’s people strive to respond faithfully to both in relation to these origins issues.  So it seems to me a good thing to have these discussions ongoing among believers. The discussions can keep us from complacency and ensure that there are a variety of thoughtful Christian perspectives on offer in the contemporary culture.

Also, I’ve found that these discussions keep before me the irony of my own propensity to consider myself as better than others and to look out for my own interests in the midst of my attempt to be faithful to my Lord—so that repentance seems to be a required constant companion while dealing with these issues.

I’m also more and more convinced as time moves on that dealing with these issues by playing “hardball” in specialized academic disciplinary ghettos, or closed church “councils” or in strident debates led by para-church origins advocacy groups is unlikely to be helpful to God’s church. The “specialists” and origins advocacy groups often do have valuable insight to contribute to the conversation, and church leaders do have responsibilities to make decisions and to temper chaos, but it seems to me that moving forward on these polarizing issues will require the intentional development of broad  “origins discussion safe zones” in the context of real worshipping communities. This would require humility, listening ears for all, supernatural patience, and likely giving up on the dream of final closure about many of the details. May God bless his people with the grace to struggle with these issues in a way that centrally and unmistakably points to the Good News of the Gospel of King Jesus, the Ruler, Sustainer and Redeemer of it all.


Some resources readers might find helpful in further exploring these issues:

C. John Collins

Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary and Theological Commentary
Did Adam And Eve Really Exist? Who They Were and Why you Should Care

Del Ratzsch

Science and its Limits
The Battle of Beginnings

Tim Morris and Don Petcher

Science and Grace

Report of the Creation Study Committee (Presbyterian Church in America)

http://www.pcahistory.org/creation/report.html

Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith (American Scientific Affiliation Journal

Volume 62 Number 3    September 2010

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2010/PSCF9-10dyn.html

 

Dr. Tim Morris is a Professor of Biology at Covenant College.  His book, Science and Grace, co-authored with physicist Don Petcher, was released by Crossway Books in March 2006. Science and Grace was written to help Christians build an understanding of scientific endeavor within a Christian worldview by utilizing specific Christian convictions concerning God’s faithfulness to His people and to His creation.


