Wilson suggests that America is divided into two main groups:
RED SENSIBILITY
• Votes Republican
• Considers Earth 10,000
• Typically a Creationist
BLUE SENSIBILITY
• Votes Democratic
• Considers Earth 4.5 billion years old • Typically an Evolutionist
Science and religion are the two most powerful forces in the world today.
I think most of us would agree that this is a fair representation of America. Of course it is not exact, what generalization would be? But let's add one more characteristic to this group division.
RED SENSIBILITY
• Votes Republican
• Considers Earth 10,000
• Typically a Creationist
• High church attendance
BLUE SENSIBILITY
• Votes Democratic
• Considers Earth 4.5 billion years old • Typically an Evolutionist
• Low church attendance
This is not a political post, so please don't get bogged down in that detail. The number of democrats in or out of church is not a factor of this blog.
Rather, evolution is.
The question that we should be asking is, where is the mission field in America? What massive people group are not being reached? The science community.
Picture the science community as concentric circles.
In the smallest innermost circle are those with advanced degrees, whose education depended heavily on biology, physics and chemistry.
The next, slightly bigger circle includes people who read periodicals like Scientific American, Discover, Nature, and National Geographic without thinking, “I wish they wouldn’t put so much stock in evolution and climate change.”
The next circle, the widest circle, encompassing roughly half the population of the United States, includes those who identify culturally with those in the inner two circles.
We’re not just talking about a small group of science fanatics; we’re talking about half of America, a massive mission field.
The Theory of Evolution is highly influential to this people group.
Evolution has always been a barrier for people to believe in God. How could they believe in a literal Genesis Creation account if their worldview is founded on the evidence of creation's antithesis: Evolution? Everything about their worldview hinges on the Theory of Evolution.
So let me ask this very difficult question:
Is the a Literal Creation account of Genesis, one that calls Evolution a lie, a theological hill that we will die on?
There are some theological beliefs that I would die for:
The Trinity. The deity of Christ. The authority of Scripture. Salvation by grace through faith.
These are foundational and essential parts of the Christian faith.
But there are some theological issues that matter less to me. I have my own opinion, and other Christian friends share different opinions:
Calvanism, Open Theism, Post/Pre/Mid Tribulation, Young Earth, Dispensationalism, Ceasationalism.
So here, I ask, both myself and you, is a Literal Creation account of Genesis, one that calls Evolution a lie, is this a belief that we will refuse to compromise?
What about Theistic Evolution?
Theistic Evolution is the theological idea that God sparked and guides the work of Evolution.
Historically, in the church, the idea of Theistic Evolution has been rejected. It has been seen as a compromise of Biblical beliefs for the sake of scientific evidence.
If the barrier for half of the US population is Evolution, and if a literal creation account is not a theological hill to die on, then can we both allow this idea of Theistic Evolution AND embrace those who want to believe it. Few pastors or biblical scholars in the United States, when pressed, would insist that rejecting evolutionary science is part of the cost of following Christ.
I am NOT asking you to change your view from a literal creation to Theistic Evolution. I am asking you to reconsider the fact that Theistic Evolution is not the compromise that we all thought it was.
Ken Wilson shares this story from his church,
"A year after listening to my sermon series on science and faith, Susan approached me in the church lobby with tears in her eyes and the following story. After wrestling through the material, Susan gathered her adult children together. None of her children were active churchgoers, though they were raised in a strict fundamentalist Baptist setting. In prayer, Susan had discerned that her approach to evolution had unnecessarily alienated her children from the gospel. Susan apologized to her children for insisting that they had to accept her young earth creation views. Susan told them that she didn’t accept evolution herself, but she deeply regretted insisting that they accept her views as the only view a faithful Christian could accept. Susan was never more evangelical than when she engaged in this soul-searching work."
Are we unnecessarily alienating people from the Gospel?
Here is my main point:
Maybe you have strong convictions that Evolution cannot coexist to the Literal Creationist Account. Maybe Theistic Evolution can be the first step of an atheist's beliefs towards a Literal Creationist Account. No Christian doubts the Holy Spirit's power to work on our theology after we become followers of Christ.
This proposal may come as a shock to many of you. I know it was for me. Process this new information for about a week or so. Test it, try it, pray about it. If you feel that my paraphrased presentation was not convincing enough, I ask that you read Wilson's full essay. Wilson also acknowledged that this is an unpopular, even destructive to our reputation.
"In order to be truly evangelical in American culture today, we may have to risk our reputation with some fellow evangelicals. That is the sad but painful truth. Which is more important though, reaching the lost or maintaining our reputation with the found?"
Now the hard part: what do we do next?
Restore credibility.
And that takes initiative. A non-Christian evolutionist is probably not going to approach you to talk about this. In the past, Christians have been intolerant to the idea of evolution. I believe that your approach of Theistic Evolution will be a breath of fresh air.
-----------
What do you think? Is a Literal Creationist account a theological essential to the Christian Faith? Or is openness to Theistic Evolution a valid option for non-believers? What are ways that we can restore credibility among the science-influenced community?