Evolution, the Gospel, and the Baptist Press

Recently I have been tackling the issue of Evolution and Fundamentalistic Christianity. Actually, I have been wrestling with this issue for years now. Up until recently my focus has been on the belief that evolution and conservative Christianity are incompatible subjects. Since I believe that this is not the case I have sought to change the conservative Christian mindset on this subject. While I am in no way desiring that people should hold to evolution as I do, I do desire that conservative Christians at least allow other Christians to hold the theory of evolution without referring to them as liberal, errantists, or , even worse, unbelievers. This has been my goal.

However, two other aspects of this issue have gained my focus:

First, I am amazed that so many of our conservative leaders and scholars devote so much time to this issue. With all the problems in this world and in this country, it somewhat amazes me that people can spend so much time on this subject. Then again, what am I doing?

Perusing the various conservative leaders’ work on this subject, many of them see evolution as the source (or, at least, excuse) for all of modern life’s problems. Such is not the case but that is what many appear to believe publicly.

However, among the SBC leaders there have been two reasons given that we all should dislike about evolution. The first reason was given during the early days of the fundamentalist movement. Evolution was called a lie because it reduced man’s importance to the level of animal and denied he was made in the image of God. Such was not the case and this argument dropped by the wayside as the old fundamentalists did. However, the resurgence of fundamentalists into the SBC leadership under the dubious issue of biblical inerrancy precipitated a “revival” of the fundamentalist attack on evolution. This time the theory that had gained wide acceptance by the overwhelming majority of believers (including the majority of conservative believers) was being attacked on the basis of being contrary to the Bible, therefore, all who believed in evolution believed the Bible to be erring. Such was not the case but there you are. Now we are seeing a barrage of fundamentalist books and news stories articulating to the public and all the other Bible-believing Christians that evolution is contrary to the revealed Scriptures of the Creator.

The second aspect of this issue that has amazed me is one that has only recently come upon me.

Whenever I discuss this issue with other seminarians who are surprised at my belief in evolution and Biblical inerrancy, they almost always ask how I can agree with a theory that argues that man is not created in God’s image. I usually answer that I do not believe that the theory of evolution does contradict the revealed truth that humans are made in God’s image.

Yes, reasons Christians give for being against evolution are many: inerrancy, “miracle” creation, image of God … okay, the reasons are three. But there is one reason to be against evolution that I never hear from conservative Christians. Yes, I do have one problem with the theory of evolution that it is currently espoused.

In college, I read a book by William Golding called The Inheritors.

In this book, eight Neanderthals encounter another race of beings like themselves, yet strangely different. This new race, Homo sapiens, fascinating in their skills and sophistication, terrifying in their cruelty, sense of guilt, and incipient corruption, spell doom for the more gentle folk whose world they will inherit.

Now the subtle yet subversive point of this book is its title derived from the Bible, Matthew 5:5; this is the Sermon on the Mount, in which Jesus says, ‘Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.’

Yes, there is a real problem with the current theory of evolution that argues for “the survival of the fittest”. Now I happen to believe that there is a way around this problem but there is still an idea in our world that the strong inherit the earth. Now I do not necessarily blame Darwin for this belief. The history of humanity (and its pre-history) suggests that this world is run by the aggressive use of force. Darwinism did not event “survival of the fittest”; it merely found a naturalistic basis for it.

Yet, as the Sermon on the Mount illustrates, the kingdom of heaven is not of this world and is based on laws and rules and commandments at antithesis to the rules of this world. The kingdom is based on peace, meekness, patience, joy, love, poverty and such a kingdom comes at a snails pace but lasts for eternity. This world is based on war, brute force, impatience, misery, hate, wealth and such a world comes quick but lasts only a moment. The kingdom of God is totally at odds with this world and this is the good news. The Kingdom of Heaven has come and is coming and was inaugurated by the coming of its king, Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ-figure, the Son of Man, the Son of God, the Incarnated God-Man, and the kingdom will find its perfection when Jesus returns. The Kingdom of God IS the Gospel. And the fact that the kingdom of heaven was based on meekness and the like was foolishness to the Greek mind and a stumbling block to the Jews. Yet there it is.

