I teach at Toccoa Falls College and have written several articles for BioLogos. Our Bible & science faculties hold various views on the faith-science interface.
2 Likes
I feel much the same way. The origins discussion is still pretty decisive in most similar churches, and probably would not be very welcome in the churches that need such curriculum most. I wonder if parachurch organizations like Biologos might be better suited to programs offered outside the church walls. How that would be best accomplished, Iām not sure;
3 Likes
Kendal, agreed. I got a little carried away. Somehow, the EC discussion needs to get into churches. Just as we see some progress at the college level, I think weāll see progress at the church and family levels over time. BTW, getting EC discussions into churches includes āmainlineā as well, especially at the pastor level. I see mainline pastors floundering on this topic because of a lack of attention, while they are well versed in other issues from a gospel level. Iād love to see Joseph Graves or other BL speakers bring a science background to those pastors.
1 Like
What do you mean? What churches/pastors? Science isnāt usually a problem for mainline churches.
True, most mainline churches have no issue with evolution. Change mainline to popular evangelical, however, and it is tough getting a hearing where it is needed most.
3 Likes
I guess there is a need to focus on places where the pastors get their education and training. Even if the teaching would not be EC, studying Genesis in the ANE cultural context would open up minds to see the different ways how the narratives can be interpreted.
3 Likes
This is a really good point, and it would fit more broadly with the type of historic understanding that many conservative denominations (more similarto what I know) seek to develop in an attempt to grasp the context of scripture.
We are in the process of developing two six-week small group studies for churches and campus groups that pull in some of the Integrate topics, but is more centered on a Bible study than a science discussion. We do however have to pick an audience and we are aiming it at people who are already open to the idea of science and the Bible being in harmony. You canāt really do a Bible study if you have to spend most of the time debating peopleās pre-existing beliefs about science or the Bible. I know lots of people want some kind of magic bullet tool they can hand YEC friends that will āconvinceā them in short order that they are wrong, but I donāt think such a tool is possible. People have to be in the mental/spiritual place where they are themselves questioning and open to alternative answers or no amount of evidence and no amount of brilliant arguments will make much of a difference. It seems the fractures and divides in Evangelicalism are just getting wider and at some point we need to admit that certain audiences are hostile and will never trust us.
I donāt think kids really need to be formally taught evolutionary creationism. They just need to not be indoctrinated into YEC stuff. If kids arenāt taught to oppose science and arenāt taught that scientists are anti-God, they donāt grow up with the same baggage, and their spiritual questions and struggles are different. My own kids have been taught science is reliable and the Bible is true and they have not had all these burning questions and conflicts that adults who are moving from a YEC perspective to an EC perspective have. Their questions and conflicts settle on different areas like how the church treats LGTBQ individuals, war and nationalism, and consumerism. (All things Iām far less prepared to āanswerā of course).
6 Likes
Kendal, Phil, Kaiā¦the comments about mainline churches and pastors (perhaps more in general) needs some explanation. According to āThe Evangelicals,ā (excellent book), the split at Princeton Seminary in the 1920ās, resulting in the establishment of Westminster, etc was over the issue of modernism versus the traditional interpretation of the Bible (literal). I was raised in the United Brethren in Christ denomination (Huntington College/U), which generally stayed away from the issue with an ambiguity: āWe donāt know what is meant by a day. It could be 24 hours or it could be a 1,000 years.ā (Of course, that was the early 60ās). The denomination did not adhere to Calvinism. Of course, the literalist movement had been establishing Bible Colleges āfamily businessā colleges all over the nation; most of the training was on sticking to the ācorporate lineā and savings souls, typically expressed in numbers. There was much more energy on the literalist/origins/rapture/Armageddon/brand-new-heaven-and-earth tenets than on the Evangelical Arminianism side, probably because the literalists saw themselves as the aggrieved party, versus the adherents of Arminianism, which was focused on evangelism, community of believers, free will, agency in the Kingdom, societal ills, etc. THE PROBLEM: in my view, while the literalists were still hot on the Genesis ā6 daysā issue, many of us, including the mainline churches simply left a void in seminary and community training in this area. I could share how this divide showed up in my family (have an hour?). My perception: much of the evangelical movement has becoming Calvinist without knowing it, usually because of a singular (political) issue; many of the former literalists have become more militant, but in doing so, have adopted the complete litmus test of issues for the most part (I know individual exceptions on pro-choice, CRT, immigration, taxes, complimentarianism, Second Amendment, nationalism, climate change, White nationalism - did I miss anything?) Pastors and families on the Evolutionary Creation issue believe in it, but, unless they have formal training or a passion, they are not prepared to discuss it with others of like mind or others who disagree. My pastor and my former pastor affirm some sort of evolution, but they canāt seem to get past, āI donāt believe in a six, 24 hour day creation.ā With my current pastor, it seems this lack of basic knowledge may have led him into some agnostic view because heās just not sure what to believe or say on evolution. He loves the traditional, liturgical service and gives great sermons on the lectionary. My sense is heās an apologist for these ancient texts which provide so much wisdom for how to live and address social ills. Weāve tried in our small group, weāve tried in other intimate, group settings of likeminded people. The conversation is short. The best we can accomplish is, "Please read this book by Frances Collins, āThe Language of God.ā The state of that lack of basic tools to assist families and churches is universally missing. I think thatās part of why Christy Hemphill is so involved in the Integrate development. Thatās long; Iām sorry. Nuance is better than generalities. Thanks.
