Forced to Choose: Science or Future With the Church

USA Today had a story this week about an Evangelical scholar who was forced out of his position with the church for posting a YouTube video about how he didn't deny evolution, and thought the church could run into trouble in the future by denying it.  Check out the story.  I'd love to show you the video but it had been taken down since he was asked to resign.  The organization that filmed it offers a more complete explanation here, and here's an excerpt of the description:

Waltke cautions, “if the data is overwhelmingly in favor of evolution, to deny that reality will make us a cult…some odd group that is not really interacting with the world. And rightly so, because we are not using our gifts and trusting God’s Providence that brought us to this point of our awareness.”
We are at a unique moment in history where “everything is coming together,” says Waltke, and conversations—like those initiated by BioLogos—are positive developments. “I see this as part of the growth of the church,” he says. “We are much more mature by this dialogue that we are having. This is how we come to the unity of the faith—by wrestling with these issues.”

The greatest thing about this in my opinion? DIALOGUE!  I heard about it on a radio talk show called Jon Grayson Overnight America.  I'll confess - I don't usually listen, but a friend texted me and told me Jon and his callers were having an incredible debate on the air about evolution. The host did a pretty good job of defending the scientific, even if he wasn't thrilled to be talking about such a serious topic on a normally "fluffy" show.  The conversation went on for almost the entire hour, and one caller -GET THIS- discussed the Creation movie!!!  That totally made my day!

S.A.M.

Classes announced! History Debunked??

I registered for next semester's classes on Friday - and I can't wait for September.  I am taking a class on the history of Christianity.  This is a straight-up anthropology course so no theology.  That will be a first for me.  I spent the first 13 years of my education in private Catholic schools, so I can't wait to finally have a "religion" class without the spin.  I hope we cover EVERYTHING - rejected books of the bible, the Crusades, the politics of the early popes.  I'm hoping this class WON'T be a breeze for me, though, because it could be an excellent opportunity to toughen up my organized religion debates.

Speaking of things like the Dead Sea Scrolls, Easter was a great day for the History Channel.  I had a hard time tearing myself away for the family dinner.  I was happy to watch some educational stuff about the actual history of the bible or cathedrals instead of just "Was Jesus Real??" features. 

One show I am NOT excited about watching on the History Channel: The Real Face of Jesus.  Um... hasn't the scientific community pretty much dismissed the shroud as a medieval fraud?  I could have sworn I actually saw the story of the debunking on the History Channel.  So why would a fake shroud reveal a real face?  I'm sure the technology is cool, but why not apply it to mummies or something?  This is definetely a step backward for the History Channel in my mind.  Next step - find another ark.  :(

S.A.M.

This is so disheartening.... (Also movie news!)

Check out this post from the blog "Small Dog. Big Stick." It is an explanation of the "true" story of creation.  If this was written by someone who truly believes it... wow.  There is no excuse to be so uneducated in this country.  I mean, this person isn't even educated in any church's (that I've heard of!) doctrine.  This is just a ridiculous, mean, mad-libs story.  Let's all hope this was just a prank.

HOWEVER, I think the chances of real sentiments such as those expressed in this letter would be greatly reduced if more people were exposed to the true stories of science, even in drama form.  ;)

Yes, Creation came.  I watched it immediately, of course!  My first impression:  What a sad tug-at-your-heartstrings story.  I was in tears at one point.  Darwin's struggle with the loss of his faith (and the loss of his daughter) was brilliantly tempered with his struggle to raise his children in a loving supportive way that was not the norm at the time.  I couldn't help but giggle at his daughter's joy when discovering a starfish - it was a portrait of a child's pure potential realized - a little girl learning. Scenes like that were set against a scene in which his doctor (which seemed to be one of the few fellow men of science whose opinion he trusted - in fact entrusted with his life) tells him his problem was a lack of faith.  I could imagine that he just had sickening feeling that he was completely alone in his struggle for his life - the he was the only one with enough of a scientific understanding of life to be responsible for his health.  Maybe he felt the guilt of taking his daughter to a doctor who was not all Darwin thought he had been.  The disappointment must have been excruciating.

In addition to the theological drama, the movie was filmed in a very compelling and haunting way.  The timeframe shifts, and you are never really certain if Anne is alive or dead, and you get the feeling that Darwin is experiencing the same incomprehension.

Really, it was an excellent true-story drama that was well-acted, well-produced and simply well-done.  I didn't find it any more controversial than an episode of House, and I really can't comprehend anymore what the problem is with releasing this movie.  It comes highly recommended by your Sweet Atheist Mistress.

S.A.M.

Some people cry over romantic movies... I cry over scientific ones.

A while ago, a friend told me that she heard an NPR interview about a movie depicting Charles Darwin's life. I was excited, but never heard anything more. I decided to try to find out what happened and I found this.

In a nutshell, it is an article from England about how no distributor in the US would TOUCH the movie Creation, fearing controversy and backlash. Yes, the life of a 19th century naturalist is way too hot for the American public to handle. This movie, which has gotten great reviews around the world, won't ever be seen or heard about by most Americans because we are so afraid of being offended (or confronted with a view that might clash with someone's religion) that we are doing a better job of censoring ourselves than the FCC. Think about it - we live in the country where a movie showing (in gory detail) the execution of Jesus Christ or a movie about college-age kids getting naked and sleeping with each other is acceptable. However, a scientist's struggle between science and faith is supposedly something we can't handle.

This isn't some B-movie or documentary that Americans wouldn't turn out for anyway. It stars a number of actors and actresses that Americans would recognize. The trailer looks like one of those big-grossing dramas about a family facing a difficult situation. It is a TRUE STORY, too. But apparently Americans can't handle reality.

The article cites a recent poll showing that less than 40% of Americans believe that evolution is true. I blushed with embarrassment when I read that. I have to wonder if this is how the rest of the developed world sees us - as a religious country that eagerly ignores modern science and facts in favor of the beliefs of centuries ago. I was ashamed to be lumped in with this. I talked to friends (who DO accept evolution as true - they are educated, after all) who were surprised with the statistic, and generally angry about the fact that they had never even heard about this movie that they can't see.

I can't find a region 1 DVD available anywhere online, but I'm efforting a blu-ray, and I plan to have a viewing party.

And I thought that shows like House and Bones were making progress... (sigh) Clearly, I have been overly-optimistic.

S.A.M.