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
October 16, 2012 | Andy Saur

Article – What I Would Like To Hear A Young-Earth Creationist Say

Article – What I Would Like To Hear A Young-Earth Creationist Say

By Dr. Dennis Venema
October 16th, 2012

***See the companion article: “What I Would Like to Hear an Evolutionary Creationist Say” by Todd Charles Wood

When I was first asked to write this piece, a flurry of thoughts went through my mind about what things I would like to hear a Young-Earth Creationist (hereafter, YEC) say: things such as that the geologic column actually exists, that humans and chimpanzees have incredibly similar genomes, or that transitional fossils are real.[div id=”callout-right”]It’s the simple “brother” or “sister” that says – “we’re both part of the same family.”[end-div]Then I thought of more specific examples I’d like to see addressed – lake varves, ice core layers, or shared pseudogenes in nested hierarchies. Then, as I reflected further, I realized that these scientific issues are not the most important issues on the table.  In fact, the most important thing I would like to hear a YEC say to someone of my views isn’t a scientific statement at all – it’s a statement of unity in Christ. It’s the simple “brother” or “sister” that says – “we’re both part of the same family.” Even if we disagree on the mechanism of creation, affirming our unity in Christ needs to be the starting point for the conversation.

One of the issues that Christians of YEC or Evolutionary Creationist (EC) persuasions will likely face, sooner or later, is a breakdown in Christian fellowship over one’s views. For a YEC, this might take the form of being regarded as “ignorant” or “fundamentalist” by believers who hold differing views. For those of us who hold to an EC perspective, this can take place in a general sense when leaders in the YEC movement label us as “compromisers” or “wolves in sheep’s clothing”. While this is hurtful, it is at least somewhat abstract. More challenging is the personal form: what I call that look – perhaps over coffee in the foyer after the sermon – when an acquaintance suddenly looks at you with new eyes in a way that says “Whoa, just a minute. I’m not sure you’re really one of us!” For those ECs who are professional biologists, these encounters are virtually unavoidable:

“So, what do you do for work?”

“I’m a biologist. I teach up at the local Christian university.”

“Oh, really? You must really love the work that (insert the individual’s favorite anti-evolution ministry) does. It’s so good to have Christians like you who fight against evolution.”

“Well, actually…”

And not long after, it’s very likely that I’ll get that look – especially if I happen to be teaching a Sunday school class at the time. Even if my new acquaintance eventually comes to accept that I do have faith (of a sort) in Christ, often the sense I get is that they feel that I’m pretty wishy-washy, or that I don’t have a high view of Scripture. Now, I don’t get those feelings from close friends who know me well, but I wonder how many of those casual church acquaintances would have become closer friends but for this issue.

[div id=”callout-left”]We’ve given up the unity of the body over what I feel is a secondary issue.[end-div]Of course, even more concerning for me is the effect that these issues have on students who learn (almost always for the very first time) that evolution is a well-supported scientific theory, and that it is very challenging to defend YEC from a scientific viewpoint. After dealing with the shock personally, then the next issue is what to tell mom and dad. When they go home, say over Christmas, similar conversations around the dinner table or in the foyer are bound to happen. I’ve had some students relate the pain they go through – some do talk it over with their friends and family, but others can’t bring themselves to do so, because they know what will happen if they do.

And I grieve with them that we as believers are divided. We’ve given up the unity of the body over what I feel is a secondary issue.

