Six Day Creation
I have been having a debate on Dave Armstrong’s blog about creation and evolution. It occurs to me that this controversy is another example of a disputed biblical interpretation that we must be sure to get right. I have written before that the issue of female ordination was one such issue. That is that no matter how we answered the question the consequences of getting the answer wrong would likely be quite severe. So it is an area where we needed clear guidance from God but Sola Sciptura did not allow God to provide that because both sides were defensible from scripture.
The creation debate is another question like that. On the one side we have those who look at a literal 6 day creation (6dc) as the only reasonable way to read the scriptures. They say that understanding God as creator is a very important part of the faith. It goes to one of the most basic religious question “Where did I come from?” How can doubting the bible’s clearest answer to that question not cause huge problems for our faith.
It also goes to the relationship between worldly wisdom and biblical revelation. If we let science tell us to ignore certain passages of scripture then don’t we buy into an anti-supernatural way of reading all scriptures? So we create some huge problems if we throw out 6dc and we are wrong.
On the other side we also get big problems. If we say scripture is clear about 6dc and this is a hill we are willing to die on then we get a major rift between science and Christianity. Someone who examines the evidence and cannot make it square with 6dc is in trouble. They often reject Christianity altogether. Failing that they try and differentiate between scientific truth and religious truth. The trouble is that religious truth ends up being something we believe for the health of our psyche. Science is what is used for the real world. It is quite the opposite on the incarnation where God becomes man and crosses the chasm between the spiritual and the physical.
Now, there is the option of simply refusing to believe 6dc does not fit the data. You just irrationally dig in your heels and say it must fit somehow. It is called faith. We do it when our reason appears to contradict divine revelation. It is a fine option but you better be right. To ask someone to accept something as true when it violates his reason it a huge burden. We cannot bind people with these burdens unless we are sure they are from God. Burdens from God will always be a blessing in the end. Burdens from bad exegesis have no such guarentee.
So there you have it. Two paths deriving from 2 ways of reading Gen 1-11. Neither choice is safe. Choosing the wrong one is going to be a disaster. So how do we know which is right? Protestants would be forced to say we cannot know. We do the best we can based on out fallible interpretive skills. We pray. We study. We have faith in the Holy Spirit. But even so, the chance of error is real. Many denominations have embraced false doctrines over they centuries because of good faith errors. Why are we immune?
Catholics, of course, have an answer for this. The choice the Catholic church has made is to allow freedom of interpretation on these matters. But it is a choice we can trust. God does protect His church so the pitfalls that come with that choice. The church has the authority to deal with anti-supernatural exegesis spreading to other parts of scripture. It has the authority to deal with people pushing evolution too far and saying life comes from a series of random events. Things that look random to us are used by God to bring about His will. That does not mean there was no love or no purpose or no creator. It is an invalid logical leap that is often made by scientific atheists.
Randy,
I started following the thread of discussion on Dave’s blog, but couldn’t finish with the semester starting. I have to admit that as an exegete, I find it comforting to know that if I go to far, the Church is there to correct me. I know that if that happens, it will be a blow to pride, but that beats the alternative.
I also find it interesting that those who are so literal in their approach to Genesis, particularly with the 6dc are so figurative when it comes to their exegesis of John 6 or the Last Supper narratives of the Synoptics.
August 27th, 2008 at 1:10 am