Suggested Posts
A Reflection for Easter
April 20, 2019 | Sarah Nicholas
A Reflection for Easter
As we celebrate Easter, we invite you to reflect upon this writing by Henri Nouwen.   "From Action to Passion" by Henri Nouwen I was invited to visit a friend who was very sick. He was a man about fifty-three years old who had lived a very active, useful, faithful, creative life. Actually, he was a social activist who had cared deeply for people. When he was fifty he found out he had cancer, and the cancer became more and more severe. When I came to him, he said to me, "Henri, here I am lying in this bed, and I don't even know how to think about being sick. My whole way of thinking about myself is in terms of action, in terms of doing things for people. My life is valuable because I've been able to do many things for many people. And suddenly, here I am, passive, and I can't do anything anymore." And he said to me, "Help me to think about this situation in a new way. Help me to think about my not being able to do anything anymore so I won't be driven to despair. Help me to understand what it means that now all sorts of people are doing things to me over which I have no control." As we talked I realized that he and many others were constantly thinking, "How much can I still do?" Somehow this man had learned to think about himself as a man who was worth only what he was doing. And so when he got sick, his hope seemed to rest on the idea that he might get better and return to what he had been doing. If the spirit of this man was dependent on how much he would still be able to do, what did I have to say to him?... The central word in the story of Jesus' arrest is one I never thought much about. It is "to be handed over." That is what happened in Gethsemane. Jesus was handed over. Some translations say that Jesus was "betrayed," but the Greek says he was "handed over." Judas handed Jesus over (see Mark 14:10). But the remarkable thing is that the same word is used not only for Judas but also for God. God did not spare Jesus, but handed him over to benefit us all (see Romans 8:32). So this word, "to be handed over," plays a central role in the life of Jesus. Indeed, this drama of being handed over divides the life of Jesus radically in two. The first part of Jesus' life is filled with activity. Jesus takes all sorts of initiatives. He speaks; he preaches; he heals; he travels. But immediately after Jesus is handed over, he becomes the one to whom things are being done. He's being arrested; he's being led to the high priest; he's being taken before Pilate; he's being crowned with thorns; he's being nailed on a cross. Things are being done to him over which he has no control. That is the meaning of passion - being the recipient of other people's initiatives. It is important for us to realize that when Jesus says, "It is accomplished," he does not simply mean, "I have done all the things I wanted to do." He also means, "I have allowed things to be done to me that needed to be done to me in order for me to fulfill my vocation." Jesus does not fulfill his vocation in action only but also in passion. He doesn't just fulfill his vocation by doing the things the Father sent him to do, but also by letting things be done to him that the Father allows to be done to him, by receiving other people's initiatives. Passion is a kind of waiting - waiting for what other people are going to do. Jesus went to Jerusalem to announce the good news to the people of that city. And Jesus knew that he was going to put a choice before them: Will you be my disciple, or will you be my executioner? There is no middle ground here. Jesus went to Jerusalem to put people in a situation where they had to say "Yes" or "No." That is the great drama of Jesus' passion: he had to wait upon how people were going to respond. How would they come? To betray him or to follow him? In a way, his agony is not simply the agony of approaching death. It is also the agony of having to wait. All action ends in passion because the response to our action is out of our hands. That is the mystery of work, the mystery of love, the mystery of friendship, the mystery of community - they always involve waiting. And that is the mystery of Jesus' love. God reveals himself in Jesus as the one waits for our response. Precisely in that waiting the intensity of God's love is revealed to us. If God forced us to love, we would not really be lovers. All these insights into Jesus' passion were very important in the discussions with my friend. He realized that after much hard work he had to wait. He came to see that his vocation as a human being would be fulfilled not just in his actions but also in his passion. And together we began to understand that precisely in this waiting the glory of God and our new life both become visible. Precisely when Jesus is being handed over into his passion, he manifests his glory. "Whom do you seek?... I am he" are words that echo all the way back to Moses and the burning bush: "I am the one. I am who I am" (see Exodus 3:1-6). In Gethsemane, the glory of God manifested itself again, and they fell flat on the ground. Then Jesus was handed over. But already in the handing over we see the glory of God who hands himself over to us. God's glory revealed in Jesus embraces passion as well as resurrection. "The Son of Man," Jesus says, "must be lifted up as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him" (John 3:14-15). He is lifted up as a passive victim, so the cross is a sign of desolation. And he is lifted up in glory, so the cross becomes at the same time a sign of hope. Suddenly we realize that the glory of God, the divinity of God, bursts through in Jesus' passion precisely when he is most victimized. So new life becomes visible not only in the resurrection on the third day, but already in the passion, in the being handed over. Why? Because it is in the passion that the fullness of God's love shines through. It is supremely a waiting love, a love that does not seek control. When we allow ourselves to feel fully how we are being acted upon, we can come in touch with a new life that we were not even aware was there. This was the question my sick friend and I talked about constantly. Could he taste the new