I gotta say, it’s so sad that they’re essentially saying you shouldn’t question things.
I attend a church that teaches YEC, but the elders of my congregation encourage questions. And while we disagree on origins, we are able to worship together. Some people have told me to find a church that doesn’t teach YEC, but I’d have issues with doctrinal things that would be deal breakers for me. Origins isn’t a deal breaker. Treating it as a salvation issue would be.
I would certainly run from a church that discourages questions. You should be encouraged to be a Berean.
Thank you to everyone for their responses the last week or so, since I posted this.
Things have gotten difficult at our current church, my views on creation are not the main issues, but certainly coming into play ,it seems.
My son, attends but doesn’t always listen, or seem to. I had a phone call today from one of the youth/assistant pastor about him, keeping his earbuds in during church. Apparently it is distracting and they wanted permission to address it with him since he doesn’t always sit with me. I said no, that i would deal with it on my own. Nevermind, I know he is listening, as he gets irritated by much of what the pastor says in his sermon, and we have talks about that (so, clearly listening). Anyway, this led to a general discussion of how he is doing (my son, is pretty open about sharing that he doesn’t believe in Christianity now) and what we would do about it. I explained “we” would do nothing, as he isn’t ready to talk to someone outside the family right now, and no, we weren’t attending the answers in genesis conference they are hosting next weekend so that they could address his concerns. Which led to the discuss of Why not, lol?
I explained that I am somewhere between an old earth creationist/theistic evolution and I don’t view evolution as a salvation issue, and know believers from various perspectives. As an example, of historical vs. allegorical parts of the bible, I explained that my son had questioned about the interpretation of the Jonah story they had discussed in youth the previous week. He had big issues with the idea of God creating a fish for just that time/place to swallow Jonah. I haven’t given it much thought, as that is tangentle to the main point of the story, which then led to the discussion of my biblical literacy and how my explanations are red flags, especially when dealing with a kid who is questioning a lot. I think it is great as we are talking so much and reading/studying so much from his deep questions, and not sure of my son, but I am certainly learning and growing more! I had 0 agreement with my perspective how my views are negate the resurrection of Christ.
Not sure what to do, and disappointed with the conversation, to say the least :(.
Sorry things are rocky. We’re piloting the evolutionary creationism unit of INTEGRATE, the high school curriculum BioLogos is developing. If it would be something you and your son would be interested in working through together, contact @Kathryn_Applegate. The guiding questions for the unit are:
Why do many Christian biologists accept evolution?
How can we promote peace within the body of Christ when we disagree about origins?
What is a theory?
Can evolution be part of the creation story?
Why have some Christians chosen to accept evolution?
A common view among Jewish scholars is that the story of Jonah contains many indicators that its genre is satire rather than literal history.
For example, all the animals of Nineveh put on sackcloth and ashes and fasted.
“By the decree of the king and his nobles: Do not let people or animals, herds or flocks, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. But let people and animals be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God.”
Animals wearing sackcloth, fasting and calling on God!
Personally, I have not put a stake into the ground on the genre of Jonah. Given this evidence from within the book, I am not willing to make a literalistic interpretation “the hill I die on.”
Thanks Chris. That one surprised me, as that has always been my understanding of that book, to some degree, that it was allegorical. Interesting about the jewish perspective, I had not heard of that take on the story before.
Kate, as a ‘Cradle Catholic’ & educated K-8 in a parochial school, I found it difficult to prepare for a career in science and hold onto the simple Faith that satisfied my elders. After years of wrestling with conflicting intellectual problems (mainly with the Vatican’s claim of exclusive possession of the Keys to the Kingdom). EventualIy, I formed a Worldview that was satisfying and a Faith that was reasonably coherent with (progressive) Christianity and with Darwinian evolution. Two of my three kids were not able to make such a transition, however (for somewhat different reasons.)
I cannot help but be curious as to what wounded you to the extent that you abandoned Catholicism. Unfavorable personal interaction with at least two parish pastors played a role in my case.
Wishing you sucess in your continuing search.
Al Leo
I definitely think also that Jonah was a fictional story.
The arguments over his birth, and even down to what fish? Or even if fish meant whale. A blue whale only has a throat with a 8 inch opening.
I think a lot of the Bible is ahistorical. ( ahistorical is not the same a historical but now like historic fiction) Take the book of Esther. Even in Ruth what are the chances each persons name was really tied into their fate.
I am sorry this has been so difficult. As a parent, I admire you for going through that, too. It sounds like you are doing a terrific job. We find similar experience in our family.
For what it’s worth, I am EC, and my church is entirely YEC; that has been a bit confusing for my son. Like you, I think it’s also good for me to tell him humbly that I don’t know all the answers, but am trying to apply the Bible to my own life with His help. I’m learning. Thanks.
Agreed! I’ve always been convinced Genesis is essentially historical, that Job is not historical and about 50% on Jonah, but that observation by Chris has me revising my view to 75% certain that Jonah is not historical.
Kate, I hope you won’t mind a belated reply. I’m a bereaved mother, too, and the death of my young son from cancer left me struggling with my faith for many years. My minister (in the Anglican church) was more helpful than yours, and I live in Ontario, Canada, where it’s the norm for urban Christians of mainline denominations to accept evolution without blinking an eye (so I didn’t have to deal with that part of the faith equation), but I have to say that my experience left me with the overall impression that Christianity isn’t very helpful to those of us who have lost a child.
