I have mixed reactions to this article.
On the one hand, I respect RTS's right to govern what is taught in their classes. I think they (along with every seminary and Christian higher education institution) have a duty to the church and to God to preserve the truths of Scripture and equip the church's leaders to be lovers of truth and shepherds of people.
On the other hand...
- This issue was not brought up in an RTS class. It was not being taught as what the students "should believe." And even if it were brought up in class, being a lover of truth means understanding concepts that you don't agree with.
- Evolution is a very nonessential issue, and not one worth losing a valued colleague over. RTS has promoted the cone of certainty for so long... Have they decided to abandon it?
- What kind of example/precedent does this set? Who else at RTS is in danger of falling out of favor? How should church's who value RTS as a spiritual & intellectual trendsetter react to similar viewpoints among their leaders & congregation?
- If this professor is worried about the church losing its relevance... Shouldn't he be encouraged for his concern and willingness to step out on the prophet's limb?
Brian- some really good questions here. Overall, I've heard that Waltke's ongoing professional association with Biologos is part of the problem.
ReplyDeleteAnd, from what I've heard, it seems some RTS people want to figure out where that line might be regarding creationism and evolution in light of RTS being a confessional seminary.
Overall, really, really sad that it had to come to this. Especially in light of Waltke's concern that evangelicals are just afraid of talking about and engaging this subject, or even science in general. It seems that maybe there's a basis for that fear after all…