God and Nature Winter 2020
A Pastor's Journey In Search of Consensus |
|
By Terry Defoe
Near the end of the book of Job, God challenges his servant with a series of questions. God wants to know if Job was present when the earth’s foundation was established. He asks Job about the earth’s dimensions. He wants to know if Job has journeyed to the place where the sea originates. It's clear that God is testing Job. Why would that be? Is God saying, “You'll never know these things, so why bother?” Or perhaps, "You don't know these things? Well, get to it then. Use the intelligence and skill I've graciously given you to study my creation. But give me the credit and the glory.”
For a good portion of my adult years, I have investigated the relationship of science and faith. I have come to believe that faithfulness to a particular theological heritage (in my case, confessional Lutheranism) may, from time to time, require a willingness to challenge that same heritage. Since the 1950s, my denomination (Lutheran Church—Canada, sister church to the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod) has maintained a long-standing relationship with, and provided significant support to, young-earth creationism (YEC).
Near the end of the book of Job, God challenges his servant with a series of questions. God wants to know if Job was present when the earth’s foundation was established. He asks Job about the earth’s dimensions. He wants to know if Job has journeyed to the place where the sea originates. It's clear that God is testing Job. Why would that be? Is God saying, “You'll never know these things, so why bother?” Or perhaps, "You don't know these things? Well, get to it then. Use the intelligence and skill I've graciously given you to study my creation. But give me the credit and the glory.”
For a good portion of my adult years, I have investigated the relationship of science and faith. I have come to believe that faithfulness to a particular theological heritage (in my case, confessional Lutheranism) may, from time to time, require a willingness to challenge that same heritage. Since the 1950s, my denomination (Lutheran Church—Canada, sister church to the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod) has maintained a long-standing relationship with, and provided significant support to, young-earth creationism (YEC).
"Science therefore cannot legitimately speak to metaphysical questions such as the existence or nonexistence of God." |
When I was ordained, my understanding of Scripture’s creation accounts was inadequate. I was well aware that young-earth creationism is an important part of my denomination’s history and systematic theology, but I wasn’t sure what I personally believed, or why. Psychologists call this malady cognitive dissonance. As science writer Gordy Slack says in his book The Battle Over the Meaning of Everything, there comes a time when an old paradigm rattles even when driven at the speed limit (1). It was time to do some research.
I wanted to know what scientists, especially believing scientists, had to say about balancing science and faith. Two incidents sparked my interest. The first was a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) science broadcast back in 1989. The topic was the Cambrian Explosion and the Burgess Shale, home to a large number of exceedingly rare and unusual soft-bodied fossils dated to approximately 540 million years ago. The second was a book by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002) titled Wonderful Life. It, too, focused on the Burgess Shale. Gould’s writings opened the door to the world of science, not just for me but for many people. Most important was the fact that, although he was an atheist and an evolutionist, Gould was also a friend of faith. His writings were generously sprinkled with Scripture references and relevant discussion.
An ongoing record of my dissonance can be found in marginal comments made over the years. How could I as a pastor in a young-earth denomination sing the Lord’s song in this strange new land of science? Some evangelicals believe that studying the theory of evolution leads to a loss of faith or, at the very least, to erosion of the Bible’s authority, insisting that there are significant theological reasons why evolution must be rejected. Church workers who depart from the party line may feel it is best to keep their views to themselves.
It has been said that the human mind is not a blank slate but a formatted hard drive. A paradigm shift is similar to the installation of a new operating system. After the upgrade, some components may not function as before. And new capabilities appear. Intellectual transformations are similar. Some components—previous beliefs or priorities—will have to be adjusted. And new insights appear.