It seems to me that the Apostle Paul had similar concerns over issues that divided believers in his day. Things like circumcision and dietary laws were issues that threatened to break the unity of Jewish and Gentile believers. For Paul, these issues were ones that he viewed as non-essential issues for Christians. In the case of food laws, he notes that as one in Christ Jesus he is convinced that no food is unclean of itself, but admonishes that Christians accept those still keeping the food laws without passing judgment. As for circumcision, Paul claims that neither circumcision nor lack thereof counts for anything, but then has Timothy circumcised in order that his partial Gentile parentage not be a stumbling block for Jews Paul was hoping to bring into the faith. These issues, both of which were “boundary markers” under the Abrahamic covenant for who was “in” or “out” of the people of God, are now discretionary items in light of the resurrection and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Discretionary as they were, there is one thing that Paul will come out swinging on, for both of these: any move that made them essential for Gentile Christians, and thus threatened the sufficiency of the Holy Spirit as a marker for who was part of the people of God. Driving this issue for Paul was a deep concern for the unity of the body: God had brought the Gentiles “in” by filling them with the Holy Spirit, not by requiring them to be circumcised and follow the food laws.  He minces no words for those who would make circumcision an essential for the Gentile believers in Galatia. When Peter, embarrassed at the arrival in Antioch of fellow Jews from Jerusalem, now refuses to sit at table with his Gentile brother and sisters, Paul calls him out in no uncertain terms.[div id=”callout-right”]Such division would hamstring the church and raise an unnecessary barrier to those outside the faith.[end-div]These were issues that threatened the gospel by bringing division and separation where God desired unity. Not unity of opinion, but rather the unity of sitting together and eating the Lord’s supper as one people of God, despite holding differences of opinion on disputable matters. For Paul, that unity cut across all social classes that divided people in his day – slave or free, Jew or Greek, male or female – and he was not going to allow secondary issues to undo what God had done in Christ and through the Spirit. Such division would hamstring the church and raise an unnecessary barrier to those outside the faith.

For me, I see similar themes with the evolution – creation discussion. Is it an important issue for Christians to discuss? Yes. Does the issue serve as a catalyst for a wide-ranging discussion on exegesis and hermeneutics? Certainly, and that in and of itself can be very healthy. Is it acceptable for believers to hold either opinion and be within the people of God? I would say yes. It is my conviction that the mechanism by which God created is an issue of secondary importance compared to the underlying primary issue of holding God as the Creator and sustainer of all things. As a secondary issue, then, the only danger is making one of the options an essential, and dividing over it. Is it a problem if my brother or sister at church is a YEC? No. Is it a problem if I won’t share fellowship with them because of their views? Absolutely. Our difference of opinion on the mechanism of creation is not a gospel issue, but breaking fellowship over a secondary matter is a gospel issue. It hinders the love and fellowship that we are called to be known for, and raises an unnecessary barrier to those who would consider joining us.

So, to my YEC brothers and sisters, I would make this request. Without minimizing the importance of the exegetical issues that the creation/evolution controversy raises, let’s first and foremost sit at the Lord’s table and break bread together, recognizing each other as brothers and sisters in Christ and members of the same body. Those of us who see things from an EC perspective may need to repent of belittling our YEC brothers and sisters as scientifically ignorant or theologically naive. Those of a YEC perspective may need to repent of condemning their EC brothers and sisters as “compromisers” or theologically liberal. Together we can affirm that what matters most is that Christ’s body not be divided over secondary issues – and then work to discuss these important matters in light of that affirmation.

 

Dr. Dennis Venema is an associate professor of biology at Trinity Western University and Senior Fellow of Biology for the BioLogos Foundation. He blogs frequently at http://biologos.org/blog.

 

