"Defending Sin" by Hans Madueme. A Review (original) (raw)
Biblical and scientific experts (all of them young-earth creationists) defend the literal truth of Genesis about Adam and Eve. They survey biblical, theological, paleontological, genetic, anatomical, archeological, historical, and social evidences and arguments to present their case. The book is designed to be used as a textbook in seminary but also to be understandable to thoughtful lay people who want to dig deeper.
Didaskalia, 2016
Evangelicalism is presently divided upon the nature of the relationship between theology and science. In many circles, evangelical receptivity toward evolutionary creationism is held in suspicion. In this paper, I argue that modern scientific discoveries do not, of necessity, impinge upon the authority of Scripture. Benjamin B. Warfield serves as an example for future interdisciplinary dialogue by affirming the truthfulness of Scripture and appropriating a theistic form of evolutionary theory—a form which establishes God's supernatural intervention in the creative process and eschewed the naturalism commonly associated with Darwin's theory. Warfield's engagement with science was governed by his doctrine of divine inspiration. Therefore, he embraced evolutionary creationism insofar as it corresponds to and illuminated the Scriptures. Warfield's theological reflection and integration of the natural sciences ought to inform the present controversy within evangelicalism. Theologians may advance the discussion through selfless scholarship, epistemological openness, and serious engagement with general revelation, God's book of nature, and special revelation, God's book of Scripture.
Book Review: God's Design for Man and Woman
2015
The contributors to Adam, the Fall, and Original Sin rightly maintain the traditional view of the historicity of Adam and the entry of sin into the world through him. However, the account displays three weaknesses. First, the inerrant authority of Scripture is sometimes interpreted as entailing that the Ancient Near Eastern context of Genesis sheds no light on how it should be read. Second, the question of why humans are justly condemned for the sin of Adam is never answered. Third, no ground for dialogue with science is provided. It is more successful in indicating what we should affirm than in grappling with the difficulties of affirming it.
For a growing number of self-identified evangelical interpreters of Scripture - that is those with a high view of the authority of Scripture - the truth of modern science, specifically Darwinian evolution, and modern historical criticism of the Bible can no longer be denied. This has necessitated a rethinking about how we understand and teach about human origins. If it is now nearly beyond doubt that humans share in a universal common descent with other animals and therefore can't have descended singly from one male and one female, and if the story of creation in Genesis one and two is an artifact of common creation stories in the ANE , how does the story of Adam and Eve function as a normative foundation story for the people of God? What relevance does it have? In this essay, I present Dietrich Bonhoeffer's approach to Adam and Eve as a model to evangelical Christians who are searching for help to appropriate Adam and Eve faithfully for a canonically oriented, robust biblical theological anthropology in light of the truths of science and historical criticism.
Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 2016
In the March 1991 edition of this journal, I published an article titled "Genesis on the Origin of the Human Race." In that piece, I took the position that Genesis sees humans as essentially religious beings, a nd I went on to argue that this means that the origin of the human race is identical with the origin of religious consciousness in creatures. I still think that is correct. However, in that same article, I also took the position that the Adam of Genesis 2 was the fi rst religious being on Earth, and was therefore the fi rst human and the ancestor of all other humans. In short, I was still under the Augustinian spell of seeing Genesis 2 as a second creation story, contrary to an important rabbinical tradition I have discovered since then. The following article presents the reasons why I am now forced to rescind my earlier position. In what follows, I will show why the Hebrew text does not present Adam and Eve as either the fi rst humans or the ancestors of all humans, and that the New Testament actually denies both those claims. Neither can I any longer agree with Augustine's view that Genesis presents Adam and Eve as created sinless so that their fall from grace is the origin of sin in the world. That runs counter to a longstanding rabbinical tradition as well as to the Eastern Orthodox Christian understanding. It is owing to Augustine's great infl uence, I believe, that we tend to read such claims into Genesis, and are blinded to some crucial parts of the New Testament that could correct them. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith Article Reading Genesis between Genesis and the results of contemporary science. 2 I must say, however, that if these clergy and scholars have good reasons for thinking there is no such confl ict, they have done an extremely poor job of communicating those reasons to the lay members of their churches. The average lay worshipper knows only that whenever naturalists can get a voice in the popular media, they proclaim that science has disproven what Genesis teaches and so conclude that the scriptures teach falsehood. Since the average layperson is utterly unprepared to meet this challenge, I hope to show here how that can be remedied. One fi nal word before launching my canoe into this (un)Pacifi c Ocean: Augustine prefaced his commentary on early Genesis with the remark that the only interpretations he was sure were wrong, were ones that said "only my view can be right." I second that sentiment. What follows is but one Christian's take on the subject, offered in the hope that it may help others who are struggling with the same issues. Therefore, what is most important is not whether my readers fi nd every interpretation I propose to be correct in every detail. Rather, it is whether exposing the false assumptions behind the fundamentalist agenda can help clear the way for understanding Genesis on its own terms and with respect to its own purposes.