3 Likes
Yes. Back when we attended a church that used AIG Sunday school curriculum, I walked into one of the classrooms and saw pictures of fossil fish on the wall. And even though I knew it must have been YEC-related, my initial reaction was more like āWhy on earth is a Sunday school class teaching kids about fossils?ā It struck me as being wildly out of synch with what not only I expected but what I imagine most parents would hope for their kids to be learning during the brief time they spend each week in a Sunday school classroom. Iām sure I would feel the same way even if evolution was frequently referenced in a positive way in Sunday school ā thatās just not what the time is for. It does help for kids to see how their faith interacts with their life (otherwise it risks becoming this abstract idea that can seem irrelevant to real life), but Iād rather they start with Jesus and let other school subjects stay in school.
7 Likes
Laura, I agree with you and Christy. Itās not moral and spiritual formation. Itās indoctrination of dogma. Certainly, I donāt want to go there, although the EC message still needs to be aired in a positive and constructive way. Ultimately, each of us needs to own our faith; that starts - and continues - with our blossoming relationship with Jesus.
4 Likes
Thatās true, and I sympathize with wanting to find ways of getting this across for people before they go off to college. Iām glad there seems to be a growing market for secular homeschool science curriculum ā when I was younger it seemed like it was dominated by YEC perspectives.
1 Like
When some believers in a group or church are promoting loudly and almost aggressively something like YEC, most people do not start to argue with them.
One reason is that it is much easier to be quiet.
The second reason is that responding with counterarguments in a public space may cause conflict and division. This kind of issues are not core beliefs and it is bad if they cause division within the church. We have adopted a strategy that when issues like evolution, vaccinations or masks seem to be heating discussion, we turn the discussion towards core issues, such as what Jesus has done for us and then prayer or songs. That usually calms the situation.
If someone is very eager to spread problematic ideas, we can discuss with her/him later privately. In a calm private discussion, most can understand the need to avoid division based on issues that are not core beliefs and also accept the fact that there are differing opinions among believers. Disagreeing does not take away the family, we are brothers and sisters even if we have differing interpretations about minor issues.
The third reason for being quiet is being uncertain. If you are not sure what is true and what is not, it may be wise to be quiet. A potentially better option is to ask questions but that may lead to heated discussion if there are present people with opposite opinions. Questions may work better in a private discussion although there is a risk of getting one-sided (dis)information when there are no other opinions in the air.
4 Likes
Oh ā but then those of us overflowing with ācertaintyā feel such a great need to share some of that with you! You too, can be ācertainā right along with my tribe. 
At least, thatās what goes through any of our minds in all those areas where we have strong opinions - whether of the well-warranted variety or not. Itās so hard to just refrain from sharing when we think weāve got something somebody else seems to lack. This is one of the ways I empathize with other tribes, because this particular vanity is a pretty strong affliction for all of us.
2 Likes
Kai, I agree with your approach, if your church can accomplish that. We left an MCUSA congregation because we tried to remain quiet, but some of the members of the church - and the denomination - could not. Continued blessings to you. My wife and I are still coming out of the wilderness - āask Mikeā experience, if that means anything to you and others.Finding podcasts like āLanguage of God,ā āHoly Post,ā and āTurning to the Mysticsā helped. Reading about the history of evangelicalism, both its strengths and weaknesses, helped. Watching the journeys of the Beth Moores, Russell Moores, Jim Stumps, Phil Vischers, et al helped us understand a new community was growing, finding each other. Thanks to everyone of you for your help.
6 Likes
It is sad that people in so many churches have fallen to the trap of being one-eyed. Maybe it should be called blindness, blindness to see the great picture, what God wants.
I start to see that there is a strong need of revival in the churches, a need to repent from our wrong attitudes and seek the will of God.
The ability of churches to resist the division depends much on the starting point, the history, attitudes and what kind of leaders are acting in the church.
I have the privilege to be in a church and denomination that has a century-long history of favoring cooperation among believers coming from different backgrounds and denominations. In the old days, it was called the alliance spirit.
At the local church level, there was earlier a period of adaptation to differing attitudes and cultures when there was a risk of loosing the young generation because of too strict and old-fashioned culture. Parents and grandparents loved their children so much that they were willing to give space to the young generation despite the different culture. Giving the young generation responsibility and a possibility to lead church services demanded much from the old generation as they partly lost their cultural habits, like having to adapt to different kind of worship music. The young had to learn how to respect the elder people with their āold-fashionedā culture in the services.
This was one kind of pre-adaptation to the modern fragmented culture where people live in isolated ābubblesā of like-minded people, partly because of social media and access to like-minded publications and video.
This kind of attitude of respective love demands continuous active maintenance and prayer, not only by the leaders but by the whole congregation. We value it so much that the congregation has been united in this effort. I am not sure if this would have been possible without the āpre-adaptationā that happened during the earlier years.
I hope you find a church where you can feel respective love, despite the differing opinions that seem to be inevitable.
3 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.