I invited a YEC to a three-person dialogue at my seminary. Three viewpoints, but with mine as an EC expressed through story.
I thought it worked well.
Is there any way to build bridges with YECs? There are so many of them, sometimes in churches with ECs and ID people who are old-earth.
What specifically do you do to build bridges? If you have been able to?
With the YEC folk in our church, I try to concentrate on the common beliefs, and avoid the areas in conflict, but if they come up in discussion, calmly express my views. It is different as I am not trying to convince them to change their minds, but rather the goal is to preserve the relationship, and hopefully have them accept me as I accept them, despite what seems wrong beliefs to the other.
In a seminary setting, where the whole point is exploring ideas and seeking truth, the dynamic is different, but still finding common ground and giving respect to their position is important. It ultimately is our task to change our minds, not to have it changed by someone else.
That’s really cool that you’ve been able for forge those connections!
For me, it’s about meeting them on their own turf and terms - probably centered around other (less sciencey) stuff where we’ll have more basis for solid and important commonalities.
I like (and have often myself used) the ‘bridge’ metaphor for these things. But I can appreciate how a YEC might be wary of people like us if our intentions from the get-go are to “build a bridge between an EC and a YEC”. Because if we start there (or even just plainly have an intention to end up there eventually), then they could be forgiven for having a sense that the only ‘bridge’ we’re interested in building is a one-way bridge intended for their one-time use to come over to us. In other words, (if that really was our intention), they have now become our mission project rather than a real friend - somebody who will be made to feel they need to be ‘fixed’ as a pre-condition to any deeper or prolonged fellowship. We’ve probably all experienced being on the receiving end of this as we try out a new bible study or church or small group. It’s not a feeling that I relish or that would draw me into any closer communion with others, so I try not to treat others that way either. That’s what I mean by meet them, as they are, and see what friendship can unfold on what we’ve already got in common. And that’s a posture that I aspire to have toward anyone, even before I would know for sure what their views were on anything. It’s a rare friendship that matures with enough mutual security that two conversation partners desire to seek deeper dives with each other (at least in my own experience) - such relationships are to be prized indeed.
Good point.
“We cannot teach people anything; we can only help them discover it within themselves.”–Galileo Galilei
A herpetologist friend of mine put it beautifully.
“These subjects are our jobs.”
This is a point that I hammer home incessantly to young earthists. You may be able to get away with a dismissive attitude to science in the home, in church, or possibly even in school or college, but you cannot get away with a dismissive attitude to science—including evolutionary science—in the workplace. Once your engagement with science reaches a level at which you have to apply its principles and methods in situations where getting it wrong has consequences for which you would be held personally responsible, not taking it seriously is simply not an option.
I am a YEC and am answering from the opposition i suppose one might say.
My experience is obviously right here in these forums and beyond this platform almost exclusively with atheists rather than other Christians.
Out in my world, rarely do Christians actually seem to discuss these things personally…we seem to talk about life issues such as LGBT, War, Economy, social problems, and that the second coming surely must be soon.
I am not of the view that mission/witness of a Christian is to preach evolutionary gospel to other Christians. I do not think that is even remotely consistent with the principles of Christs ministry, although it seems some here believe there is a correlation?
Having said that, God works in mysterious ways and he uses some very unconvential methods in order to reach those who would otherwise be seemingly unreachable. This forum i think performs and important task in helping those who do not believe in YEC find a safe haven where they can be accepted without raised eyebrows, scowels, and/an earbashing from peers sitting across from them at church or atheists out in the world who scoff at the very idea of God.
My personal interest here is that I dont come to talk to other Christians about YEC or EC for the purposes of witness, i come here to talk about our individual ideas and methods because its in the process of doing that i discover new things i hadnt thought about before and that is good for personal growth and i have found that rather interesting.
What i will say about this forum is that despite some signifgicant differences in belief etc, i have found some truly wonderful Christians here. So i suppose whilst it might seem a bit strange to say this, to some extent, this place has been a bridge for me.
Agreed.
My experience, however, is that Christians can latch on to my understanding how nature works and obsess about that as a sign of wrong faith, even heresy, rather than accepting my testimony of faith in Jesus by the power of his Spirit.
This is also a distraction from the real work the church has been given – all of it – including real service.
Agreed again. I’m not a science person, and the science classes that I loved I had ages and ages ago. I’ve pursued very different areas of interest. However, I live in a world that functions within the view that scientific exploration is the way to find out what we need/want to know about nature. I also live at a time when many people seem to think it’s essential that I know how my understanding of nature and my faith in Jesus are connected.
I’ve never thought was a big deal, but it seems like somebody does.
Even though there are many discussions here that don’t connect directly with my interests or “needs,” many discussions do come around to how Christians live a life of faith in such a world. And there are some nons here, who provide me with valuable insight, too.
I appreciate having a space like this.
Regarding the OP
These days I think we might all need to work on building bridges. Period.
Honestly. I feel like the whole world, and I first of all, need intensive immersion courses in Bridge Building Diplomacy in every area of our lives.
Adam was pointing to focusing on the Gospel of Jesus. That would be a good start. And a good finish. Really the arguments can just be a huge distraction from what is important. What if we refused to allow the argument to be a distraction?
What if people who care about faith in Jesus decided to spend whatever energy and money and time they might put into arguing about nature into obeying Jesus’ explicit commands – the hard ones that are so easy to overlook?
What if these people invited others interested in the work to join them in that work, regardless of philosophy or faith? Would that be bridge building?
For me, how God created us is not a core issue - it is enough that we believe that God created us. When discussing and working with other believers, we focus on other matters. I do not hide my interpretations about Genesis and if someone asks, I can tell why my interpretation is what it is. I do not force my interpretations on others, there is no need that all have identical interpretations.