BIBLICAL AUTHORITY
Evangelicals stress biblical authority, including Scripture’s inerrancy and inspiration. Christians of all stripes understand that God wants his people to be good stewards of all his gifts, including the gift of knowledge. Our faith stresses the importance of being open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. A God–pleasing interpreter of Scripture “...correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15, NIV). Despite differences in explaining creation, evangelicals generally agree that all people are created by God in his image, that sin is real and we are all subject to it, and that Christ’s death was necessary to forgive sin and restore access to a holy God. Most evangelicals agree, in addition, that creation is not a salvation issue.
While I was in seminary, I visited an inactive member of a local congregation. I was asked whether it was necessary to believe in a literal six-day creation in order to be a Christian. I said that being a Christian meant trusting Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord and that a proper understanding of the creation narratives was secondary. I am reminded of the words of Lutheran patriarch C.F.W. Walther (1811-1887), who said “The findings of science can neither give us the faith nor rob us of it.” (2)
YOUNG-EARTH CREATIONISM
Today’s young-earth creationism has connections to nineteenth-century Seventh-day Adventism, specifically to prophet Ellen G. White (1827-1915). White recounted a vision that dealt with the flood of Noah. In her vision, a worldwide flood dramatically altered the earth’s geology. It deposited fossils and plant matter that became the source of the earth's oil deposits. White's vision, which Adventists took to be from God himself, became the foundation of what came to be called flood geology, a point of view tirelessly promoted by fellow Adventist and Canadian amateur geologist George McCready Price (1870-1963). Flood geology was the focal point of The Genesis Flood, a book by Henry Morris (1918-2006) and John Whitcomb. That book, published in 1961, had an immense positive impact on the young-earth creationist movement.
Young earth creationism gives credence to the common-sense understanding of the natural realm found in the Scriptures. It is trapped in a pre-scientific worldview and denies many of the contributions of modern science. A pervasive lack of scientific literacy among evangelicals makes it difficult for the average YEC to distinguish information from disinformation. YEC insists on a “literal” interpretation of the creation accounts. Saint Augustine (354-430) proposed a distinction between literal and what could be called “literalistic” interpretations. A literal interpretation seeks to understand the text as the original author intended. A literalistic interpretation, on the other hand, simply reads the words off the page. A literalistic interpretation is often guilty of eisegesis—the cardinal sin of hermeneutics (interpretation)—that is, guilty of reading modern notions back into ancient documents.
SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY
Scientific methodology sets out limits for the discipline. Science can be compared to a fisherman's net that can't catch small fish because the holes in the net are too large. Science cannot tell us everything we need to know about what’s important in life. Most scientists gladly work within these limits, but a vocal minority, the so-called New Atheists, use science to attack religion. British biologist Richard Dawkins represents a point of view called scientism—the idea that science is the only reliable way to determine truth. Another limitation inherent in scientific methodology has to do with the supernatural. The supernatural is not included in scientific discussions because it cannot be falsified. Science therefore cannot legitimately speak to metaphysical questions such as the existence or nonexistence of God. It cannot deal with miracles like the incarnation or the resurrection of Christ. What this means is that Christians are free to live out their faith without scientific interference.
CONCLUSION
Christian leaders need to be scientifically literate. “Zeal not based on knowledge...” is harmful to the faith (Romans 10:2, NIV). It is important that all believers, especially youth and young adults, know what various groups believe. My own understanding increased exponentially when I read Francis Collins’ The Language of God. That was when I discovered BioLogos--an advocacy group that seeks to develop an approach to evolution that is faithful to the foundational beliefs of Christianity. When I learned of evolutionary creation, the view that God uses evolution as his method of creation, disparate pieces of information began to come together. I learned that evolutionary creation acknowledges miracles and posits God's ongoing supervision of creation.
