I commend contemporary evangelical churches for their willingness to re-evaluate 20th century assumptions about what the Bible really teaches (i.e., exegesis) and how it applies to our generation (i.e., hermeneutics). Unfortunately, for the most part, they seem rather immature in their methodology. Simply put, the church's fundamental problem is its sophomoric understanding of critical realism. Somehow, all truth claims, whether scientific or scriptural, are naively understood as speaking the same language and competing for identical territory.This tends to spill over into scripture interpretation as well, as it all tends to get the same brush. Consequently, Psalms get interpreted the same way that the Primeval History is.The other week, my Bible Study Fellowship leader commented at great length about how Jesus spoke symbolically and never spoke directly about anything, which resulted in the disciples standing around and saying "Huh?" much of the time. This is the same man who remarked in our study of Genesis that the entire Primeval History had to be taken absolutely literally. Huh? Irony completely lost there. Read the whole post. He has some interesting ideas about how to pick a church.
This is a blog detailing the creation/evolution/ID controversy and assorted palaeontological news. I will post news here with running commentary.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Steve Martin's Blog: Is there an Evangelical Church Home for the Evolutionary Creationist?
Over at Steve Martin's blog, there is a guest post by Douglas Hayworth on whether or not the EC can find a church home among evangelicals. He writes:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment