Is Evolution Socially Corrosive?


#1

Here is an article on evolution and its critics by former BioLogos writer Karl Giberson. (At one point he was even the leader here.) He now teaches at Stonehill College, a liberal Catholic Institution.

Is Evolution Socially Corrosive?


#2

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#7

Inclusiveness is a particularly Christian value. To deny this is to miss some significant elements of Jesus’ ministry and some key arguments of Paul as well. I would even argue that righteousness and inclusivity are not incompatible, or opposed so that they must be “held in tension.” It is “unrighteous” to be divisive and non-inclusive when it comes to the family of God.

This is why Jesus says “Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect,” in the context of extending grace and mercy to outsiders just as you would to your family members (something we miss because we read the scripture with our own cultural glasses on–glasses that presume individualism rather than “family identity” or “community identity”).


#9

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#12

[quote=“Eddie, post:9, topic:4854”]
Yes, but it is not a value that trumps all other values.[/quote]

I’ve already addressed that. Christian inclusivity and righteousness are not at odds.

Your statement minimizes that absolutely shocking and counter-cultural nature of Jesus’ ministry. It was iconoclastic. They “turned the world upside down” when it came to cultural values.

That’s kind of what 1 Corinthians is about. Keep in mind that Paul only said to exclude somebody when they had behaved in ways worse than the pagans around them…

So where is the line at which point we divide or exclude?


#13

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


#14

Oops, I had already responded and hadn’t gotten this far yet…


#15

I love this sentence.


(Brad Kramer) #16

@fmiddel @Eddie OK, this discussion is no longer about evolution or even science and faith generally, so it needs to be continued through private messages or brought back on track.


#17

This article (with the exception of where it conflates the author’s politics and his thesis) takes the evolution discussion in an interesting direction. It comes back to whether life is a zero sum game. If the “other”, whatever that represents, is given greater value, does that devalue the “original” (for lack of a better term.) If the answer was “yes”, that could radically change our perspective on the effects of evolutionary thinking on society.

I think “no” is a more defensible response because I don’t see it as a zero sum game. I see us as ever striving to be higher, more noble and more holy. And since God is limitless, our capacity to love and find synergy and abundance is not limited by miserly humanness:-)

When any theory capture public attention, it can be viewed as desirable or undesirable by different interest groups. Some of it is simply personality, some of it is a love for drama or conflict. Evolutionary theory can be used for good or evil, as most things. But, as in the Hilter example, if a nut job is going to take an idea and run with it, I see that as a statement about the heart condition of said nut job, rather than a valid assessment of the theory.

We are above the animals, but we are not independent of them. We respect various human groups because they are part of God’s creation, but we do not need to agree with their world views. Evolution demonstrates the connection, without assigning a response. That part is all Jesus.


#18

Excellent response!


#19

Thx, @beaglelady.


(system) #20

This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.