Books at a Glance, 2018
Denis Lamoureux, a Canadian Evangelical who occupies an extraordinary teaching role at St. Joseph's College in the University of Alberta, is convinced that he has the remedy for the growing number of university students who defect from the Christian faith when they encounter the overwhelming evidence for evolution. He insists that it is necessary to relieve young people from the unwarranted conflict between Christian faith and evolutionary science with which their churches, pastors, Sunday-school teachers, Christian school teachers, and their own parents have burdened them. What is the solution he proposes to relieve this conflict? This Associate Professor of Science and Religion is a passionate apologist for his cause; he believes that Christian young people, from their formative years through high school, are not being taught fairly the range of views concerning origins. As he sees it, one view, "the literalism and scientific concordism of young earth creation," has been forced upon young people (p. 180). So, he is convinced and endeavors to convince others that to preserve the Christian faith of university students it is necessary to make it safe for Christians to embrace evolution as factually right, even indubitably true. Thus, he wrote Evolution: Scripture and Nature Say Yes! To meet Denis Lamoureux is to encounter a man exuberant and passionate about this cause. Hence, the bold title. Does he really believe that both Scripture and nature affirm that evolution took place? It is an audacious and provocative title that poses a daunting if not impossible task. Who can demonstrate that both Scripture and the corporeal realm advocate evolution? Such is a massive endeavor for one even with his credentials and impressive resumé. Lamoureux admits the title overreaches with provocation. Summary of the Book Lamoureux presents his experience as paradigmatic concerning most young people among North American Evangelicals who are trapped between two antithetical belief systems concerning origins: "either atheistic evolution or creation in six days." The first two chapters recount his own journey that reflects his dichotomous thinking when he entered college. Convinced that he was inadequately taught, he found himself without any capability to defend his faith when confronted with contrary beliefs. So, as a college freshman he began to forsake his Christian rearing, abandoning belief in the Genesis account of creation, no longer attending church, and vehemently defending evolution. By the close of the first year he spurned the God of Christianity. While in dentistry school he became an agnostic and then an atheist. Upon graduation and serving as a military dentist, Lamoureux plunged into godless living and debauchery until, while serving as a UN peacekeeper in Cyprus, he repented and returned to the Christian faith.
Journal of Biblical and Theological Studies (JBTS) is an academic journal focused on the fields of Bible and Theology from an inter-denominational point of view. The journal is comprised of an editorial board of scholars that represent several academic institutions throughout the world. JBTS is concerned with presenting high level original scholarship in an approachable way. Academic journals are often written by scholars for other scholars. They are technical in nature, assuming a robust knowledge of the field. There are fewer journals that seek to introduce biblical and theological scholarship that is also accessible to students. JBTS seeks to provide high-level scholarship and research to both scholars and students, which results in original scholarship that is readable and accessible. As an inter-denominational journal, JBTS is broadly evangelical. We accept contributions in all theological disciplines from any evangelical perspective. In particular, we encourage articles and book reviews within the fields of Old Testament, New Testament, Biblical Theology, Church History, Systematic Theology, Practical Theology, Philosophical Theology, Philosophy, and Ethics. Please see the guidelines for submission at jbtsonline.org. Since JBTS is a broadly evangelical journal there will often be a variety of views that are represented that align with the evangelical Christian faith within each journal issue. The views expressed by contributors are not necessarily the views of the editors or the institutions that they represent.