Tuesday, August 12, 2008
what am i trying to do with genesis 1??
my real aim in tackling evolution during 1 week of this series in genesis is to prove that there is no real conflict between evolutionary biology and biblical faithfulness.
i.e.
i don't think that the bible is threatened by proof that the world is 16billion years old.
now, many other, wiser, more capable people have tackled this topic before me - and in no way do i actually think my efforts will rival theirs - but i feel like it's my job to weigh into the conversation here.
some have wondered about whether or not it's my goal to convince people that evolution is "right"
this is not my goal. i'm not a scientist. heck - i can hardly add.
my goal is simply to illustrate that if evolutionary theory were proven right beyond any shadow of any doubt ever that our faith would not suffer one iota. we would be neither discreditied nor forced to believe something we know to be untrue, nor would we be forced to do some kind of hermeneutical jujitsu to make our bible say something it really doesn't in order to save face.
others have wondered if i'm going to try and convince everyone to be a literal 6-day creationist.
this is not my goal either.
it's true that the world could be only 6500 years old, and that it could have been made in 6 literal days. god is god. he could've made it in 6 minutes 6 minutes ago. if we believe in god, we open ourselves up to the possibility that he is capable of doing anything.
but again, my goal is simply to prove that there is no conflict between faith and science, not that faith and science are the exact same thing as revealed in scripture.
so, in the diagram above, you see three boxes. there is the box of evolutionary science - which is not my interest - there is the box of the scripture - which is my interest, but not necessarily as it pertains to evolutionary science - and there is the middle box of the conflict.
this 1 week where we teach on evolution will focus on the middle box, the conflict.
essentially proving that there is no real conflict there at all.
Labels:
narrative theology