As we make this distinction between science and theology, it is also necessary to...
2) Clearly distinguish between what the Bible says and, especially, what the Bible does not say.
To clearly distinguish between what the Bible says and does not say is especially important because, on those issues where God has spoken the matter is settled, and on those issues where God is silent we must allow for a difference of opinion. On matters where God is silent, He leaves it up to our Christian freedom 3 to explore and observe, and to use our logic and reason to come up with models which describe this world. We realize to a large extent such models are human conclusions and not derived from God's Word. In scientific issues about which God's Word is silent, we not only allow for a difference of opinion in Christian love but also understand that a Christian may in good conscience feel free to select any position that he/she sees fit.
A method that may be used to evaluate the existence or absence of Christian freedom in creation/evolution issues might consist of something like the following thought process:
• First, ask, "Is this mentioned directly by Scripture?"
• Then, "Is this implied by Scripture?"
• Then, "Is this permissible by Scripture? If so, which parts are permissible by Scripture and which parts are not?"
• Then, "Do the scientific conclusions have a theological basis that needs to be evaluated?" The answers to these first four questions will enable the Christian to evaluate whether or not Christian freedom is involved by emphasizing the specifics about which Scripture speaks, or does not speak, on an issue.
• Finally, evaluate scientific conclusions based upon the science itself.
Failure to properly make this distinction between what the Bible says and what it does not say may result in a number of undesirable deficiencies:
• It may result in subtracting from or minimizing what the Bible states (sometimes referred to as "a half-truth").
• It may result in adding to what the Bible says (e.g. "a truth-and-a-half").
• It may result in a misapplication of the Scriptural doctrine of Christian freedom. This misapplication may unnecessarily bind the consciences of others with scientific conclusions as if they were theological conclusions. This binding might happen if someone takes a scientific question and presents what should be a scientific answer but rather passes it off as a theological answer. In so doing, he would be presenting the issue as theologically settled, whereas in reality the matter is open to Christian freedom of assessment and discernment.
This last point is certainly something to keep in mind as Christians apply the Gospel to their lives when creation and evolution issues are discussed. The latitude of Christian freedom to hold varying scientific conclusions about matters in which God's Word is silent is something that is often overlooked. This consideration needs to be regularly emphasized so that consciences are not unnecessarily bound in such matters when information is presented as if Scripture is speaking when, in fact, it is not.
Also understand that confessional Lutheranism offers some unique insights into the Scriptures - insights which enable the Christian to deal effectively with paradoxes between what God's Word says and our observations of the natural world. A Lutheran approach does not inherently seek to resolve everything the Bible says with our observations of the natural world. An example familiar to many is the Lutheran understanding of the Lord's Supper, where the communicant receives the bread and wine as well as the body and blood of Christ. This reception is certain, not because observation and logic, per se, are conclusive, but because the words of Christ are conclusive. It is because of Lutheranism's unique approach - one which does not find the need to completely understand and rationalize everything that God's Word says but simply accepts it in faith, and one that applies Christian freedom properly - that confessional Lutheranism can potentially offer some new approaches to creationism.
How might we apply these first two principles? To begin, let’s itemize a sampling of questions so that the reader better understands the science-theology distinction involved. First are some examples of theological questions which the Bible definitively answers:
• Were Adam and Eve the first humans and special creations of God?
• Was there only one creation event?
• Did creation occur over six 24 hour periods?
• Was there matter before creation?
Next are some examples of scientific questions about which the Bible does not address. Some examples are as follows:
• What is the circumference of the earth?
• How deep are the oceans?
• What is the life cycle timeline of a star?
• How far from earth is the Large Magellanic Cloud?
• Are the sedimentary layers that we see in the Grand Canyon the result of the Biblical Flood?
• What is the measured age of the earth?
Now, let’s continue with a specific example by looking at this last question and analyzing it further. In keeping with these distinctions, we will note that "What is the measured age of the earth?" and "When was the earth created?" are two separate questions. The former is a scientific question requiring scientific measurement while the latter is a theological question requiring us to search the Scriptures.
Somewhat analogous to the treatment of the Lord's Supper, a confessional Lutheran would not necessarily need to have the same answer for both questions since, as was mentioned previously, we do not need to resolve everything the Bible says with our observations of the natural world. Our observations in nature may correlate well with the Scriptures but they don't have to. And if it is our experience that there is a lack of correlation between our observations in nature and the Bible, it is still the Scriptures that are more certain.
A rough approximation to "When was the earth created?" may be obtained by looking at the genealogies in the Bible. However, it need also be understood that since internal evidence 4 shows that these genealogies are not complete nor are the time periods consecutive, we would not be able to conclude a date for creation much more specific than some “multi-thousands" of years ago.
We will also recognize that, while Genesis describes the state of creation as being good, without sin and death, and fully functional, it stops short of providing specifics. For example, the Bible neither gives us the distances to the stars nor radioactive decay parameters. Therefore, the question "What is the measured age of the earth?" is a scientific one about which we are free to use our Christian freedom and scientific knowledge to assess.
From a confessional Lutheran perspective, an aged universe - that is, a scientifically measured age which may be orders of magnitude older than the elapsed time since God created the world 5 - may be theologically acceptable with respect to some aspects of creation as long as those aspects do not contradict with what the Scriptures specifically say.
Contemporary Lutheran theologian, Siegbert W. Becker properly applies these distinctions when he comments,
The point that ought to be clear to all of us is that, entirely aside from the theory of evolution, we are taught by the biblical revelation of creation to expect to find a world that seems to be much older than it really is. If scientists would be truly scientific and say that the universe seems to be millions of years old, or even that it is millions of years old unless at some time in the past the whole natural world came into being in a supernatural, miraculous way, or that some catastrophic event or events speeded up certain processes of nature at one time or another, we would have no reason to quarrel with them; in fact, we would agree and say that the earth appears to be far more ancient than it is. We know that it is much younger than it seems to be only because God, who is the only one who really knows how all things came to be, has shared this secret with us in Genesis one and two. 6
Former Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary president Carl Lawrenz also cautions, "Yet the creationist, in opposing the billions of years invoked by the evolutionist, needs to be conscientious in asserting nothing further concerning the age of the world on the basis of Scripture than is actually said there." 7
3 “Christian freedom,” “Christian liberty,” and “adiaphora” are related terms. For further explanation on the topic of Christian freedom, the reader is encouraged to look at the book of Galatians (especially Galatians 5:1-4) and Article X, Formula of Concord, Book of Concord.
4 That is, evidence from Scripture itself.
5 As described in Genesis 1 and 2
6 Becker, Siegbert. “Evolution and Genesis,” page 7. Available from Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary Essay File.
7 Lawrenz, Carl. Reviewer’s Desk. “Darwin, Evolution, and Creation.” Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly, Volume 57 No. 3 (July 1960): 223
Posts