It is very important that we have a respecting attitude towards others and think before saying something rash. That is a matter of learning how to live in an extended family - I am still learning.
It also helps that offensive talks and disagreements that cause discord are handled, by discussing with the participants what was said and happened. It has helped a lot that we have workers and retired pastors who are trusted and have the ability to speak and act wisely in this kind of matters. In cases of starting discords, it is likely that someone contacts a pastor and that gives a possibility to react in a constructive way.
In acute disagreements that threaten to become divisive, it may be necessary to have a break or at least, turn the attention towards Christ, praying and perhaps singing and praising together.
These guidelines have helped so far in a congregation that attracts people with different kinds of interpretations and opinions, including YEC. My guess is that there are more supporters of YEC-type thinking than people that have similar kind of interpretations than me.
.
Edit:
In our denomination, all workers must go through a long education and training (five years for pastors, three years for other workers) before they receive a license to become workers within the church. Those working can get supplementary education. Teachers are competent, many have doctorated. For these reasons, hardly any of the pastors and other workers support YEC-type interpretations.
I believe that education helps everyone to get a better overview of what the Bible teaches and helps to understand why certain interpretations are more credible than others. Even short ‘Bible school’ or ‘Basics of Christianity’ -type occasions would be beneficial, provided that the teachers are somehow competent. Even if the participants would not agree about everything, the education helps to focus on the crucial issues - it helps if we understand why we have different interpretations.
What a contrast to what we see in many smaller churches, especially those of the “Bible church” variety here in the US. Seminary is seen as an evil, where preachers fall away from the true meaning of the Bible, and the pastors seldom have any advanced training other that sometimes a few months at a preaching school/Bible college.
Fortunately, the church I attend pays for and encourages staff pursue education and all except our youth pastor have their masters, and he is working on his. A few of the older ones are still pretty engrained YEC types, including one of my best friends,hence our senior group has a trip planned to the Ark Experience, but they are pretty tolerant of me. I suspect ID and Progressive Creationism have a bigger following among older folks than YEC or EC either one, at least among those who think about it, though it seldom comes up.
Emphasizing the theological meaning of Scripture is a potential way to build bridges, e.g. The Manifold Beauty of Genesis One | Kregel
Examining the history of ideas is also valuable, though one has to beware the rampant popular bogus history.
Certain Primitive Baptist groups are or were even more extreme-- believing that pastors ought to be illiterate so that the Holy Spirit is the only influence on their teaching.
How can an illiterate pastor obey the teachings of the sciptures, like studying the word (Psalms 1, 119 and others)? What is wrong in learning to understand the scriptures?
Believers can sometimes be surprisingly blind.
You’re a good man, Adam. I enjoy reading your thoughts.
I don’t know how that was supposed to work in detail, but I know that some (extreme) Primitive Baptists in extremely rural areas at least pre-1970 required pastors to be illiterate (they are also a very congregationalist group, so defining a standard for what is Primitive Baptist is a bit challenging). They are one of the some-teachings-derived-from-Reformed Baptist groups, but some of them have changed enough teachings that whether or not they qualify depends on the definition of “Reformed” being used.
I’m thinking of certain subsets of Primitive Baptists (the specific ones that I am aware of are or were in very rural parts of Appalachia)–as I said, they are a very congregationalist denomination. The “liberal” end of Primitive Baptists look basically like Reformed Baptists with a few quirks, so far as I know.
I generally agree with this statement, although with caveat.
i think we all agree that Education is extremely important even for Christians. I feel that many atheists tend to see Christians are somewhat indoctrinated, or completely brainwashed.
In our denomination (SDA), pastors generally must complete a 4 year Bachelor of Arts Degree in Theology and its school teachers generally a 4 year Bachelor of Education degree, our medical staff such as doctors and nurses also Bachelor degrees or higher, university lecturers usually Doctoral or higher.
So our trainers are very highly qualified in some of the best intitutions in the world such as Loma Linda and Andrews Universities in the US.
Many adventist academics study outside of SDA insitutions - an example was Samuel Bacchiocci who studied at the Pontiful Gregorian University in Rome (once a Catholic Jesuit institution). That is significant because up until his enrollement in that university, im not aware of any protestants having studied in that place.
In 1969…Bacchiocchi studied at the Pontifical Gregorian University. He was the first non-Catholic to be admitted since its establishment in the 16th century.[4] He completed a Doctoratus in Church History in 1974 on the subject of the decline of Sabbath observance in the Early Christian church, based on his research in the Vatican libraries. Samuele Bacchiocchi - Wikipedia
My understanding is that SDA church schools are about the second largest Christian education system in the western world (Catholic being number 1). Given our church generally promotes YEC, Seventh day Sabbath, Christ’s Heavenly Sanctuary ministry, and all dead remain in the grave until the second coming…my views are certainly anything but those of one from a system of lowly educated individuals.
So with the above said, I do diverge with you on the point that education separates YEC from TEist any more than my once held view that better education would influence individuals not to become terrorists (i was very wrong about that). Answers in Genesis scientists are anything but poorly educated. It would be highly insulting of the academic world to claim astrophysicists, biologists, paleontologists, geologists in their employee who hold doctoral degrees, are uneducated dummies deluded into YEC theology.
YEC idealology doesnt start from naturalism or any science, it comes from a theological position as a result of reading the Christian Bible. These individuals have a belief and then search for supporting evidence for that belief (thats the point).
Just because their scientific interpretation differs from yours does not excusively mean you are smarter or have better science then they do…its the same science and these people are very highly educated and experienced in their respective fields!
Going back to religious belief example, the theology of the SDA church has some very unique areas of belief that other denomination theologians dissagree with , however, our theologians remain very highly credentialled in their field despite these differences (Bachiocci being point and example)
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.