Re: [asa] a theological exercise

From: Jim Armstrong <jarmstro@qwest.net>
Date: Tue Jun 03 2008 - 17:59:31 EDT

It need not be a dilemma for a Christian. It might be something of an issue if the starting point is that God actively guides the progress of the evolutionary aspects of Creation (which requires such intervention to accomplish its designed purpose - an awkward proposition to reconcile). It is less an issue if the starting point is that the evolutionary aspects of Creation proceed according to perdetermined plan (not a point-to-point map, but a launched active creation with just the minimum constraints required to move it broadly in the desired direction).

There do emerge those pesky theodicy questions, but those seem to hinge upon value judgements as to what is "good" (or "evil") from our human perspective. I am increasingly persuaded that a primary human role in stewardship is essentially redemptive, rounding out the sharp corners of, and to the extent possible bringing recovery from the damage inflicted by natural processes which are otherwise working in exactly the unthinking way they must according to plan and to accomplish the Creator's intent. Of course, there is also the potential of our role at times being more positive, nuancing and even redirecting some aspect of the natural workings to bring about positive benefit. At the limit (scarey thought), I wonder if the redemption of our part of Creation mentioned in Scripture may - contrary to the understanding by many - in actuality and by intent be in our human hands (again, as stewards of Creation).

The way I see it, my theology cannot be rigid because it is my human attempt to respond to the existence and work of a transcendant entity at whose pleasure I exist and whose true nature I am ill-equiped to understand to any significant degree in any absolute measure. As was the case for Burgy -  and said so well - I too in time concluded, "that 'God' was just a name I used to describe an ultimate mystery - that God was so much bigger than my early ideas." My theology must have the capacity to evolve because it alway has, and because I read and listen and learn (still) and ponder, and the processes of understanding and insight are not static, evolving in their abstract ways even as other things living and "natural" and physical. Even revelation (with a nod to Dave S) requires that I be the one to make any adjustments that flow from the revelation.

Well, that said, when I encountered evolution in my college days, it required no adjustment, comprising instead more of an affirmation of both the creative capacity of God and of my understanding at that time of how Creation and faith meshed (despite its conflict with a consensus that characterized the denomination I was then a part of). It was - even in retrospect - one of my cooler and durable encounters at the science/faith overlap.

I'm not sure I completely agree with George on whether anyone has any business questioning (admittedly changing his words for the moment) without having gone through the process. But perhaps I write this just to make the distinction between questioning or skeptical critique and arrogantly correct "criticism" per se, the former being a significant part of how we test and learn.



JimA  [Friend of ASA]


Alexanian, Moorad wrote:

First, do we know if God interacts with His creation? If God does interact with Nature, then how does He do it and can we scientifically detect such interactions.  Here is the dilemma that any Christian seriously interested in studying evolutionary theory must eventually confront first.

 
Moorad

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu on behalf of George Murphy
Sent: Tue 6/3/2008 2:07 PM
To: ASA list
Subject: [asa] a theological exercise


The first book we were assigned when I started seminary was a small volume by Helmut Thielicke, A Little Exercise for Young Theologians.  I'd like to propose here what I think is an important little exercise for Christians, young & old, who want to engage in theology-science discussions, & especially those relating to evolution.
 
Let me begin with a scientific preliminary.  One of the tasks of a scientist, & especially a theoreticians, is to try to see how well some new discovery fits in with what he/she has up until that point regarded as the best theory in the relevant field.  E.g., are the data generated when a new particle accelerator comes on line consistent with current theories of high energy physics?  If they are consistent without any tinkering with the theory then they can be regarded as predictions of noverl facts by that theory.  Perhaps some relatively minor adjustments of secondary aspects of the theory are required.  Or maybe there's just no natural way in which the new data can be understood within the theory's framework - in which case all but diehards will decide that a new theoretical framework is needed.
 
OK, assume now that somehow - & "how" is not something I want to debate now - it has been demonstrated scientifically, beyond any reasonable doubt, that present-day human beings have descended from pre-human ancestors without any unexplained gaps - physical or mental - in the process.  (Some might claim that that's already been done but again that isn't the point now.)  The exercise is to see how well this could fit in with your theology - with the way that you understand God, creation, sin, salvation and other aspects of the faith.  Does the evolutionary reality flow naturally from your theology, does that theology require some modification in its secondary aspects, or is there just no way to make human evolution part of your theology without changing it (the theology) totally?  A really serious effort should be made to accomplish the task in some detail.  It need not produce a dissertation but has to be more elaborate than "Evolution is how God creates" or "The Bible r
 
ules!
 
  out evolution."      
 
& now the point of the exercise.  Only a Christian has honestly tried to do this - not necessarily succeeded but tried - has any business criticizing the views of Christians who do accept human evolution. 
 
Shalom
George 
http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/


To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.


  

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message. Received on Tue Jun 3 17:59:50 2008