Tim Keller on Evolution

Interestingly some big names are starting to speak up on the Genisis/Evolution disscussion. Tim Kellor who makes a lot of sence to me writes that it does not necessarily mean a yes or no answer.
This comes from the white paper written by Tim Keller for the November workshop "In Search of a Theology of Celebration" is posted on the BioLogos web site: Creation, Evolution, and Christian Laypeople.
He gives three question and brief then followed by more detailed examples...

Question #1: If God used evolution to create, then we can’t take Genesis 1 literally, and if we can’t do
that, why take any other part of the Bible literally?

Answer: The way to respect the authority of the Biblical writers is to take them as they want to be
taken. Sometimes they want to be taken literally, sometimes they don’t. We must listen to them, not
impose our thinking and agenda on them.

Question#2: If biological evolution is true—does that mean that we are just animals driven by our
genes, and everything about us can be explained by natural selection?

Answer: No. Belief in evolution as a biological process is not the same as belief in evolution as a world-
view.

Question #3: If biological evolution is true and there was no historical Adam and Eve how can we know
where sin and suffering came from?

Answer: Belief in evolution can be compatible with a belief in an historical fall and a literal Adam and Eve. There are many unanswered questions around this issue and so Christians who believe God used evolution must be open to one another’s views.

I found it fascinating that he used C.S.Lewis as part of his detailed answer.

One of my favorite Christian writers (that’s putting it mildly), C.S.Lewis, did not believe in a literal Adam and Eve, and I do not question the reality or soundness of his personal faith.

(It also interests me that people like John Piper love to quote C.S.Lewis, yet I'd say for Piper a non-belief in a literal Adam and Eve would be heretical!)

I do like Keller's approach. It gives the reader some outs, as well as options. A freedom to think though things and not be boxed in. It does mean that a certain undoing or diminished importance of aspects of Scriptures which certainly if reading from Genesis has implied effects through out Scripture. This for some people will feel like shaky ground.

Coffee at the GPO

Had coffee x3 at the cafe in Bendigo called the "GPO". Opposite the old Post Office. 'Cafe Essence' and 'Coffee Select' were shut for Boxing Day, my regular coffee haunts in Bendigo when I visited.
I was not dissapointed. A slightly darker and bitter coffee from what you normally get from cafes, but this is how I like it. Micro foam was good.


No latte Art, but this is Bendigo...

Christian Marketing

One of my favorite blogs 'Seth Godin's Blog' has written a post 'Think like me agree with me", while it is fundamentally a marketing blog there are numerous implications for Christians....

When you're trying to sell your idea, it's natural to assume that the people you're selling to think the way you do. If you can only show them the facts and stories that led you to believe what you believe, then of course they'll end up where you are... believing

The problem, of course, is that people don't always think like you.

Yep this is the same as Christians who do evangelism or mission. They don't realize that the world has moved on to looking at all things in a pluralistic manner including spirituality.

Seth goes on to give two work a rounds, the first is::

The challenge doesn't lie in getting them to know what you know. It won't help. The challenge lies in helping them see your idea through their lens, not yours. If you study the way religions and political movements spread, you can see that this is exactly how it works. Marketers of successful ideas rarely market the facts. Instead, they market stories that match the worldview of the people being marketed to.

This is a hard option because it involves incarnational mission. Really understanding who you are reaching, through their eyes.

And the second::

[There's an alternative, one that you might want to think hard about: perhaps you should only market your idea to people who already think the way you do. After all, you're not running for president, you don't need a majority. Screen people by their behavior (what they read, what they buy, how they act) and only tell your story to the people who will embrace it. That's a lot easier to do that than it's ever been before.]

I think this is where Christianity is currently stuck. Its easier to market your church and brand of Christianity to Christians. It is easier to sell to existing Christians than do the hard work converting new followers in a pluralistic society. What happens is sheep stealing. The majority of church growth comes from existing churches.

Sheep photo credits brew ha ha's

Copenhagen, a Christian response

Its been a bit disappointing to me to see that there has not been much of a buzz around the Christian literature that I read, no real mention of the environmental efforts at Copenhagen. Or any Christian lobbying regarding the issues.

Politically it was also pretty disappointing.

I think our government went in really wanting to make a change but that didn't happen.

The Australian opposition just looked on trying to score political points with 'I told you so' attitude. Especially after the leadership spill.

The Australian Greens just winged saying it was not enough and a failure.

I can always remember at school during a religious education the discussion came up, 'How will the earth end? The teacher was pointing towards some sort of Spiritual Armageddon. One smart lad said the world would end with a nuclear war... I thought this was the most insightful (It was still during the cold war). But I realize now it will most probably be due to our environmental negligence.