Recently, I decided to go public with my research. The result was a book, published in mid-2018, titled Evolving Certainties: Resolving Conflict at the Intersection of Faith and Science. My goal was to present the issues as objectively as possible. I leave it to the reader to determine an appropriate response. Evolving Certainties contains endorsements from several scientists affiliated with BioLogos along with a foreword by past president Darrel Falk. I look forward to the day when Christians emphasize dialogue rather than debate, and irenics rather than polemics. I am convinced that if our interpretation of the scriptures is more accurate, our doctrines have been appropriately reviewed, our respect for science has grown, and our personal faith has been enriched, this intellectual journey is worthwhile. To those who travel this road, however, I would point out the Greek myth of Ariadne and Theseus. Ariadne gave Theseus a ball of red thread, which he unrolled as he made his way into the abyss so that he could find his way out. Christians will be blessed if they maintain a strong connection to their faith as they negotiate these complicated, controversial, and, at the end of the day, critically important issues.
References
Educated at Simon Fraser University, the Lutheran theological seminary at Saskatoon Saskatchewan, and the Open Learning University, Terry Defoe has served Lutheran congregations in Canada’s three Western provinces for almost 40 years. His ministry included time spent as a chaplain at the University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University. Pastor Defoe seeks to assure people of faith that evolutionary science, rather than being destructive to their faith, has the potential to enrich it in many ways.
I wanted to know what scientists, especially believing scientists, had to say about balancing science and faith. Two incidents sparked my interest. The first was a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) science broadcast back in 1989. The topic was the Cambrian Explosion and the Burgess Shale, home to a large number of exceedingly rare and unusual soft-bodied fossils dated to approximately 540 million years ago. The second was a book by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002) titled Wonderful Life. It, too, focused on the Burgess Shale. Gould’s writings opened the door to the world of science, not just for me but for many people. Most important was the fact that, although he was an atheist and an evolutionist, Gould was also a friend of faith. His writings were generously sprinkled with Scripture references and relevant discussion.
An ongoing record of my dissonance can be found in marginal comments made over the years. How could I as a pastor in a young-earth denomination sing the Lord’s song in this strange new land of science? Some evangelicals believe that studying the theory of evolution leads to a loss of faith or, at the very least, to erosion of the Bible’s authority, insisting that there are significant theological reasons why evolution must be rejected. Church workers who depart from the party line may feel it is best to keep their views to themselves.
It has been said that the human mind is not a blank slate but a formatted hard drive. A paradigm shift is similar to the installation of a new operating system. After the upgrade, some components may not function as before. And new capabilities appear. Intellectual transformations are similar. Some components—previous beliefs or priorities—will have to be adjusted. And new insights appear.
BIBLICAL AUTHORITY
Evangelicals stress biblical authority, including Scripture’s inerrancy and inspiration. Christians of all stripes understand that God wants his people to be good stewards of all his gifts, including the gift of knowledge. Our faith stresses the importance of being open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. A God–pleasing interpreter of Scripture “...correctly handles the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15, NIV). Despite differences in explaining creation, evangelicals generally agree that all people are created by God in his image, that sin is real and we are all subject to it, and that Christ’s death was necessary to forgive sin and restore access to a holy God. Most evangelicals agree, in addition, that creation is not a salvation issue.
While I was in seminary, I visited an inactive member of a local congregation. I was asked whether it was necessary to believe in a literal six-day creation in order to be a Christian. I said that being a Christian meant trusting Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord and that a proper understanding of the creation narratives was secondary. I am reminded of the words of Lutheran patriarch C.F.W. Walther (1811-1887), who said “The findings of science can neither give us the faith nor rob us of it.” (2)
YOUNG-EARTH CREATIONISM
Today’s young-earth creationism has connections to nineteenth-century Seventh-day Adventism, specifically to prophet Ellen G. White (1827-1915). White recounted a vision that dealt with the flood of Noah. In her vision, a worldwide flood dramatically altered the earth’s geology. It deposited fossils and plant matter that became the source of the earth's oil deposits. White's vision, which Adventists took to be from God himself, became the foundation of what came to be called flood geology, a point of view tirelessly promoted by fellow Adventist and Canadian amateur geologist George McCready Price (1870-1963). Flood geology was the focal point of The Genesis Flood, a book by Henry Morris (1918-2006) and John Whitcomb. That book, published in 1961, had an immense positive impact on the young-earth creationist movement.