And it is still foolishness to this world and much of the Church. It is amazing, ironic and sad that the most famous use of the rules of the Kingdom of God were applied by the Hindus and Muslims of India under Gandhi.

The most famous American example was by Baptist pastor Martin Luther King Jr.

Unfortunately, King appears to have been the last prominent liberal Christian to use the kingdom method. From the 19th century onward (and particularly today), the liberal wing of the American Church is more interested in pushing forward their agenda and the kingdom by means at odds with the kingdom. Very ironic.

And, unfortunately, much of the conservative wing of the American Church has never taken an interest using the kingdom methods. Each time the conservative churches have moved toward the kingdom of God, the fundamentalist wing has taken over and pulled them back. It is interesting that the conservative resurgence leaders used the most worldly of methods to get their way and now are trying, like the liberal churches, to push their vision of the kingdom upon the American culture. And it is failing as well.

Both groups suffer from impatience and the unwillingness to let the “foolish” methods of the kingdom bring the kingdom to this world. Unfortunately, the kingdom can only come by means of the kingdom. All other methods will fail.

Watching the fundamentalist leadership’s efforts of using brute force and overwhelming power to effect change for the kingdom of God is both sad and disheartening. It is painful to see people who are certainly believers and certainly members of the kingdom of God use the most un-gospel-like methods to proclaim the gospel … if, in fact, they do know what the gospel is.

So it does not surprise me at all that most conservatives do not see “survival of the fittest” as a problem with evolution. Most conservatives don’t see “survival of the fittest” as a problem with the gospel! The last 40 years of Southern Baptist History seems to suggest as much.

All of this is to say that I wanted to know how many articles in the chief Southern Baptist Convention news and propaganda outlet, the Baptist Press, mentions the subject of “evolution.” I was under the impression that they mention the subject a lot. It appears that at least once a week some article out of Southern Seminary will be about the evils of evolution. So I researched the past five years of the Baptist Press and found that they only mention evolution in Evolution – 250 articles. So, yeah, about once a week.

...

Then I thought … hmm, how many articles has the Baptist Press mentioned other subjects in the past five years.

For example:

How many articles mention the “gospel”? 4269

How many articles mention Jesus? 6339

How many articles mention Faith? 6008

How many articles mention God? 10851

How many articles mention the Bible? 5215

How many articles mention the Kingdom? 1699

How many articles mention Salvation? 1598

How many articles mention Grace? 1546

How many articles mention Sin? 1264

How many articles mention Evil? 766



So that’s all interesting, but ...


How many articles mention Abortion? 1232

How many articles mention Homosexuality? 885

How many articles mention Poverty? 370

How many articles mention the Supreme Court? 1352

How many articles mention Judge? 1148

How many articles mention the Courts in general - 2220



Interesting where our priorities are located, but …


How many articles mention Republicans? 745

How many articles mention Democrats? 502



Okay, but ...


How many articles mention the Resurgence? 217

How many articles mention Liberal? 791

How many articles mention Conservative? 1386

How many articles mention Moderate? 341




But we are a Christian group standing on the shoulders of giants, so ...



How many articles mention Luther? 223

How many articles mention Calvin? 129

How many articles mention Barth? 8

How many articles mention Augustine? 50

How many articles mention Kierkegaard? 2

How many articles mention Niebuhr? 6

How many articles mention Darwin? 76



Okay, let’s delve a bit deeper ...


How many articles mention Dr. Al Mohler? 709

How many articles mention Dr. XXXXXX? 678

How many articles mention Dr. XXXXXX? 38

How many articles mention Judge Paul Pressler? 61

How many articles mention Bobby Welch? 330

How many articles mention Rick Warren? 384

How many articles mention John Piper? 72



I won’t interpret this data; you can do that on your own. I am just relieved that evolution is not as big an issue as I feared. That’s good news.