My brother alerted me to a sister-college of my alma mater making headlines in Newsweek with a story titled, “Can God Love Darwin, Too?”. A simple answer to that question is an obvious “YES!”.
The article centers around an professor at Olivet Nazarene University writing a book entitled “Random Designer” that states that components of evolution may fit within the intelligent design theory as well. A statement I can say I agree with. Mutations and variations obviously occur in both the plant and animal kingdom. Why must these variations be considered outside of God’s plan for creation itself?
The sad part is the exposure this article is giving to various churches in the Nazarene denomination and their response to the work of this professor. Including threatening to withhold funding from the school and other little actions.
In a letter to Bowling, ministers in Caro, Mo., expressed “deep concern regarding the teaching of evolutionary theory as a scientifically proven fact,” calling it “a philosophy that is godless, contrary to scripture and scientifically unverifiable.” Irate parents, pastors and others complained to Bowling, while a meeting between church leaders and Colling “led to some tension and misunderstanding,” Bowling said in a letter to trustees. (Well, “misunderstanding” in the sense that the Noachian flood was a little puddle.) It’s a rude awakening to scientists who thought the Galilean gulf was closing.
I believe my brother says it well with the following response:
It’s just like the church’s arrogant narrow-minded reductionism of any single issue or cause to an irreducible claim on God’s position. As with homosexuality, abortion, being a Republican, the War in Iraq, Evolution vs. Creationism, etc…who gets off deciding what God’s view is and then dictating it to others. Religious elitists and prudes beware or be damned! There are certainly some guides and commands in Scripture which make certain things clear. But on many other things there is SO much room for interpretation that you’ve got to be mentally deficient to claim a definitive stance (e.g. evolution).
I remember a conversation I had recently about the idea that maybe humans had only been on the planet 10,000 years and how that is contrary to carbon dating being used. I’m not sure about you, but my God was all powerful the last time I checked and if he wanted to make something in an instant and make it look like it had been that way for millions of years, I wouldn’t put it past Him.
Let me jump back to my initial point though. What does arguing this fact in public in a situation internal to the church do for our witness to non-believers? My guess is it doesn’t make it any easier for them to change their opinions and stereotypes about us when we prove them correct with this kind of garbage.
| 2.5 |
I agree with you that there is much in the Faith that is debatable to some degree with some room for interpretation. That might include your worship style, baptism style, whether you believe in a pre tribulation rapture or not, speak in tongues or how many times you’ve been married. But, I don’t think that merging evolution with Creationism is one of the items open to debate.
Nor do I believe if there is such a debate, that it should be confined inside the Church. A public debate, even at risk of being stereotyped or alienating potential converts, is justified as this is a fundamental belief that separates Christians from non believers. Potential converts should be aware that becoming a Christian demands total belief in God’s absolute creative ability without any compromise or mixture with any aspect of a scientific or theistic evolutionary belief.
The foundational belief of scientific evolution is that things get better by absolute chance and there is no intelligent design precipitating the event. However, a Christian believes that everything created is by God’s absolute design, even the minor variations in plant and animal species, as He knows the beginning from the end. Evolution says that the mutations and variations you observe in the natural world will eventually become a new life form, totally without God.
Call me a religious elitist or prude, theistic evolution compromises God’s character and nature. If you compromise on this you are forced to eventually compromise and endlessly debate on other key elements of the Faith, including God’s plan of salvation, because if God didn’t create the world His way and by His rules then who is to say that Jesus Christ is His only way to salvation?
My statement is that God’s creation process could have included components of macro/micro-evolution to a degree. I’m not taking the Creator out of the equation, I’m stating that all equations we can use to answer our own questions were created by God as well.
Very well said Dave.
http://thenazareneu.blogspot.com
Attention Naz U. In the future, why don’t you take a moment to introduce yourself and what your site is about instead of just plopping your URL in the comment field. Why would someone want to visit your site after reading this post? Let us know and maybe we will.