Anyway, I've found the good old wikipedia the best for news on Copenhagan. No real spin, and just trying to report what is really happening. Here is what I think is a good summary::

On December 18 after a day of frantic negotiations between heads of state, it was announced that a "meaningful agreement" had been reached between the United States, China, India, South Africa, and Brazil.^[77] The use of "meaningful" was viewed as being political spin by an editorial in The Guardian.^[78] An unnamed US government official was reported as stating that the deal was a "historic step forward" but was not enough to prevent dangerous climate change in the future. However, the BBC's environment correspondent stated: "While the White House was announcing the agreement, many other – perhaps most other – delegations had not even seen it. A comment from a UK official suggested the text was not yet final and the Bolivian delegation has already complained about the way it was reached – 'anti-democratic, anti-transparent and unacceptable'. With no firm target for limiting the global temperature rise, no commitment to a legal treaty and no target year for peaking emissions, countries most vulnerable to climate impacts have not got the deal they wanted."^[79]

Early on Saturday 19 December, delegates approved a motion to "take note of the Copenhagen Accord^[80] of December 18, 2009". However it was reported that it was not yet clear whether the motion was unanimous, or what its legal implications are. The UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the US-backed climate deal as an "essential beginning". It was unclear whether all 192 countries in attendance would also adopt the deal. The so-called Copenhagen Accord recognises the scientific case for keeping temperature rises below 2°C, but does not contain commitments for reduced emissions that would be necessary to achieve that aim. One part of the agreement pledges US$ 30 billion to the developing world over the next three years, rising to US$ 100 billion per year by 2020, to help poor countries adapt to climate change. Earlier proposals, that would have aimed to limit temperature rises to 1.5°C and cut CO₂ emissions by 80% by 2050 were dropped. An agreement was also reached that would set up a deal to reduce deforestation in return for cash from developed countries.^[81] The agreement made was non-binding but U.S. President Obama said that countries could show the world their achievements. He said that if they had waited for a binding agreement, no progress would have been made.^[82]

I wish I was given the option...

I wish I was given a few options when I was growing up within the Church. It seemed to me, at school as well as at church, there was only one answer to how the world began as a Christian. Creationism. I wish some one could have stopped and said 'Hey Scott' there are a few solutions to your pondering.
I've settled now on 'Theistic evolution", for the moment. Seems to fit and is regarded by most mainstream denominations as a viable option of belief for Christians.

Here is part of the blurb from the good old Wikipedia on theistic evolution::

Theistic evolutionists argue that it is inappropriate to use Genesis as a scientific text, since it was written in a pre-scientific age and originally intended for religious instruction; as such, seemingly chronological aspects of the creation accounts should be thought of in terms of a literary framework. Theistic evolutionists may believe that creation is not literally a week long process but a process beginning in the time of Genesis and continuing through all of time, including today. This view affirms that God created the world and was the primary causation of our being, while scientific changes such as evolution are part of "creatia continua" or continuing creation which is still occurring in the never ending process of creation.

Not all coffee is created equal!

Well unforumately the grinders decaf is well below average. Finding a good coffee can be hard, but finding a good decaf is just about imposible!
The grinders is the only whole decaf bean sold at Cowes Coles. Everything about the purchase was promicing. Good crema, length of pour about right. The taste was what let things down. It slightly flavours the milk.

The beans once dried were extremely dry. Other good decaf grounds had a slightly oily texture.
The pack has an obscured use by date. But it would be more useful a date when the beans were roasted.

Inclusive Christianity

One of the things that I can't stand especially with Christianity is from the pulpit or some other manner. An exclusive understanding of theology and Christianity.

For me I've come to the opinion that I actually enjoy a variety of understandings of theology on different topics. I don't believe that it Jesus was exclusive in the way humanity understood things or he wouldn't have spoken in parables. I think you can have a variety of opinions and still be a Christian.

Some blog reading and pod casts which reveal an openness to different expressions within Christianity I've been reading are::

Mark Connors has written a series on his blog on the end times.

Over the years there has been a variety of approaches to interpreting the book of Revelation. There are three broad categories of how people have interpreted this book through the centuries:

What I liked about Mark's approach is that he gives each position positive and negatives yet leaving it up to the reader to make up there own mind.

Sunday Nights with John Cleary on the ABC

He recently put on a program on Genesis. Looking at if there is a conflict with science.

The panel looked nice and varied, yet it was a disappointment. They seemed to just end up agreeing with one another.

The only controversy was when senator Barnaby Joyce turned up. Said some things about Genesis and ended up trying to score some political points. It ended up leaving the program right off track. (I would have respected the guy a lot more if he just spoke to the topic.)

Lastly the journey of 'The naked pastor' and his look at the bible and the journey he has taken in understanding it.

For me, the bible used to be The Truth. Then, the bible became truth. Then, the bible became something that contained the truth. These are all deficient. Now I see that the bible points to the Truth. Actually, this is quite Barthian. He compared the bible to John the Baptist who pointed to the Light.

Reading the naked pastor has been interesting because in many ways. I've come to similar conclusions but through different paths...

Why the liberals wont win the next election....

Well have a look at this....




Seen these faces before...Talk of bringing back old policies tweeked, Old Howard ministers, close to retirement. Is this political party going backwards? It's not rocket science.