Young earth creationism gives credence to the common-sense understanding of the natural realm found in the Scriptures. It is trapped in a pre-scientific worldview and denies many of the contributions of modern science. A pervasive lack of scientific literacy among evangelicals makes it difficult for the average YEC to distinguish information from disinformation. YEC insists on a “literal” interpretation of the creation accounts. Saint Augustine (354-430) proposed a distinction between literal and what could be called “literalistic” interpretations. A literal interpretation seeks to understand the text as the original author intended. A literalistic interpretation, on the other hand, simply reads the words off the page. A literalistic interpretation is often guilty of eisegesis—the cardinal sin of hermeneutics (interpretation)—that is, guilty of reading modern notions back into ancient documents.
SCIENTIFIC METHODOLOGY
Scientific methodology sets out limits for the discipline. Science can be compared to a fisherman's net that can't catch small fish because the holes in the net are too large. Science cannot tell us everything we need to know about what’s important in life. Most scientists gladly work within these limits, but a vocal minority, the so-called New Atheists, use science to attack religion. British biologist Richard Dawkins represents a point of view called scientism—the idea that science is the only reliable way to determine truth. Another limitation inherent in scientific methodology has to do with the supernatural. The supernatural is not included in scientific discussions because it cannot be falsified. Science therefore cannot legitimately speak to metaphysical questions such as the existence or nonexistence of God. It cannot deal with miracles like the incarnation or the resurrection of Christ. What this means is that Christians are free to live out their faith without scientific interference.
CONCLUSION
Christian leaders need to be scientifically literate. “Zeal not based on knowledge...” is harmful to the faith (Romans 10:2, NIV). It is important that all believers, especially youth and young adults, know what various groups believe. My own understanding increased exponentially when I read Francis Collins’ The Language of God. That was when I discovered BioLogos--an advocacy group that seeks to develop an approach to evolution that is faithful to the foundational beliefs of Christianity. When I learned of evolutionary creation, the view that God uses evolution as his method of creation, disparate pieces of information began to come together. I learned that evolutionary creation acknowledges miracles and posits God's ongoing supervision of creation.
Recently, I decided to go public with my research. The result was a book, published in mid-2018, titled Evolving Certainties: Resolving Conflict at the Intersection of Faith and Science. My goal was to present the issues as objectively as possible. I leave it to the reader to determine an appropriate response. Evolving Certainties contains endorsements from several scientists affiliated with BioLogos along with a foreword by past president Darrel Falk. I look forward to the day when Christians emphasize dialogue rather than debate, and irenics rather than polemics. I am convinced that if our interpretation of the scriptures is more accurate, our doctrines have been appropriately reviewed, our respect for science has grown, and our personal faith has been enriched, this intellectual journey is worthwhile. To those who travel this road, however, I would point out the Greek myth of Ariadne and Theseus. Ariadne gave Theseus a ball of red thread, which he unrolled as he made his way into the abyss so that he could find his way out. Christians will be blessed if they maintain a strong connection to their faith as they negotiate these complicated, controversial, and, at the end of the day, critically important issues.
References
- Slack, G. The Battle Over the Meaning of Everything, Jossey-Bass, 2008, p. 200
- Pieper, F. Christian Dogmatics. Volume 1. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1950, pp. 163, 473
Educated at Simon Fraser University, the Lutheran theological seminary at Saskatoon Saskatchewan, and the Open Learning University, Terry Defoe has served Lutheran congregations in Canada’s three Western provinces for almost 40 years. His ministry included time spent as a chaplain at the University of British Columbia and Simon Fraser University. Pastor Defoe seeks to assure people of faith that evolutionary science, rather than being destructive to their faith, has the potential to enrich it in many ways.