August 12, 2013

To Some Early Evangelical Reviewers of The Evolution of Adam:

These are the words of the author, who wrote the book, whose words are contained therein, and who endeavored to speak clearly on many complex matters in the space allotted after cost analysis by Baker Publishing House (of blessed name).

I know your deeds, that you are zealous to protect the faith that was once delivered to the saints, that you are concerned to maintain faithfulness to God, and are therefore cautious about entertaining too quickly ideas that are new to you or otherwise freak you out. In this, your motives are good and sincere.

But I have one thing against you: You have not yet left your first love, the theology with which you are familiar, that gives you comfort, which you have been taught to see as the mirror of the very thoughts of the eternal and inexhaustible God himself, and concerning which your knee jerks violently.

I see two, even three, obstacles you will need to face squarely.

1. Read deeply, for many months or even years, Mesopotamian, Canaanite, and Egyptian origins myths. Read, too, the works of those who have studied these myths and labored greatly to make plain their meaning in your mother tongue. Read especially those with whom you may not see eye to eye, and those whose blood does not boil at the subject.

Read and see what others before you have seen, that these stories, though unique and not without their entertaining, soap opera-ish qualities, have much to tell us about the literature of Genesis 1-3. Read and see that, although Genesis 1-3 clearly bears its own unique qualities, is does nevertheless and invariably breath the same air as these stories, and that such an observation will likewise invariably lead to theological overhaul.

2. Read deeply, and for many more months and years, the writings of those known to us as Second Temple Jewish Interpreters, and place the Holy Apostle to the Gentiles, Paul–formerly he of Jewish name, Saul, trained in and expert in all manner of Jewish customs and traditions of his day–along side of these writers, and see for yourself, and plainly so, that Paul, the first century Jew, does also breath the midrashic air of his time, first century Judaism, when he reads his Scripture, even the Adam story.

Learn too that neither Paul nor the Spirit of the Good, Wise, Loving, and Incarnating God has a problem with this, and so neither should you.

3. Read deeply, for many months after, how the Church (over which Christ is the head) throughout history (over which the risen Lord is ruler) have read the Bible. Note the manner in which they speak to the mystery and inexhaustible depth of Scripture, and that they have zero interest–zip–in removing that mystery and depth.

Note, too, those periods in the history of the church when the ears of many were stopped up and hearts were hardened to really neat new ideas, and how much subsequent embarrassment ensued.

To him/her who has ears to ear, let him/her hear what the 2000+ year stream of human thought, where God has not been a disinterested bystander, has to say to the church today.

To him/her who overcomes, you will find relief from your cognitive dissonance even as you come to see more and more than your theology is good and precious as a signpost along the path, but disastrous and idolatrous as a lodging place, the doors of which are locked from the inside and windows boarded up.

Moreover, to him/her who is able to overcome the current, but passing, moment of angst, you may come to see that the author is neither the first horseman of the apocalypse nor Babylon the Great, and that talking about Adam and evolution neither signals the end of the space-time universe nor God’s covenant faithfulness to you.

Neither will souls be plunged into outer darkness for speaking of such things, for the Creator God–whose mind is not our mind, whose ways are beyond tracing out, to whom we give no counsel–is not the petty and touchy Megatron we sometimes make him out to be, and is willing and eager to handle much more from those whom he loves than we give him credit for.

Finally, brothers and sisters, know that neither life nor death, unavoidable questions nor difficult answers, doubt nor certainty, theological stability nor shift, can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus.

This post originally appeared in February, 2012.

July 2, 2013

I just learned that The Evolution of Adam: What the Bible Does and Doesn’t Say about Human Origins has won the gold medal for the 2012 ForeWord Review Book of the Year Award in Religion (Adult Nonfiction).

This is a great honor, and reflects months of hard work I put in to bribing judges and hacking the voting system. If I am correct, I believe the next step is to make the book into a major motion picture featuring Justin Bieber and Amy Poehler as Adam and Eve (respectively), and Charlie Sheen reprising his role as the serpent.

All kidding aside, I am honored and humbled to have this little book recognized by ForeWord. I am thankful for the chance to have worked on this book with my friends at Brazos Press. And I am thankful to God for how the book has been received and for those who have found it helpful for thinking through their faith in today’s world.

 

May 24, 2013

Today we continue Denis Lamoureux’s series of brief slideshows on his popular book I Love Jesus & I Accept EvolutionIn the previous five slideshows, Lamoureux covered chapters 1 and 2, chapter 3, a supplement to chapter 4 (the sources of Genesis), chapter 4 (“Biblical Accounts of Origins”), and the first portion of  chapter 6  on human evolution.

