Christianity and Science: Has the Debate Evolved?

It would seem we haven’t come very far in the last 89 years.

A large crowd of reporters packed out the small courthouse in Dayton, Tennessee the summer of 1925 to witness the spectacle that has become known as “The Scopes Monkey Trial.” High school teacher John Scopes had been accused of violating Tennessee’s Butler Act, which stated that human evolution could not be taught to students in public school.

Perhaps the limitations on what theories can be presented in such a setting have been flip-flopped, but the concept of the public debate with the intention of gaining national attention still holds today.

Last evening Mr. Bill Nye, a scientist promoting evolution, and Mr. Ken Ham, a creationist endorsing a literal reading of the biblical creation account, squared off in a debate held at Ken Ham’s Creation Museum.

I chose not to watch.

Don’t get me wrong, I love both science and theology. My undergraduate degree is in a field of biology and I have a seminary degree as well. But I knew that this debate wasn’t going to present anything new; we’ve been hearing it now for close to 90 years.

Debates like this are not intended to change someone else’s mind. The goal is to make the other side look bad, to show who is the smartest, most highly read, and quickest on their feet. Debates like this look a lot like what the politicians do before an election, and very little like how Jesus interacted with those he disagreed.

Sure, Jesus had discussions and one could even call them debates. They are recorded forever in our Bible and often involve Jesus and a religious leader. But I don’t ever remember Jesus publicizing a debate and broadcasting it nationally. Okay, that was a bit of an anachronism, but public humiliation doesn’t seem like a Jesus thing to do.

Jesus was interested in people coming together to arrive at a better understanding of who God was calling them to be. Debates like the one held last night are not an attempt to bring people together. They are an attempt to draw a line in the sand and find out which side you stand on.

Ken Ham and Bill Nye drew such a line, bifurcating the secular and the sacred. I deny such dichotomies. Indeed there are things that are not in line with God’s will, but such easy divisions are not a good representation of reality and only further separate human beings from one another.

Rather than present these two perspective as diametrically opposed, what if Mr. Nye and Mr. Ham had invited a person of a third-way persuasion? Perhaps it went unknown last evening, but there are Christians who believe in evolution and the Bible. They may not necessarily believe in the same approach to evolution as Mr. Nye and they surely do not hold the same biblical interpretation as Mr. Ham, but that is the point. There are other options.

Believing in evolution does not make a person less of a Christian. Believing in the authority of the Bible does not make someone less of a scientist.

Holding a debate between individuals on opposite ends of the spectrum usually does little to convince anyone of anything and I’m not interested in watching such an event. What I am drawn to is the nuanced approach to understanding the middle ground, the third way. At the end of the day, we must remember to be like Christ, even in our disagreements.


About Kevin Gasser

I envision this site to be a place where I can post my weekly sermon text and invite feedback from anyone who is interested in the church, theology, or life in general. Please note that these sermons are rough drafts of what I plan to say from the pulpit, so typos are common.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Christianity and Science: Has the Debate Evolved?

  1. As someone who holds an undergraduate degree in mathematics, loves amateur astronomy, is amazed by the bio-molecular machines inside our cells, and is fascinated by the never ending discoveries about the very fabric of our universe.. and someone who holds a graduate degree in theology, loves diving into the Scripture looking for more understanding of God, who appreciates the poetry of the Bible and the deep, everlasting truths…

    Ya know… I could have had some fun being that “third way” person…

  2. Derek King says:

    Thanks for the thoughts. I think Jesus was harsher in his words than you state. His language often leaves me feeling like those he addressed would feel pretty embarrassed, but perhaps that’s what they needed to hear to break free from their preconceptions. What I hear Jesus stressing is the need to repent from the ideologies we are serving and back to God. It seems to me the folks who take part in these debates are serving science alone or a particular understanding or theology of scripture. Repentance is needed on all sides, even by me who usually looks down on both sides and elevates the middle ground to the “right” standing.

    • Kevin Gasser says:

      Derek, I agree that Jesus can be pretty harsh in his criticism of others. “Brood of vipers” is no complement. But my point was that his intention was not to humiliate his conversation partners but to bring about a better understanding. I’m not sure that was the goal last evening.

  3. Dennis Kuhns says:

    Kevin, I appreciated you thoughts. Thanks for expressing where I am.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s