A Question About Evolution – Answers Anyone?

Is Christianity like a warm cozy sweater, but one that requires only one dropped stitch to unravel?

Paula Kirby has suggested that it is, and that evolution is the stitch that unravels the sweater. But more of that toward the end of the post.

I put up a piece last Thursday looking at a phone survey of senior pastors performed by Barna, commissioned by BioLogos: Creation, Evolution, and US Pastors. One of the questions posed in the survey asked about concerns raised by evolution. Four concerns were considered. Theistic evolution …

1. undermines the authority of scripture.

2. views portions of the Bible as non-literal, like Genesis.

3. raises doubts about a historical Adam and Eve

4. raises questions about how and when death and sin entered the world.

The senior pastors/priests were asked if they found these to be a major concern, a minor concern, not a concern, or if they were unsure.

Which of these raise major concerns for you? Why?

The results are not terribly surprising. Most of those who hold to a Young Earth Creation find all of these to be a major concern. I find it a little surprising, however, that the percentages are slightly higher for the two questions that deal directly with scripture than for the questions about Adam and Eve and Sin and Death. Unlike those holding to YEC or PC, few of those who hold to theistic evolution (7%-13%), and only somewhat more who are uncertain how God created (20%-27%), find any of these to be a major concern.

It is a Defiling Skin Disease … Say What?

My kids, about 12 years ago, wandering in the ruins at Tel Be’er Sheva.

Over the last year or so I have been listening to scripture straight through in large chunks during my commute (20-25 minutes each way depending on traffic). The Bible Gateway App for my phone has a great feature that permits listening to an audio reading or dramatization of several different translations. Plug the phone into the power outlet (evolved from a cigarette lighter with vestigial features of such, a cultural idea my children need to have explained to them) for power, into the sound system on the dash for volume, and off we go.

The idea of reading/listening straight through wasn’t my idea to begin with. I got it from one of the many wise commenters on this blog. It has been a fascinating experience, and one I have commented on in earlier posts. While I had read the Bible since childhood – the bits and pieces scattered here and there, primarily aimed at salvation (Romans Road and heaven) or at moral lessons for twentieth or now twenty-first century life provided little real grounding in the story of scripture.

This latest time through the text I started with the prophets, then continued to the NT. Over the last couple of weeks I have been listening to the early part of the OT once again. Genesis, Exodus (all that exciting tabernacle stuff), Leviticus (all those purity laws – not to mention the laws concerning defiling skin diseases), Numbers (the name of this book conveys the excitement) and on. Every time through I get a better perspective on the whole.

Lately I have been listening with two thoughts in mind: “What does this mean through the spectacles of the Jesus Creed?” and “What does it mean if we look back from the perspective of Revelation?” If we are being drawn towards God’s future – what was the point of Joseph, Moses, Leviticus, Joshua?

But … the Jesus Creed … God’s Future … that is all well and good. But what does it have to do with much, perhaps most, of the text we have? What is the point of all this detail about defiling skin diseases, defiling molds, and placing the blood on the lobe of the right ear, on the thumb of the right hand and on the big toe of the right foot? To pick just a few examples.

Creation, Evolution, and US Pastors

A bit over a year ago BioLogos commissioned a survey conducted by Barna Group to understand the views of clergy on questions of creation and evolution. The results of the survey are now being released by BioLogos and you can see the initial summary from the survey in April edition of their monthly newsletter The Conversation and in The Forum. I am going to looks at some of the results of this survey over a few posts.

In Mar. and Oct. 2012 a phone survey of 743 senior pastors and priests was conducted. The cooperation rate was quite high. For the 602 protestant senior pastors included in the first two graphs here Barna reports a cooperation rate of 96% suggesting that the results are representative of the group. The graphics on the BioLogos site displays the results of the survey in the form of a pie or circle chart. Here I will plot the results in the form of bar graphs to provide a different visualization of the same data. The data comes from the press release of the survey.

Categories of views. The responses provided by the pastors to a series of questions were used to separate them into seven different categories with respect to views of origins. These seven categories are defined as follows:

YEC: Young Earth Creation. Believe that God created life in its present form in six 24 hour days. Assert that the earth is less than 10000 years old. Absolutely certain of these perspectives.

Lean YEC: All others who believe that God created life in its present form in six 24 hour days, but who express qualified uncertainty or who doubt “young” age of the earth.