Suggested Posts
Reclaiming Jesus
February 14, 2019 | Gene Miyamoto
Reclaiming Jesus
“The contemporary church is so often a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound.” – Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.  Wicked Problems The “Wicked Problem” of today’s political climate can present us a wonderful, if challenging, opportunity for polarized Christians and churches to gather as one body. It gives us the chance to face our conflict and brokenness, learn through the Spirit to lovingly “fight” well together and to become stronger; to be held together in Christ (Colossians 1:17) and known as Christ’s disciples through our love of one another (John 13:35).  Reclaiming Jesus is a letter from a group of Christian leaders acting upon their conscience, coram deo, posting six theses that affirm what they believe and what they reject, specifically related to several pivotal issues that are driving separation across our society. In the letter, they denounce racism, particularly white supremacy; oppression and abuse of women; abandonment of the vulnerable, the poor, immigrants and refugees; normalization of lying and the undermining of the public accountability to truth; autocratic and authoritarian rule; and xenophobic ethnic nationalism. Their declaration calls to churches for a process of prayer, discernment and turning away from complicity in politics that undermines the theology of being seen as disciples of Christ through love for one another. The authors repudiate “those at the highest levels of political leadership” who incite such behaviors, implying but without naming President Trump.  Critics of this statement, such as the author of the 6/10/18 The Washington Times’ op-ed, “Wolves in Shepherd’s Clothing,” focus primarily on hyperbolic criticism of the “Reclaiming Jesus” authors, rather than offering biblical exegesis illuminating counter-points.  Choose Loving Engagement Over Rhetoric But rhetoric isn’t the point. Rather than trying to convince the other to come over to our side or engaging in a vitriolic argument that simply drives us further apart, we have the opportunity to change the conversation. We can recognize these kinds of opinion differences – these conflicts – as Christ-given possibilities to offer a new way to approach our disagreements.    In this case, both sides are equally impassioned, equally committed to revealing the “truth.” It is precisely, squarely within the realm of disagreement between two sides such as these where we have the chance to deepen our relationships with God and one another. For the pastors, local churches and young people watching and waiting to see what liturgical leaders will say and do in response to this, and other arguments, that are playing out on the national stage, be encouraged. Because polarized Christians who gather and lovingly engage and learn well together as one body held together in Christ provides a wonderful opportunity for leadership and discipleship.  Let’s defy Dr. King’s observation. Let’s join our voices to create a beautiful sound, change the way we argue, and both lift up and restore the church and its people.
Imagine: Recovering our Desire to Participate in God’s Holy Life
January 29, 2019 | Michael Gulker
Imagine: Recovering our Desire to Participate in God’s Holy Life
We live in exciting times—times when the need for the reconciling power of the gospel is blindingly clear. Christendom is in retreat. The church suffers from a brand problem, rooted in its complicity with a divisive culture that it tacitly reflects. Young people, as well as old, are leaving the faith at an unprecedented rate.[1] Yet, there are pockets of beauty, faithfulness, and hope, as hunger for communion, community, and peace is becoming increasingly pronounced.[2] Pockets of Hope The work of The Colossian Forum (TCF) is privileged to be situated within these pockets of hope—as well as within the tensions among them. We recognize the depth of our society’s polarization and alienation, while at the same time, seeing that, by the grace of the Holy Spirit present in the body of Christ, the solution has already been given and indeed is embedded in the problem itself. Conflict, at its core, arises from differing desires, and those differences are perceived as threatening. Yet, the Christian tradition from Augustine onward has recognized that desire is always desire for communion—with God and one another. If this is the case (and we think it is), then conflict is that same desire for God and one another gone awry. How so? Well, we begin with our confession that humanity is created in the image of the Triune God, whose very life is constituted by self-giving love across three distinct, different persons. The Father gives himself completely to the Son, the Son gives himself back—unto death—to the Father through the Holy Spirit, catching up all creation into the divine and eternal dance of self-giving love and delight. This is ultimately who we are and how the world most truly is. Harnessing Conflict But in a world full of brokenness, hurt, and sin, rather than participating in the divine dance of pouring ourselves out through self-giving, our love has become self-protective and self-serving. Rather than experiencing delight and desire across different persons, there is defensiveness, fear, suspicion, and even violence. Yet the very desire powering conflict (all the energy of our desire gone awry) can, by the healing power of the Holy Spirit, be harnessed for our own redemption and the salvation of the world. The conflicts raging across our society, denominations, churches, and even our families are driven by our deep and abiding desire for communion with God and one another, however distorted that desire has become. And we have, in the words of 2 Peter 1:3, “…been given everything we need for a holy life...” TCF is an organization tasked with the recovery of the language, imagination, and practices that will help open up believers to the Spirit’s power to reshape our desires, moving us away from the fearful and combative desires of the self-protective “flesh” and toward active participation in God’s own holy life of self-giving love, especially in the face of the conflicts that plague our time. Built for Communion To our deep delight, we have found believers and non-believers alike are hungry for this way of being-in-communion-in-the-world. We are made for this. We are ready for this. We are built for communion, and even amidst the intense divisive language we experience in social media and elsewhere, we haven’t forgotten it. Because of this deep longing, and because of the vision and faithfulness of people like you, TCF has had the privilege of being set aside—given the time and space—to walk with believers, churches, leaders, and Christian organizations from divisiveness to discipleship and to the first fruits of reconciliation. Through almost eight years of research, reading, writing, experimentation, and evaluation, we now have the clearest sense in our history of where we are as an organization and where we need to go next. And with this emerging clarity, we are embarking on a five-year strategic planning process next month. Envisioning a five-year horizon will insure that near-term planning plots the appropriate trajectory. This is an exciting, yet daunting, time. [1]Pinetops Foundation reported in 2018 that if the current trends continue, 30-50 million people will have left the church by 2050, never to return. [2]Google’s NGram tool analyzing word usage across time marks a 46% increase in references to “community” from 1960 to 2000.