Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Jesus Creed

Home
Evangelical
Evolutionary Creation 2 (RJS)

Evolutionary Creation 2 (RJS)

Last updated on: November 30, 2010 at 6:02 am by RJS

Evolutionary Creation 2 (RJS) 2010-11-30T06:02:56-06:00 RJS

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

The second chapter of Denis O. Lamoureux’s book Evolutionary Creation: A Christian Approach to Evolution provides a sketch of five basic categories for common views on creation, Genesis, and human origins – young earth creation, old earth or progressive creation, evolutionary creation, deistic evolution, and dysteleological evolution.The sketches are designed to highlight the distinctions between the various positions and avoids much of the nuance; thus many will find that their view falls in the cracks between the sketches.

I am not going to rehash each of these positions – young earth and old earth progressive creation are fairly well understood. Dysteleological evolution denies the existence of God and the presence of any purpose or plan in the origin and development of life, or in the universe as a whole. The universe simply is, life simply evolved as a result of physical and chemical processes combined with blind chance. This too is fairly well known.

Less clear to many Christians, at least as far as I can tell from comments on the blog and e-mails I’ve received, is the distinction between evolutionary creation and deistic evolution or dysteleological evolution. Evolutionary creation is a view that takes both science and scripture seriously. The position is often identified as theistic evolution, but the word order is significant. The view is conveyed more accurately when the noun is creation and evolutionary is descriptive of a view of creation. Perceptions of theistic evolution can range from the view of evolutionary creation presented here to a hands-off view that comes closer to deism. Dr. Lamoureux gives a good description of evolutionary creation and of the contrast of this position with deistic evolution, including forms of Christian deistic evolution in his book:

Evolutionary creation asserts that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit created the universe and life through an ordained, sustain, and design-reflecting evolutionary process. This position fully embraces both the religious beliefs of Christianity and the scientific theories of cosmological, geological, and biological evolution. It contends that God established and maintains the laws of nature, including the mechanisms of teleological evolution. (p. 29)

Clearly this needs to be fleshed out – but the statement is critical. Evolutionary creation is a view that fully embraces Christian orthodoxy yet sees no reason to doubt the empirical evidence for an old earth or for evolutionary processes including common descent. You can argue that we are wrong – but the level of the discussion is on par with many theological debates in the church. This is not a step away from God and into skepticism or demythologized rationalism.

From your perspective what is the most significant issue for an evolutionary view of creation?

Lamoureux uses the example of human development – embryology – as an analogy to explain evolutionary creation. In Psalm 139:13-14 we read

For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb. I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;

Few of us, however, read this with a vision of God stepping in to perform discrete acts in the process, say construction of an eye or the neural network of the brain, distinct from the natural growth from fertilized egg to human infant. God is fully capable of weaving an infant in the womb and knowing him from unformed substance to manhood without undermining or sidestepping the ‘natural’ process. Nor do we see science in verse 15:

My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth;

This is not a scientific statement about the formation of humans prior to the womb.

So… Lamoureux puts forth the following features of evolutionary creation (p. 30-31):

First, embryological and evolutionary processes are both teleological and ordained by God. At conception, the DNA in a fertilized human egg is fully equipped with the necessary information for a person to develop during the nine months of pregnancy. Similarly, the Creator loaded into the Big Bang the plan and capacity for the universe and life, including humans, to evolve over 10-15 billion years.

Second, divine creative action in the origin of individual humans and the entire world is through sustained and continuous natural processes. … evolution is an unbroken process that the Lord sustained throughout eons of time.

Third, human embryological development in the microcosm of the womb and evolution in the macrocosm of the world reflect intelligent design. That is, each is a natural revelation authored by the Creator. … Indeed, the Big Bang “declares the Glory of God” and biological evolution “proclaims the works of His hands.” (Ps 19:1)

Finally, spiritual mysteries are associated with both the embryological and evolutionary processes that created humans. Men and women are unique and distinguished from the rest of creation because they bear the Image of God and have fallen into sin. … Christian evolutionists firmly accept these spiritual realities, but recognize that understanding fully their origin is beyond our creaturely capacity to know.

Evolutionary creation is not a position that disregards scripture. Scripture is a record and revelation inspired by God of his nature, his relationship and interaction with his creation and his creatures – including humans created in his image for covenant relationship and for mission, and his relationship with his people in Israel. Most importantly it reveals Jesus Christ – not simply the historical Jesus, but God’s messiah who, as Paul tells us, was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. But evolutionary creation does view the creation narratives as conveying theological rather than scientific truth in much the same way that Ps. 139 conveys theological truth rather than scientific truth.