PC: Progressive creation. Believe that God created life in its present form over a period of time, but not via evolution. Absolutely certain of this perspective.

Lean PC: All others who embrace an old earth view, but who express qualified uncertainty.

TE: Theistic evolution. Believe God created life, used a natural process like evolution. Absolutely certain of this perspective. Express the belief that natural selection can explain the rise of new species.

Lean TE: All others who embrace the idea that God used a natural process to bring about life in its present form, but who express some qualified certainty.

Uncertain: Believe that God created life, but admit they are not certain how.

Of the pastors surveyed 54% either lean YEC or are certain of the YEC perspective, 15% prefer a progressive creation view and 18% prefer a TE perspective, although only 3% are certain that TE is correct. It is not surprising that most who take a TE view are not “absolutely certain.” If I were given such a survey it is not clear that I would be categorized as absolutely certain – although I know far more science than the vast majority of pastors.

Skepticism and (Not Needing) The Last Word

As most are aware by this time, Dallas Willard passed away last Wednesday. Dallas Willard was a Professor of Philosophy at USC, The University of Southern California, for 47 years. He began as an Assistant Professor of Philosophy in 1965 and moved through the ranks from assistant to associate to full professor. He retired last fall and was an emeritus professor at the time of his death. It was an impressive career. USC has a nice tribute on their website: In Memoriam, a tribute to the respect with which he was held by many.

Of course we are remembering Willard on this site because he was not simply a professor of philosophy. He was, especially later in his career, a philosophy professor “for the church”. He wasn’t simply trying to succeed in his career, but was making a difference for the church. I’ve been a professor now – Chemistry not Philosophy – for 20 years at a major secular University. It isn’t an easy task, or a particularly comfortable environment much of the time. I was introduced to Willard and his work through the pastor of our church, especially The Divine Conspiracy which figured large in a series on The Sermon on the Mount. Since then I’ve read several of his other books as well.

For many Willard was connected with the idea of spiritual disciplines from one of his first “religious” books – The Spirit of the Disciplines published in 1988. What impressed me most with Willard, however, was his approach to Christianity with intellectual integrity and with faith. This observation from John Ortberg’s tribute to Dallas Willard in Christianity Today I find a particularly powerful reflection of his strength, and it serves as an example and a challenge for the rest of us who continue on for a time.

In one of his classes a student challenged him with statements that were both offensive and incorrect. Dallas paused and told the class that that was a good place to end their discussion. Somebody asked Dallas afterward why he had not countered the students’ argument and put him in his place. “I’m practicing the discipline of not having to have the last word.”

This is part of why Dallas would never debate non-believers. He would engage in a mutual conversation where both parties could seek for truth together. He would often say: “I’m sure Jesus is the kind of person who would be the first to say you must ruthlessly follow the truth wherever it leads.” Through the last week of his life he was still hoping to help believers engage non-believers by looking together at questions where people get stuck in their actual lives rather than by trying to win arguments.

We need quality Christian thinkers like Willard, unafraid of truth and inquiry. Those who can stand up and think, who don’t need the last word, and who ruthlessly follow truth wherever it leads. I am not sure how many realize how deeply important this is in the 21st century church and university. We will miss his voice and insight.

Rather than end on that note however, I would like to put up for conversation some ideas from what must have been one of Willard’s last public speaking engagements.

A Miraculous Creation

No matter how we look at it the question of miracles is a key one as we consider faith, worldview and science. Certainly I have been asked many times on this blog how I can dismiss a miraculous creation (I don’t – but we’ll get to that), yet accept (apparently arbitrarily) the miracles performed by Jesus and, of course, the resurrection. Isn’t it all or nothing? How can we pick and choose?

On the science side, of course, acceptance of miracles is met with complete incredulity. Ard Louis has a scholarly essay also extracted into a series of posts on Miracles and Science over at BioLogos (Part 1 here). His essay begins with a typical encounter:

Unbelievable, isn’t it, that there are still students at this university who believe in stories from the Bible, said Martin, an older colleague, at one of the formal dinners around which the traditional life of Oxford University revolves. But Martin, I answered, their faith probably doesn’t differ much from mine. I can still see his face go pale while he nearly choked on his glass of St. Emilion Grand Cru Classé: How can you believe in such things nowadays – Walking on water, a resurrection from the dead? Those are miracles, and aren’t you a scientist?

