|
Ross theory won’t impact science
In ‘The benefits of putting biblical creation to the test’ (June), Hugh Ross argues that Christians should respond to evolutionary theory
not with “evolution bashing” but with competing, testable models of our own.
It’s surprisingly difficult to find, on Ross’ website (reasons.org), a straightforward statement of his competing theory. But
he does reject the view that humans have evolved from other forms of life.
Our evolutionary history is as obvious as our wisdom teeth, our tail-bone and
our appendix. Evolutionary theory is one of the most exciting developments in
intellectual history, but Ross and others would have us ignore it all, at the
cost of believing in a bungler God who designed us rather poorly.
Once we accept that we do in fact have to come to terms with evolution, it will
seem less hard to do so, since we won’t have a stake in pretending the obstacles are insurmountable. Once people stop
telling us we have to choose between evolution and Christianity, I think we’ll find a way to accept both and muddle through, as we always do.
People like Ross insist on a way of reading scripture that makes it incompatible
with evolution, and tell us there are intellectually respectable ways to resist
evolutionary theory.
They make it harder for the rest of us to come to terms with evolution by
fostering the impression that rejection of evolution is a mark of Christian
identity, and that such a rejection is possible. In this they are the
evangelical counterparts to Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennet, and their
relationship to the New Atheists is symbiotic.
People like Hugh Ross will never make an impact on the scientific world. They
will never affect any actual debates about science.
But they can fool other Christians into thinking such debates do or should
exist, and can thereby damage the intellectual lives of Christians, and make us
objects of ridicule.
And our rejection of evolutionary theory has made us an object of ridicule. In this case, we have earned the ridicule; and
put a stumbling block in the path of thinking people.
Please let’s stop trying to convince people that embracing Christianity means embracing
ignorance.
Brendan Ritchie, Boston, MA
Muslim faith putting us to shame
The Toronto Stock Exchange now publishes a Sharia Index, which lists companies
that comply with Islamic law. It excludes companies involved with alcohol,
tobacco, financial services and pork-related products.
As a Christian, I am filled with admiration. But why is there not a similar,
Christian index? Do we even think Christianity should shape investment
decisions? Muslims are putting us to shame. Their religion means something, it
shapes how they live.
Sadly, we interpret Christianity so that it leaves untouched most of what we do
each day. Dorothy Sayers wrote: “How can anyone remain interested in a religion which seems to have no concern
with nine-tenths of his life?” Is that why Islam is gaining converts?
Nick Loenen, Richmond
Continue article >>
|
Christ crucified is all we need know
Regarding Walter Rachinski’s letter, ‘The true meaning of the cross’ (June):
It becomes apparent that the true meaning will always be hard for some people to
define.
While that may be due to a greater or lesser understanding of scripture and
theology by some people, I think the more obvious reason for disparate concepts
will always be couched in personal experience.
We do not all experience the gospel the same way, as history has made apparent.
Calvinism, Arminianism, post- and pre-millennialism, dispensationalism, creation
science, intelligent design, traditional church or Seventh Day Adventism: the
list of ‘isms’ that can be supported, and that can find their opposite in scripture, is
seemingly endless.
No Christian I have ever read or talked to would ever deny the profound
importance of the cross, or the centrality of Christ in salvation.
But from the extremes of the hellfire and brimstone dogma of some evangelicals
to the universalism of some more modern theologies, one thing remains the same
in all that I have encountered.
Jesus Christ’s life, death and resurrection are pivotal in bridging the gap between humanity
and God. How it’s done, whether it is universal or not, is irrelevant to me – and for that, I’m sure to be called on the carpet.
God, in my humble opinion, had very little recourse to demonstrate his love for
his creation – other than to walk among us, suffer and die as we do every day.
Whether or not his death was an atonement, or just the logical end of any mortal
man who rebelled against the powers that existed, I cannot say for sure.
I do believe his resurrection is of more significance to me, because I know
death awaits me. I need the promise of his eternal life to sustain me, and I
need his love to give me purpose and show how I may minister to those mentioned
in the Beatitudes.
I can honestly say, with Paul, that all I know is Christ crucified – and that is enough for me.
I will spend the rest of my life trying to unravel the deep mystery of that
event and all its ramifications, and will try to pass my hope in Christ on to
others with my feeble understanding.
We will always argue theological minutiae, and accuse each other of heresy on
the one hand and dogmatic narrow mindedness on the other.
I prefer to look up the hill where the cross stands and remember the words of
Jesus when he said: “If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto me.”
Jon Ochsendorf, Surrey
July 2009
|
