I personally am not comfortable with categories such as empirically detectable in theology.
It’s mixing scientific methodology with theology. I don’t see the relevance.
A little more about myself. I’m a retired missionary-educator with a PhD in Biblical Hermeneutics (Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia). My area of focus there was Old Testament, so I studied with Raymond Dillard, Bruce Waltke, and Tremper Longman—and Moises Silva for Septuagint and hermeneutics and Vern Poythress for hermeneutics. Outside of the Old Testament, I appreciated the Presuppositional approach to apologetics taught there, after the fashion of Cornelius Van Til as adapted by John Frame.
I believe we have some mutual acquaintances in Longman and perhaps Waltke. I’ve just moved to Saint Louis to join family here, and I believe you also know my son-in-law Jared Stoner, Senior Pastor at West County Assembly of God. He’s actually the one who passed along the link to your Peaceful Science site and suggested that I might enjoy engaging.
I don’t know how much I engage the discussion intially, since to some degree you’re all speaking some jargon I’m just picking up (e.g., “outside of Eden,” “genetic vs. genealogical ancestor,” etc.). I do find the discussion intriguing enough to observe while lurking—at least at first. I especially find comments like this one potentially helpful:
What Is a say is that they are our sole-genealogical progenitors, defining this that they are the single unique couple by which we genealogically inherit an “important theological status.”
It’s that “important theological status” that gets my attention, given that whatever we do about explaining the origins of the universe and linking it up with a biblical worldview that takes Genesis seriously, I want to be able to link Romans 5:12–21 to Genesis 1–3 without torturing science, Old Testament exegesis, or New Testament exegesis to the screaming breaking point.
2 Likes
Why is “fundamentalist” a helpful term in debate like this, given that it’s not aged well since the 1930s as a label for Christians and that evokes decapitations and bombing in broader religious circles. I doubt if Grudem has much affinity with the label.
1 Like
Hello @DaleABrueggemann, thanks for the information about yoruself.
I know Tremper well. He is a great guy. We did a Veritas Forum a while back at UCSB, with Jeff Schloss. Waltke I haven’t met yet.
I know Jared! He is a great guy. I’ve really learned a lot from the Concordia Seminary faculty with whom he did his PhD. I also know some of their parishioners very well. I’m glad he sent me this way. Hope we can grab coffee sometime here. Let me know.
Let us know how we can help you. I’m in the middle of finishing off a draft of a book on this, extending this Dabar paper I wrote on this. I am happy to share the draft with you. Are you interested?
That is exactly the tact we are taking here. The paper maps out one way through this. Perhaps you can help us tighten the story. Or perhaps you have your own take to it.
Just a layman’s thought - I really like this. How do you see this in light of Romans 8:19-21?
1 Like
I hope something constructive can come from this outreach to Dr. Grudem. I studied under him back in the day when I was doing an M.A. in New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School. I did not always agree with him, but he is one of the nicest guys you’d ever want to meet and takes his relationship with Christ seriously.
I love this forum, Dr. @swamidass and am very much looking forward to your book!
3 Likes
@thepalmhq welcome to the forum!
Tell us about yourself? Are you a pastor or a scholar?
Would you consider making the connection? When the divide is very wide, a relational connection makes all the difference.
Thanks! What has drawn you here? What are we doing right?
1 Like
Dear Dr. @swamidass,
I’m neither pastor nor scholar. I’m an electrical engineer by profession, but also completed an M.A. in New Testament from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, as noted above. My wife and I converted to Catholicism shortly thereafter (that’s a whole 'nuther story ;o) I’ve had a lifelong interest in the intersection between religion and science. I’m the creator of the web site Geocentrism Debunked (www.geocentrismdebunked.org) Yes, unfortunately, modern geocentrism is a thing.
I was raised YEC but was convinced of the antiquity of the Earth/universe while still in high school. I have real affinity for various aspects of YEC and emotionally would like to be one, but can’t reconcile that with the evidence. I have also been influenced by various ID arguments and still struggle with whether there really is enough “there there” in the various proposed mechanisms for evolution to explain the existence of complex, information-bearing structures which then interact in such marvelous ways to bring about the diversity of life we observe. But more recently I’ve come to see that, at the very least, the evidence for evolution is much stronger than I had been led to believe (Dr. Todd Wood’s “famous” blog posting had a significant impact on me). So I’m acknowledging my ignorance and trying to learn. Human evolution is really the sticky wicket with regard to the Christian faith, so that’s where I’ve been doing more reading, which brought me here…
What I like about your approach specifically and this forum generally is the emphasis on peace. “Come, let us reason together…” I don’t have all the answers. I’m interested in learning, in asking hard questions, in agreeing to disagree if we must, but in charity. What I like about the approach here is that it’s not all about winning arguments.
I would be open to reaching out to Dr. Grudem, although it has been nearly 30 years since I last spoke to him. Perhaps you could tell me how you think that might be done most appropriately, what “message” you would wish to convey by proxy?
God bless,
David
5 Likes
I agree! The word has been so abused as to have limited value in most discussions.
I agree entirely with both statements.
I certainly agree. He’s a very caring individual (if someone has a need, Wayne is there to help) and puts boundless energy into every academic and ministry he pursues. Our career paths eventually took us in different directions but I enjoyed knowing him. Our children attended the same private school and we conversed often.
Wayne had—and apparently still does—a tendency to pursue ideas to an extreme, often resolving to sit down and hastily compose “rules” which established the “correct” position on a matter. I remember well when he got concerned about gender-neutral language in new Bible translations. Even though he lacked the appropriate linguistic training and the requisite years of experience in the many difficulties professional translators face, he spent a weekend in a motel room typing out the definitive guidelines to properly addressing gender when translating the Bible. (Of course, this was not surprising in the light of his role in the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, an organization focused on defining and supporting “rules” for a correct Christian view of gender.)
Yes, what professional translators have spent entire lifetimes trying to sort out as they slugged through very complex linguistic issues, Wayne Grudem tried to settle once and for all in concise summary statements during his marathon drafting session. That gender translation guidelines statement got longer and more convoluted as associates pointed out the many deficiencies. Much as with the CBMW organization, many friends/colleagues soon started to politely step away and disassociate (e.g., removing their names from his “advisory council”) as they saw various problems and even outright errors in his adamant declarations. Grudem used to remind me of the late Norman Geisler, who had a similarly rigid drive to defining correct/incorrect ideas. This sometimes struck me as more fear-driven and dogmatic than helpful.
1 Like