For me, the only way forward – that is, the only way to reconcile my faith with my grief – was to start asking a lot of new questions. That eventually put me on the fringes of Christianity, because I no longer accept some of the traditional Christian doctrines (e.g. Original Sin) that make human grief so much harder to deal with. But on the plus side, I found myself quite unexpectedly on a journey of relationship with God that I wouldn’t trade for anything.
Everyone deals with grief in different ways, but I hope you’re able to find some people of faith who won’t turn away from the things you need to discuss.
God bless.
P.S. It’s been 30 years since my son died, and I still cry.
Just curious, Randy, how much do you (and others here as well) discuss EC and YEC type issues? Despite the time I spend here, I talk about it very seldom with family, and sense they are uncomfortable with it to some extent (though all old earth adherents) and very seldom with church people unless they bring it up, which they seldom do. I get the sense with one of my dear friends and YEC adherents, that he would rather not talk about it because he is not comfortable with examining his position closely, and I can respect that.
In the case of your son, Randy, that is a difficult position, and you don’t want to burn bridges on either end.
I’m by no means an expert, but I’ve been reevaluating many similar issues over the past few years. One aspect, especially, that I’ve come to reconsider is that of Original Sin. I think we look past the point and tend to see the sub-text in this case. The Christian mantra is that through Adam came sin. While this may be true and scriptural, I don’t at all believe that this was the point of the story of Adam and Eve. To me, the point of the story is that here’s a guy (Adam) who is dropped into paradise, given every advantage, including the ability to commune daily with God. That, and just one minor rule. Given all of these advantages, and every opportunity available, with none of the challenges that come with life in the real world, Adam still sinned.
The point of this story, I believe, is not that Adam sinned, but that adam (man) is a sinful being. He will never not sin and, as such, needs redemption. So, while Adam may have been the first, he would never be, or never have been, the last. I only mean this to say that when we say that we only need redemption because of Adam’s sin, I think that we miss the real point, which is to say that we always would and always will need redemption. Jesus is the cure for what ails us all.
I’m terribly sorry for your loss. I can only imagine how that would set your mind in action, reevaluating what you believe and why. You certainly don’t need these obstacles to faith in your worship right now.
It’s good for me, because it puts in perspective that I don’t need to major on the minors. Last Sunday, a mother in our adult Sunday School said (to much approval from the leader) how she tried to keep her dinosaur-loving children faithful to God by reminding them that the secular books they read were “of the world,” but we believe otherwise. It occurred to me that she was setting them up for failure, but that was not the time or place to say anything. I’ve approached my pastor and an elder friend about making the “Four Views on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design” available to college kids in case they run into trouble, but they were politely incomprehensive of why such a thing was necessary.
I don’t really talk about it much, either. I think my church (and most conservative Christians in this area) are so afraid that any deviation from the norm would lead to some doubting the Bible and losing their salvation, that they are not comfortable with listening to anything else. I can’t blame them.
However, it is freeing to realize that God isn’t a Judge waiting to punish us if we don’t get everything right–and that leads to an even better relationship with Him, as well as a better comfort in learning science and the truth about creation.
Randy, that is what I ran into this past bit. They basically said because I allowed for differing views other then historical or literal for some passages in the bible, that means I doubt the historicity and authority of God’s word, and then would call into question the death and Resurrection of Jesus (ie - Jesus only slept,not really died, etc). That is one heck of a judgmental leap fo someone to make (along with implied suggestion the reason I am “allowing” these discussions to happen with my son, that is the reason he is likely doubting and questioning.
Wow, that’s pretty difficult. I think that the genre is way different between Genesis and the NT. --the NT is more based on eyewitnesses, and the Genesis account quite poetic and symbolic–even the names are symbolic.
It is true that things get more complicated when asking these questions, but truth is not necessarily simple, nor attractive. I’m learning a lot from Biologos and other writers. However, I think @Kathryn_Applegate, in “Why I Changed My Mind About Evolution,” encouraged EC’s to focus on mutual beliefs–that science proclaims the glory of God, similar to passages in the Psalms; and that God is loving and reliable, too, I think. (or was it @DeborahHaarsma?)
There is a saying. “Truth fears no examination, and dreads no discovery.”
It sounds like they very afraid of their “truth” won’t hold up under scrutiny. I know it didn’t when I investigated in great detail.
4 Likes
Klax
(The only thing that matters is faith expressed in love.)
59
Hmmm. That is not a serious critique. A rule of postmodernism is respect the text. It’s a sublime - transcendently true - parable or allegory regardless of whether it’s literally true or not, which is absolutely irrelevant. It reveals an inclusive, loving, humane God.
At church I don’t really bring it up to much. Some believe it, and some are super conservative with a very strong “speak where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent” type mentality. It’s almost a completely literal interpretation by the majority.
I sometimes get into small debates over can the church building be used for fellowship such as Christians gathering together on Halloween to watch horror films. There were several upset over it and for anything you want to do they basically want “BCV” (book chapter verse) for anything and everything. Others are more laid back. At this , and similar ones, I don’t bring it up to much. But at another congregation I routinely attended the majority share similar views to me. It changes from Adam as a historical being in an a historical tale to Adam as a fictional being being used as a literary device but we commonly believe science is accurate on science.
When it comes to other issues like transgendered issues and science it’s a bit more political but often comes down to respect vs theocracy.
With friends and strangers it comes up often though. I try to not bring it up when working. A few days ago someone overheard me talking about why I left Liberty and it’s stupid science department and the client then brought up later on how proud she is of her daughter going to liberty college and not being mislead essentially. So what were the chances lol.