In today’s installment, Lamoureux continues his summary of chapter 6, zeroing in on what is the issue for most Christians who object to evolution: what about Paul? Since Paul understood Adam to be the first man, and since he ascribes to Adam to cause of sin and death, does this not force Christians to choose between Paul and evolution?

Lamoureux says no. He applies his “message-incident principle” to point out that Paul’s “ancient science” does not determine the validity of his theology. 

Lamoureux is associate professor of science and religion at St. Joseph’s College in the University of Alberta. He holds three earned doctoral degrees—dentistry, theology, and biology–which uniquely qualifies him to speak to the issue of human origins and Christian faith. He gets the science, he gets the hermeneutics, and he articulates both clearly for non-specialists (full bio here).

I Love Jesus & I Accept Evolution is a great introduction to his view of origins called “evolutionary creation.” For those of you who are beyond the beginner’s stage, you can read his much thicker book Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution.

May 20, 2013

Last month I was a guest on Unbelievable?, a British radio show hosted by Justin Brierly, to discuss evolution and Christianity, specifically the historicity of Adam. The show just aired and you can listen to the show here.

On the show, too, were Denis Alexander and Fuz Rana. Denis, a molecular biologist, is the former director of The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion and the author of Creation or Evolution: Do We Have to Choose? Fuz (Fazale), a PhD in chemistry with an emphasis in biochemistry, is Executive Vice Present of Research and Apologetics at Reasons to Believe  and author of The Cell’s Design: How Chemistry Reveals the Creator’s Artistry.

Both Denis and Fuz are wonderful people who present their views without rancor or defensiveness. I think some of the best exchanges were between Denis and Fuz on the degree to which we can be certain about evolution in view of the genomic evidence, and Denis pulled no punches. To summarize the gist of the 82 minute show.

1.Fuz: “Genetic studies don’t support evolution.”

2.Denis: “Sure they do.”

3. Pete: “I’m with Denis. I’m also not sure why we are still talking about this.”

 

 

 

May 13, 2013

John Schneider (former professor of theology at Calvin College) recently posted an article online: “The Fall of ‘Augustinian Adam’: Original Fragility and Supralapsarian Purpose.” 

The title is a mouthful, but his basic point is whether Adam in any sense is compatible with evolution. His answer is yes, provided it is not the Adam the western church has inherited from the 5th century Augustine but the Adam of 2nd century Irenaeus. In other words, first humans as “comparable to innocent, but morally undeveloped children” (Irenaeus) rather than “endowed with superhuman gifts, and yet as so fragile as to fall” (Augustine) makes more sense not only within an evolutionary framework, but for other reasons as well (from the abstract).

Some of you will remember Schneider as one of two faculty members from Calvin College (the other being biblical scholar Dan Harlow), who in 2010 received national attention for the controversy that followed their comments on the literary rather than literal nature of Adam and Eve. For Schneider, one specific point that led to his choosing to retire was that the notion of a paradise lost, and therefore the fall of humanity, needs to be rethought in western Christian thought in light of evolution.

A common argument in favor of retaining an Augustinian Adam is that it lays the entire blame for sin squarely and solely on the shoulders of humanity rather than God, thus preserving God’s goodness, i.e., he is not the “author of evil.” That is why those who stand in the Augustinian Adam tradition “are urgently motivated to keep the character of Augustinian Adam on stage at all costs, even if the stage we approve is Darwinian” (p. 11). But, as Schneider argues, Augustine doesn’t get God off the hook, and Augustine’s Adam is an unconvincing reading of the garden story at any rate.

Many of us involved in the conversation concerning Adam and evolution have articulated the need not to abandon Adam but to (re)understand Adam in a manner that is more compelling exegetically, theological, philosophically, and scientifically. Schneider is very much a part of that conversation and has paid a professional price for doing so.

Feel free to leave comments here after reading his article and I will see if Schneider will be available to interact with them.

************************

All comments are welcome–pro, con, or neutral–provided they are respectful and genuinely engage the post or a comment on the thread. Badgering comments will be deleted. Grandstanding and lecturing will be tolerated to a point, but if it gets out of hand, let me suggest you start your own website like I did. Also, rest assured I read every comment that is posted. I learn something new from many of them, as I’m sure others do, too. I wish I could respond more, and I will as time allows.

 

 


Browse Our Archives