Well played. Context: Luther colorfully illustrating that reason can get us into all sorts of trouble when doing theology. Example A: Medieval Scholasticism which, if I’m remembering correctly, those quotes are directed.
Luther also says in the Disputation Concerning Man (1536),
- And it is certainly true that reason is the most important and the highest in rank among all things and, in comparison with other things of his life, the best and something divine.
- It is the inventor and mentor of all the arts, medicines, laws, and of whatever wisdom, power, virtue, and glory men posses in this life.
- By virtue of this fact it ought to be named the essential difference by which man is distinguished from the animals and other things.
- Holy Scripture also makes it lord over the earth, birds, fish, and cattle, saying, “Have dominion” [Gen. 1:28].
- That is, that it is a sun and a kind of god appointed to administer these things in this life.
- Nor did God after the fall of Adam take away this majesty of reason, but rather confirmed it.
@swamidass Luther’s take on reason seems to be paradoxical as well!
The Pew research data is shocking to say the least. Particularly when one looks at how much publicity AiG gets through our various media outlets. I’ve personally heard sermons that take special moments to remind the laity that they should not be buying into various evolutionary scenarios. I’m not sure that the educational data on evolution and the LCMS is a paradox in the sense that we like to employ paradox to understand theology. The two natures of Christ is a paradox as scripture speaks as if Jesus was man and Jesus was God, thus we hold our reason silent, captive to the word of God. The discrepancy between pastor and laity is not paradoxical in that sense (logical), it is more a surprising find when one takes a moment to look away from the official position of the LCMS to what people in the pews actually believe.
Also, now that I think about it, did the data make any distinctions between church workers and laity? Regardless, I (we) are in for some interesting times!
To be perfectly honest, I’m not sure that the LCMS is going to move anywhere closer to any sort of evolutionary scenario. @keiths is correct in his insistence that the going position is young earth and, perhaps evolution within kinds, but never between kinds. That being said, the direction that the LCMS has moved is to not even be able to discuss the relevant science as, for some reason, even discussing the science is tantamount to sinning. Thus, we find a false confidence in the work of others (e.g., AiG), instead of doing the more difficult task of engaging the science (and the scientists) directly to see where common cause may be made.
My $.02 on what good may come of your paper for the LCMS is something akin to Osiander and the work of Copernicus. What Osiander did in writing a forward for Copernicus’ book is to disarm immediate theological concerns so that the science (and theology) could be discussed in as open a manner as possible. I see the value of your paper in a similar fashion. Your carefulness with keeping scripture and key doctrines in tact, while at the same time promoting a deep commitment to evolutionary theory, should be intuitively troubling to a LCMS Lutheran. It goes against the standard narratives.
But, this is ultimately good for “us” as it requires us to engage the science and the theological thoughts in a way that the standard narrative(s) do not allow. We might be able to actually learn from evolutionary biology, while strengthening our theology, even without adopting your conclusions whole hog. It would be something akin to the way “we” treat Augustine on creation. “We” can’t confirm that Augustine’s view is true, in fact, we aren’t even sure it is scriptural. However, it is not heretical. You may be the closest I’ve seen to that sort of position with evolutionary biology. We might not be able to go along with you, but its possible that your position could be held while not being heretical.
And now for something completely different:
Yes. I admit that I am very interested in that as well. My younger self thought this awesome, my older self is curious how even my younger self would have, hmmm… kept going so to speak 
It must have something to do with the gift of Wisdom…
In all honesty, is there any sort of definitive book/research on Solomon and his concubines? I would love to try and get into the mindset of that little slice of biblical history.
@keiths and do you think that just because politician X says A that politician X actually means A? Of course there is more to the story! The problem is that we (LCMS) do not have a well-formed story to tell as we’ve relied on others (c.f., AiG) to tell the story for so long. In the 16th century, we created the story. In the 20th-21st century, we’ve let others (again AiG) manage our story (at least in terms of Christ/Culture, science/religion issues). This is that fundamentalist strand that @swamidass keeps mentioning. That statement on creation you keep bringing forward works with many different scenarios/interpretations of creation that we are officially silent on, but unofficially committed American fundamentalist.
Cheers!
P.S. - I can only imagine that others are viewing and reading this thread. I’m very interested in perceptions of Lutherans from other Christians (as well as @Patrick non-christians) as I’ve learned we are often an anomaly. I am LCMS and NOT representative of all Lutheran denominations, but if you’ve got questions that you were too polite to ask a Lutheran you may have bumped into on the street don’t be afraid to ask here. I’ll let you know if it is something that I do not know how to answer or wish not to answer. You can also check out the open office I’ll be helping out with regarding Crosswise. I can promise at least three Lutherans present at that time to answer any questions!