If miracles are arbitrary acts of imaginative supernatural showmanship the incredulity of Martin is understandable. But they are not. And this connects with an essay by Pete Enns also on the BioLogos site several years ago (Jesus and the Sea) looking at the incidents in the ministry of Jesus where he rebuked or calmed the sea. These were not arbitrary acts, magic tricks, or acts of convenience to make life easier. These were miracles with a purpose – where the impact could not be missed. The essay concludes:

The theological power of these episodes is more fully appreciated when we keep before us the Old Testament “taming the water” theme they echo. This helps us see that the purpose of these two episodes was not simply to calm a storm for its own sake or to help the disciples get to the other side of the lake safely. It was to show the disciples what kind of messiah Jesus was. Israel’s God–the chaos tamer who rebukes the water–was here among them. The long-awaited messianic age has dawned, with more power and authority than anyone had expected. As Jesus says in John 8:46-47, to listen to him is to belong to God. Controlling the water shows his disciples–and us–that Jesus is worthy of our attention.

These are both excellent essays – well worth reading and pondering. They ask important questions:

When and why does God work miracles? How are miracles to be understood?

It Goes Deeper

There is an excellent article in the March edition of Christianity Today: Bigger Than We Think by David Wilkinson that describes how the Christian doctrine of creation goes far deeper that just explaining how the world began. It goes far deeper than explaining the origin of life or the origin of the diversity of life. David Wilkinson received a PhD in Theoretical Astrophysics from the University of Durham and a PhD in Systematic Theology from Cambridge University where he explored Christian eschatology.

From the CT article:

The Christian doctrine of Creation has often been hijacked by controversies over how old the universe is. It has been hollowed out by the theory that God simply ignites the universe and then goes off for a cup of coffee, never touching his masterwork again. It is interesting that attacks on belief in a Creator, whether from Hawking, Richard Dawkins’s The God Delusion, or Lawrence M. Krauss’s recent A Universe from Nothing, tend to target this diminished deity. But the Bible has a much bigger understanding of God as Creator. Not only does the doctrine of Creation feature in Scripture beyond just Genesis 1, God’s creative activity permeates every moment of the history of the universe.

Scientific explanations can only go so far. To address the big questions we have to go deeper into the transcendent meaning of the facts. In this clip from Test of Faith (an excellent resource by the way) Wilkerson goes to George Lucas and Star Wars and to the scientific description of a kiss to explain what he means.

At 2:04 in the video:

What is the scientific definition of a kiss? Well a kiss is the approach of two pairs of lips, the reciprocal transmission of carbon dioxide and microbes, and the juxtaposition of two orbicular muscles in a state of contraction. That is a kiss in scientific terms. But if I go to my wife and say to her, “Allison, I’d love to get together with you for a mutual transmission of carbon dioxide and microbes” she would say “Get lost.”

Being Drawn Toward the Future

Daniel Harrell wraps up his book, Nature’s Witness: How Evolution Can Inspire Faith, with a reflection and a perspective that I don’t think we consider seriously enough.

Christians have always believed all truth to be God’s truth, implying that science and faith, despite differences when it comes to explaining why, nevertheless should agree in regard to what. … Science matters whether we care about it or not. And because science matters, it warrants theological reflection. (p. 137)

Because science matters, it warrants theological reflection.

The point isn’t that science is an objective truth, that theology must conform or be lost in the dust of time. Rather the point is (1) that all truth is God’s truth and thus “as reliable witnesses of nature, we can only become more reliable witnesses to God.” And (2) for Christians at least, theology is the queen of the sciences … that is, it is the lens through which we interpret everything else. Because science matters it warrants theological reflection. The biblical narrative is the source and ground of this theological reflection because it records God’s interaction and relationship with his creation.

The final two chapters of Nature’s Witness (Sunday Lunch and Peach Pie in the Sky) walk through some of these theological reflections which center on death (biological and human), new creation, and the nature of time. The biggest issue is death. Science tells us that death is a necessary and natural part of the world. We can wonder a bit about the fate of mankind, but so far as plants, animals, and insects are concerned it seems an intentional and necessary part of creation. It is not that God had to use death in creation – but that he did use death in creation. Somehow, then, it must be and have always been part of his plan.