Evolutionary ethics properly
argues that there are biological reasons for ethical developments and
orientations in humans. Thus, moral sensitivity appears to be a biological
phenomenon, yet this alone does not explain particular or well defined moral
codes and configurations that have arisen in the human niche, nor does it help
us draw conclusions about right and wrong. So, there’s more. We’re also heavily
embedded in and dependent on context, culture, texts, and tradition, and
through these become interpreters of ourselves. These informers, which offer
some direction, are nevertheless so diverse and porous that we’re left having
to continually work out how to live with others in a shared world.
Monday, July 26, 2021
Reflection for the Week - July 26
Thursday, July 22, 2021
Thursday Thoughts - July 22
Monday, July 19, 2021
Reflection for the Week - July 19
Since we’re at a “defining moment” in the history of
Christianity, I’d wager it’s time for a re-examination of who God is and what
God does. Tread carefully, but tread we must. The biblical writers give an
Ancient Near Eastern or Greco-Roman picture of God, and their limited
understanding of the natural world had a significant influence on their
theologies. We are better informed today about nature, notably evolution, and
this can’t help but cause us to re-view the theologies of those who precede us.
Some of these may be worth holding on to, yet others will have to be let go of.
The days where the Christian faith attempted to stand on the biblical text
alone for its theology are over. It’s now just a matter of how long it will
take for Christians to accept this, consult multiple informers, and refigure
what they believe about God and the world.
Thursday, July 15, 2021
Thursday Thoughts - July 15
Science is fallible and sometimes gets it wrong. Granted. Some theologians use this as a foil to discount science all together, whenever it goes against their theology. “Oh yes” they quip, “science is often having to revise its findings, frequently changing its views, and therefore it’s untrustworthy.” But this is absurd. There is no reason to entirely discount the stable findings of science, many of which are not going to change. Furthermore, science is frequently self-correcting and capable of offering new and better understandings for where it was in error. Thus, theologians should stop making excuses for not accepting valuable scientific data concerning human evolution and the cosmos, and recognize its potential significance for and justified challenge of some of their theological interpretations regarding who God is and what God does.
Wednesday, July 14, 2021
Living Spiritual Rhythms - July 14
When reading about the world, Judaism, and resurrection in the biblical text, we must proceed with due caution. These topics cannot all be simply put in the same context because they are thought to be “Revelation,” but they have to be taken on an informational basis that is relevant to each particular subject. Genesis 1, for example, is not the same as Genesis 2-3. Exodus is different than Psalms. Isaiah is not like Proverbs. John is narrative, and Romans a letter. While this diversity of genres is accepted by most, there’s still some work to do in configuring how each of the subjects connects to the “world-views” of the times. Doing so will be one of things that might help us discern just how much of the biblical writings are to be directly applied to our own contexts, which remains an open and explosive hermeneutical question today.
Monday, July 12, 2021
Reflection for the Week - July 12
Wednesday, July 7, 2021
Living Spiritual Rhythms - July 7
Tuesday, July 6, 2021
Reflection for the Week - July 5