Kirby, speaks about homosexuality at the Parliament of World Religons

An interesting speaker at the Parliament of World Religions was Michael Kirby, former Australian high court judge. Kirby is an interesting choice because of his own homosexuality as well as his position within the Australian legal system.

Quoting from the age::

He urged religious people to read biblical texts in the context in which they were written, saying his 35 years as

a judge had taught him the importance of analysing words.

''You cannot take words out of context. You cannot take words in isolation … especially holy books that are written in terms of parables and in terms that are often poetic,'' he said.

Mr Kirby said Leviticus 20:13 was usually cited by Christians who condemned homosexuality, yet other passages of Leviticus that condemned men and women to death for adultery were no longer taken literally.

''There are many theologians now who say we have to re-read this, we have to read it in context. You've got to read it in the context of adultery being a death sentence for straight people,'' he said.

''Why don't all those people who are being nasty in religions to gays ever quote verse 10 [condemning adulterers to death]? If we are going back to the rules in Leviticus, we've got to be neutral and we've got to raise them all.''

He also went on to quote scientific studies that there was a 'Genetic' component to sexual orientation.

'If it's genetic, it means it is part of a great design,'' he said. ''In the end, in a battle between interpretations of scripture and science, science will always win.''

I'm not sure about the last quote. I see it problematic for there are many genetic issues facing humans. But yes Homosexuality does face bigotry unlike any human genetic disposition, if that is the point he is making. (I would like to have seen the full transcript for this)

Overall I think Mr Kirby is right. We as Christians have read the scriptures selectively especially in relation to sexuality. When overall Jesus spoke more about the dangers and corruption of money...

Frank Viola Re-imagining Church, Chapter 11, Reimagining Spiritual Cover

'Spiritual covering' is an interesting chapter. In many ways I think Viola is right. The way 'Covering' has been used is some cases in abusive. Yet on a practical level I'm not sure that he has given any practical alternatives. (I'm not really sure what he meant by the 'Shepharding movement' it sound like a Northern American thing, which I don't think he explained well.)

Covering may not be used with that specific wording in the bible as Viola writes. Yet I think it could be argue that it is implied with accountability, an aspect of Spiritual formation and the call to holiness.

One of the things that Viola writes about is the hierarchal nature of 'Covering'. I think in a traditional sense, this is the case. Yet I know that for Vineyard certainly in Australia it is very much based around a network. Where peer mentoring is probably the best accountability, or covering you may have.

I also find it amusing his conclusion regarding 'The real question behind covering", That it is 'Who controls you". I've always thought covering as who is going to take some of the responsibility when you stuff up. Certainly for me this was the case in the Anglican system, when a Bishop took on much which I didn't hear about in my ministry...

Its interesting that I'm sure there would be similar structure in Northern America, yet Viola doesn't mention them. I can't help wonder if he wants to really depress the reader, into thinking the church is doomed completely.

The next chapter may I think unpack some of my concerns.... 'Reimagining authority and submission'

Coffee in the 'burbs

A suprise coffee at 'zests' in Croyden 8/10 for a flat white, latte art very good.

The playground

Both Christina and myself do the job share with the girls. We both have our own routines. One of mine is the playground at the Esplanade foreshore Cowes.









The other is trying to do things like hair plats, help out with dress selection, etc etc.

Location:The Esplanade,Cowes,Australia

Liberal shenanagins

The liberal party today had their spill, and elected a new leader. Poor old Joe Hockey didn't even make it to final vote. Tony Abbott won, but not convincingly.

A few thought...

::The liberal party needs to be seen to be closer to the center. Abbott is not the man for this.

::Joe Hockeys or Malcolm Turnbull's time will come. There will be a spill when Abbott looses the next election. Or sooner if Abbott doesn't look a bit more moderate.

::The vote was less than convincing 42-41, a shaky start for Abbott.

::Turnbull didn't go down in the ball of fire as predicted. Sure he lost but he will be a thorn in Tony Abbott's side, with that sort of margin.

::Turnbull has learn't a lot from this. He will be wiser if he gets a second spin.

My meeting with Job

Today on my way to lunch with our ward clerk and pharmacist out of the corner of my eye I spotted a clergyman who I knew. So I went over to the anteroom and said hello.

He looked up and through red eyes and replied. It was a river of confusion and pain. As he talked of illness, of which only he escaped in his family. Then he asked 'with all the prayer, why?'

I've seen a lot of sad, sad things. Nursing especially palliative care, you see people at the extremes. You get a peek at rawness that only sneaks up on most people half a dozen times in their lives. Yet todays experience shocked me, for I thought.

It could have been me.

For I have never since knowing the clergyman had the same passion, energy, desire. The same love for the 'flock'. Yet this had befallen him. Not me.

Latter in hindsight, talking it though with Christina, I wondered.

What if he had permission to give it all away. To walk from God and the unanswered prayer. To push in no further. Just to be angry. Sitting in the ashes.

Photo Credits Corzon loco / Crazy Heart