Evolutionary creation is distinct from deistic evolution – the position that sees a God who started the process in the Big Bang, but then steps aside and allows life to unfold. In particular, evolutionary creation sees God at work within creation in both natural and supernatural ways. There is a place for personal miracles, signs, and wonders as well as natural processes. Evolutionary creation does not reject intelligent design in nature, nor does it reject human spirituality. In fact there is little difference on these issues between Christians who hold to young earth, old earth, or evolutionary creation. When signs and wonders are rejected, and this is true of young earth creationists as well as evolutionary creationists, the reasons have to do with theology and the reading of scripture, not with a denial of the possibility on scientific grounds. Those who hold to evolutionary creation run the gamut from Presbyterian to Baptist to Pentecostal and all between.

The most significant issues with evolutionary creation center on divine activity in origins – both the place for divine activity in general and the role for divine activity in human origins in particular.

According to Dr. Lamoureux “evolutionary creationists reject dramatic miracles in origins. They argue that God created everything by ordaining and sustaining a teleological evolutionary process. ” (p. 48) While some do take this position, it seems a bit of an unnecessary overstatement. An evolutionary creationist sees no reason to expect that God created using dramatic miracles, no reason to doubt the evidence we see for the gradual development of biological diversity or common descent. But there is not, or need not be, a blanket rejection of the possibility that God acted in a supernatural fashion at key points. Simply put, there is a willingness to go with the data. Whatever the method or process, God created and sustains all.

Human evolution is an even more explosive topic. Here again there is a spread of views held by Christians who support evolutionary creation. There is general agreement that Genesis is not a science text and there is no expectation of scientific concordance. There is general agreement that humans evolved in common descent with all of biological life, sharing a common ancestor with Chimpanzees some 4 to 5 million years ago or so. There is much more variety of opinion on the significance of Adam and Eve, the historicity of the fall, and the intertwined relationship between historical and theological concordance in Gen. 2-3. Dr. Lamoureux will argue that Adam is not historical and there is theological, but no historical concordance in Gen 2-3. Dr. Denis Alexander, on the other hand, who has a Ph.D. in Neurochemistry, has published ~60 papers in the primary scientific literature, and is Director of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion, sees both theological concordance and an element of historical concordance in Gen 2-3, but no element of scientific concordance (see specifically about 3 minutes into this clip).

These distinctions in positions will undoubtedly lead to some good conversation as we continue on in discussion of Dr. Lamourex’s book, but do not challenge the general premise of evolutionary creation. There is work to do at the edges, particularly the theological edges of this view of God’s creation. Of course, there is work to do at the edges of any view of creation, including young earth and old earth progressive creation. None of these are entirely self-consistent in their accord with scripture or view of theology. The mystery or uncertainty alone is no reason for concern. We are meant to wrestle with scripture, the relationship of God with creation, and his redeeming work in creation. This is part of being both human and God’s people.

What do you see as the strengths and weakness of evolutionary creation? What distinctions and positions are possible?

If you wish to contact me directly you may do so at rjs4mail[at]att.net

If interested you can subscribe to a full text feed of my posts at Musings on Science and Theology.

For those who find the full book (400+ pages) somewhat daunting Dr. Lamoureux has condensed the book into a more accessible version, I Love Jesus & I Accept Evolution. He also provides audio and slide summaries of each chapter of Evolutionary Creation online.

Science and Faith

Denis Lamoureux

Evolutionary Creation

Previous Post

November 30, 2010

The Baptism Question

Next Post

November 30, 2010 None Dare Call it ... but they are

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Acts of the Apostles Adam Advent Anabaptism Angels Anglican Apologetics Atonement Baptism BCP Prayers Bible Biblical Studies Birds Blogging Bloglossary Bonhoeffer Books Calvinism Christianity Church Church History Coffee Colossians Commentary Recs Conversion Creation Creeds Culture Death Ecclesiastes Economics Education Embracing Grace Emergent Emerging Movement Eschatology Essays Ethics Eucharist Evangelicalism Family Fasting Fathers Fellowship of Differents Footsteps Tour Fun and Whimsical Gospel Grace Happiness Heaven Hell Holy Spirit Irenaeus James Jesus Jesus Creed Job Justification Kingdom of God Law Lectures Lent Liberalism Love and Marriage Mabanteneni Manhood Mary Miracles Missio Alliance MissioLife Missional Missional Jesus Movies and Film New Perspective Northern Seminary OneLife Origins Project Orthodox Parables Pastor's Spouse Pastoring and Leading Pastoring and Preaching Patristics Paul Paul-John Tour Pharisees Pietism Political Theology Prayer and Formation Preaching Problems for Faith Psalm 119 Psalms Public Issues Purgatory Religions Resurrection Revelation Romans Rule of JCreed Science and Faith Sermon on the Mount Sports Ten Commandments Theology Third Way Top Ten Lists Translations Uncategorized Universalism University Ministry Way Out Weekly Meanderings Wisdom Women and Ministry Work Worship Writing & Blogging Youth Ministry

Select a Month July 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 0000

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

A hand wrote on the palace wall during a feast, and I interpreted the message: numbered, weighed, divided. What were these three Aramaic words?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Ichabod, Ebenezer, Beulah Mene, Mene, Tekel, Parsin Holy, Holy, Holy Babylon, Media, Persia