life in the midst of his passion? Could he see that in his being acted upon by the hospital staff he was already being prepared for a deeper love? It was a love that had been underneath all the action, but he had not tasted it fully. So together we began to see that in the midst of our suffering and passion, in the midst of our waiting, we can already experience the resurrection. Imagine how important that message is for people in our world. If it is true that God in Jesus Christ is waiting for our response to divine love, then we can discover a whole new perspective on how to wait in life. We can learn to be obedient people who do not always try to go back to the action but who recognize the fulfillment of our deepest humanity in passion, in waiting. If we can do this, I am convinced that we will come in touch with the glory of God and our own new life. Then our service to others will include our helping them see the glory breaking through, not only where they are active but also where they are being acted upon. Henri Nouwen, “From Action to Passion,” from “A Spirituality of Waiting” by Henri J. M. Nouwen, in The Weavings Reader, ed. by John Mogabgab. Copyright 1993 by The Upper Room. Used by permission. NOTE: RECUPERATED FROM THE NOW-DEFUNCT http://www.bruderhof.com/articles/FromAction.htm USING THE INTERNET ARCHIVE WAYBACK MACHINE.
Gathering: Accepting God’s Intimate Invitation
April 15, 2019 | Michael Gulker
Gathering: Accepting God’s Intimate Invitation
We’re losing our ability to gather as Christians. In our polarized culture of contempt, rather than gathering in person, in unity, and around our faith, we do so in echo chambers along racial, socio-economic, and political lines. And from our preferred news and social media outlets, we’re continually bombarded by messages—both subtle and overt—that compel us to fight for our side and to isolate ourselves from opposing views, making it easy to compromise our morals and our faith in order to win. Personally, I experience this daily. I have to fight the temptation every morning to check my news feed first thing rather than rest in God’s word. I feel a constant pull to see if my people won—a pull to feed my addictions to those ideologues whose views align with mine. But when I take a moment to remember God’s intimate invitation to gather—around his word and with others outside my echo chambers—it changes the tone for my day. This year, The Colossian Forum is exploring the nuances of gathering, including illuminating our struggles with it and how we can overcome the obstacles that prevent us from deepening our relationships with our brothers and sisters in Christ who look, sound, and vote differently from us.     Gathering in the name of Jesus rather than in the name of our favorite media outlet starts us on a firm path to participate in God’s love when we disagree. While we are free to choose Fox News or CNN instead, there is a high price when we do. The missed opportunity may seem imperceptible in the moment, but over time, we lose our ability to gather in Jesus’ name. And when that happens, we lose our way. We lose the chance to participate in God’s reconciling narrative in the world. We lose our ability to imagine how our lives intersect with God’s and how God has given us each other as gifts to learn to love as he loves, even if it’s costly. And unless we gather a variety of voices—male and female, young and old, black and white and everything in between—we miss out on the multiplicity of gifts that reflect the multifaceted nature of God’s infinite glory. Accepting God’s invitation gives us the opportunity to participate in a different news story, and—for once—it’s Good News. It allows us to uncover the story of God and live more fully into it—into the conflicts and into the complicated but rich joy of our shared life together. It’s when we gather amidst the messy realities of our communal life—and keep gathering—that we find ourselves participating in God’s self-giving love in and to the world. Every time we assemble in the name of Jesus, we’re reminded of who we are and where we’re headed. It grounds us in our shared faith. We’re reconstituted from being creatures of the left or the right into being part of the new creation—the people of God. When we gather in our brokenness, the Spirit transforms us. And when we gather in our difference, yet as one in our worship of God, the more deeply we experience and reflect Christ. We may be susceptible to adopting the trappings of other identities that have been pushed on us, but our primary goal as Christians is to gather as the people of God. Instead of engaging, as the wider culture does, primarily as members of the left or the right, let’s engage first and foremost as members of the body of Christ, people created in the image of God and expecting to find the image of God in the other. If we do this, if we follow Jesus when we gather, especially with those with whom we disagree, new creation bursts forth. And instead of running from the church when conflicts emerge, people will run to it—drawn by the beauty of Christ made manifest in our imperfect but persistent life together. This is our opportunity. And it is my prayer that you find ways to step into it. Gathering is at the heart of The Colossian Way, a spiritual discipline that enables Christians to engage conflict and difference as a catalyst for growth in faith and witness. The Colossian Way creates worship-filled spaces for Christ-honoring engagement on the most divisive topics. Gathering is also part of the theme for our 2019 Annual Conference. We believe that in order to live together well in ways that reflect the beauty of Christ, we need both to recognize our diminished view of gathering and to work toward a fuller experience of gathering—filled with grace and truth. We invite you to join us and others seeking a community committed to love of God and neighbor. It is our hope that this event will provide you the space and encouragement to accept God’s intimate invitation. We also invite you to share your experiences with gathering, whether negative or positive. Please visit colossianforum.org/stories to do so.

601 Fifth St. NW, Suite #101
Grand Rapids, MI 49504

(616) 328-6016

info@colossianforum.org