It was my privilege to chair in the afternoon the session on Darwin. Ken Brownell spoke on the attitudes of C and A A Hodge and Warfield (no time for Machen) to evolution. It was a fascinating, informative and challenging paper. The discussion was rather wide ranging and ran over slightly but was very stimulating. Here are Ken's five concluding principles.
1. Like old Princeton we must be committed to a high doctrine of Scripture and as infallible and inerrant word of God. The Bible is in the end our touchstone but while we must have the same high view of Scripture we will have differing legitimate interpretations. In relation to science we may have to revise our interpretations as the church has done before, but only cautiously and after long reflection. As Charles Hodge said there will be a struggle in this, but we can trust the Holy Spirit to guide us. But here we need to do better than the Princetonians. In this area they were strangely weak in their exegesis of the relevant Biblical passages in spite of having such a high view of Scripture.
2. Like old Princeton we must be robustly and enthusiastically Calvinistic in theology, not only in understanding how God saves, but also in how he works in the world. The Princetonians’ doctrine of providence and the absolute sovereignty of God helped them in their assessment of the idea of evolution. Likewise a Calvinistic view of reality will help us face many of the challenges of science today.
3. Like old Princeton we should have a deep respect for the scientific enterprise. I sometimes get the impression that some Christians are deeply suspicious of science. That is not something Hodge and company could understand. Perhaps they had a too high an estimation of the objectivity of scientists, but some Christians may have too low an estimation. While sin affects the scientific enterprise as much as everything else, God’s common grace is operative. There needs to be respect for scientists, support for Christians working in science and respectful dialogue particularly in this area of evolution.
4. Like old Princeton we must engage in this dialogue with courtesy and respect for those with whom we disagree. Nothing brings more discredit on evangelical Christianity than the intemperate way in which we sometimes deal with our opponents. The Princeton theologians always dealt with those they opposed with courtesy and respect; they were gentlemen controversialists and we should be as well. Among other things that means being fair in the way we assess the views of those we oppose. A good example of this in another area of controversy is the way John Piper evaluated N T Wright’s views in his book on justification.
5. Like old Princeton we must remember that the big battle is not on the details of how God created things, but with naturalistic materialism that has no place for God. This was the big issue for old Princeton and it must be for us. Whatever our specific views on many aspects of the evolution debate all Christian theists need to stand together to contend for the Christian worldview. He closed with a quote from Kuyper on evolution
Evolution is a newly conceived system, a newly established theory, a newly formed dogma, a newly emerged faith. Embracing and dominating all of life, it is diametrically opposed to the Christian faith and can erect its temple only on the ruins of our Christian confession… And therefore against that system of the aimlessly and mechanistically constructed cosmos we set our full-fledged resistance. We must not only defend ourselves against it but attack it… Over against Nietzsche’s Evolution-law that the strong must tread the weaker we cling to the Christ of God who seeks the lost and has mercy on the weak. Over against the undirected mechanism of evolution we present faith in that Eternal Being who “has worked and continues to work all things after the counsel of His will” [Eph. 1:11]. Over against the selection that selects the species and neglects the individual, we cling to Election… Over against the annihilation of the individual person in the grave we continue to testify to the coming judgment and of an eternal glory. And over against the altruism that is nothing more than a “transformed” and therefore disguised egoism we raise up the fire of eternal love that burns in God’s Father-heart, a holy spark of which has leaped to our own… And so I conclude by returning to what was, is now, and ever will be the starting point of the Confession for the entire Christian church on earth, by maintaining over against Evolution the first of all articles of faith: I BELIEVE IN GOD ALMIGHTY, CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH.
1. Like old Princeton we must be committed to a high doctrine of Scripture and as infallible and inerrant word of God. The Bible is in the end our touchstone but while we must have the same high view of Scripture we will have differing legitimate interpretations. In relation to science we may have to revise our interpretations as the church has done before, but only cautiously and after long reflection. As Charles Hodge said there will be a struggle in this, but we can trust the Holy Spirit to guide us. But here we need to do better than the Princetonians. In this area they were strangely weak in their exegesis of the relevant Biblical passages in spite of having such a high view of Scripture.
2. Like old Princeton we must be robustly and enthusiastically Calvinistic in theology, not only in understanding how God saves, but also in how he works in the world. The Princetonians’ doctrine of providence and the absolute sovereignty of God helped them in their assessment of the idea of evolution. Likewise a Calvinistic view of reality will help us face many of the challenges of science today.
3. Like old Princeton we should have a deep respect for the scientific enterprise. I sometimes get the impression that some Christians are deeply suspicious of science. That is not something Hodge and company could understand. Perhaps they had a too high an estimation of the objectivity of scientists, but some Christians may have too low an estimation. While sin affects the scientific enterprise as much as everything else, God’s common grace is operative. There needs to be respect for scientists, support for Christians working in science and respectful dialogue particularly in this area of evolution.
4. Like old Princeton we must engage in this dialogue with courtesy and respect for those with whom we disagree. Nothing brings more discredit on evangelical Christianity than the intemperate way in which we sometimes deal with our opponents. The Princeton theologians always dealt with those they opposed with courtesy and respect; they were gentlemen controversialists and we should be as well. Among other things that means being fair in the way we assess the views of those we oppose. A good example of this in another area of controversy is the way John Piper evaluated N T Wright’s views in his book on justification.
5. Like old Princeton we must remember that the big battle is not on the details of how God created things, but with naturalistic materialism that has no place for God. This was the big issue for old Princeton and it must be for us. Whatever our specific views on many aspects of the evolution debate all Christian theists need to stand together to contend for the Christian worldview. He closed with a quote from Kuyper on evolution
Evolution is a newly conceived system, a newly established theory, a newly formed dogma, a newly emerged faith. Embracing and dominating all of life, it is diametrically opposed to the Christian faith and can erect its temple only on the ruins of our Christian confession… And therefore against that system of the aimlessly and mechanistically constructed cosmos we set our full-fledged resistance. We must not only defend ourselves against it but attack it… Over against Nietzsche’s Evolution-law that the strong must tread the weaker we cling to the Christ of God who seeks the lost and has mercy on the weak. Over against the undirected mechanism of evolution we present faith in that Eternal Being who “has worked and continues to work all things after the counsel of His will” [Eph. 1:11]. Over against the selection that selects the species and neglects the individual, we cling to Election… Over against the annihilation of the individual person in the grave we continue to testify to the coming judgment and of an eternal glory. And over against the altruism that is nothing more than a “transformed” and therefore disguised egoism we raise up the fire of eternal love that burns in God’s Father-heart, a holy spark of which has leaped to our own… And so I conclude by returning to what was, is now, and ever will be the starting point of the Confession for the entire Christian church on earth, by maintaining over against Evolution the first of all articles of faith: I BELIEVE IN GOD ALMIGHTY, CREATOR OF HEAVEN AND EARTH.
2 comments:
The five concluding principles were surely the best part of the paper, which at times was poorly articulated and hard to follow.
A very helpful summary. Many thanks.
Post a Comment