Monday, June 12, 2006

The Inheritors

There is only one basic theological problem that I have with Darwinian evolution and it is the one problem that evangelicals and fundamentalists never mention or with which they appear to ever have a problem. What is it?

The biological idea of “survival of the fittest” as coined by Herbert Spencer, which is better phrased as Darwin’s term of “natural selection” appears to be at odds with the Christian idea that “the meek shall inherit the earth” (Matt 5:5) which Jesus appropriated from Ps 37:11.

Now this idea of inheriting the earth or land is a diverse and complex cultural idea of the Ancient Near East. Many of the promises that God gave to Abraham and his descendents are based upon this idea of land inheritance (provided they honored the covenant, that is. If they didn’t honor the covenant they would be subject to the cherem (Mal. 4:6), which God did subject them to as the Apocalypse of John so records. God’s promises are often conditional. Most dispensationalists maintain that God always keeps His promises and therefore they attempt to find fulfillment of Israel’s inheriting the land within the millennial kingdom. But one of His promises is punishment for breaking the covenant. Also, God said He would destroy Nineveh in 40 days. However, Nineveh repented and God repented from destroying them. Did God break His promise? Of course not. And God did promise that if Israel did not repent they would face the cherem. Well?)

Of course, “natural selection” and “genetic drift” are far more complex factors than simple matters of biological aggression versus biological passivism. Our earliest known biological ancestors from the Cambrian explosion (between 542 and 530 million years ago) were both relatively small and defenseless when compared to those oceanic species which did not evolve into amphibious creatures. However, these earliest proto-human ancestors did have the uncanny ability to use their relatively small construction to hide in their environment and thus to allude extinction. Therefore, natural selection is not simply a matter of physiological strength and stamina.
William Golding as a good book called The Inheritors, which is about a group of passive Neanderthals which encounter and are destroyed by a group of hostile Homo Sapiens. Yes, the ironic title of the book is directed at the sayings of the Scripture. Whether or not Golding was attacking the Gospel I have no way of knowing. However, for those believers who hold to various forms of natural selection, Golding does raise a good point.

One of the odd, apparently conflicting and foolish, and even scandalous aspects of Christianity which is at the core and one of the foundations of its ethics is the strong focus on meekness, non-violence, humility, servanthood and peace. Our movement is founded on the Cross. The Cross is foolish and scandalous to mankind. The prior ethic of the Old Testament, the ethic of the world, and the laws of nature itself are “an eye for an eye”, dog-eat-dog world, the aggressive use of force, majority rule, competitive capitalism, the perils of the animal kingdom, and the food chain. Both nature, history provide overwhelming evidence that aggressive dominance is the supreme ethic of the universe. … And yet, the Creator of this universe, of this world, and of this natural ethic has broken into history and has spoken in the full revelation of His Son who comes to the rebellious humanity who were made in the image of the Creator, and says, “The Kingdom of God is here; it’s not going to be that way anymore.” And, thus, all of history, science and the political and military methods of this world are turned on their heads and somehow the meek do indeed inherit the earth.

It is unfortunate that so few believers have adopted these particular teachings of Christ (save Francis of Assisi and Martin Luther King and those like them). Just like the rest of humanity, they look around them and see the natural world and the political world expediently accomplishing their goals. They grow impatient with the steady progress of the kingdom and would rather see goals met by swift victory than by the individual-by-individual witness of believers to the Gospel message. Instead of sharing our faith, we prefer to codify our beliefs in the culture by laws and court rulings. We rather see a culture transformed in our lifetime than individuals transformed in the same time. We would rather see our political enemies punished and defeated than saved and renewed.

The disciples of Christ are still waiting for a political messiah: “When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6)

It is a supreme irony that so many faithful believers who accept evolution reject the “survival of the fittest” ethics while so many other faithful believers who reject evolution accept the “survival of the fittest” ethic. Of course, these are very general categories but none the less reflect a very true reality.

Regardless of differences in methodology and ethics, we all believe that God is and will win and purge the Creation from sin. We do believe that God is continual creative control and that the meek will in fact inherit the earth.

However, as the 1st century Jews and Jewish Christians discovered when they settled on nationalistic and politico-military solutions:

“He that troubles his own house shall inherit the wind: and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart.” (Prov 11:29)

No comments: