While we’re on this line of thinking, can you guys Interview Ken Ham from Answers in Genesis next? At Least the creation museum is willing to take their literalism all the way through to its logical conclusion

That accent makes Tom Wright sound like he’s saying something intelligent, doesn’t it? To me, his message is the same modernist apologetic reaction that we see at the creation museum. The bottom line is that he’s another modernist Evangelical trying to apply the label “history” to our sacred myths, as if history carries more weight than a story. Why can’t we let myths be myths? We might find that their meaning blossoms into full view. Why cling to the modern snobbery against myths, poems, parables, and art? Do we need to keep the modern bible wars going? Doesn’t he realize that binding the value of scripture to its historicity is actually dragging the whole story down the drain? Let it go, Tom! There is a better Christianity available on the other side of the modern fundamentalism/Atheism divide. Let’s get past it already. Tom seems like a nice guy, but I’m sure Ken Ham is nice too. Neither of them are doing our faith tradition any favors.

Was anyone else bothered by the Christian elitist stance Wright seems to suggest in the interview? I didn’t particularly care for Wrights shots at Bart Ehrman either. I’m not a big Ehrman fan, but he doesn’t come to his conclusions via “anger at his childhood faith”. He also isn’t “out of his area of expertise” when he talks about Christianity. Ehrman was an educated and experienced clergy member before becoming a religion professor. He does know what he’s talking about when he talks about the Christian faith and tradition.

Do you think affirming an eschatological hope with some confidence entails embracing divine omnipotence? Wright’s point on a consistent basis is that progressive types get rid of the eschaton and in doing so get rid of substantive connection to the religious vision of the New Testament.

“Doing justice, in whatever form, is always about anticipating in the present God’s eventual design to put the whole world to rights, to gather up all things in heaven and on earth into Jesus Christ (Ephesians 1.10). Though God will eventually do this completely and fully, he does not want the creation to lapse into complete chaos in the present age, and so calls into being structures of human government and authority to bring about a measure of order, some kind of anticipation of his eventual putting-to-rights of all things.”

So in NT’s theology, we can take our “little steps” towards bringing Heaven to Earth (like switching to fluorescent bulbs), but since “God will fix it” in the end, we don’t have to do the painful and costly steps to truly save our planet. (I picture a child slowly picking up a few toys here and there knowing that Mommy or Daddy will actually end up finishing the job.)

I think we need to move beyond this “omnipotent” idea of God towards that of a God in Relational Process that desperately NEEDS us to take our role here quite seriously (like a responsible adult rather than a child). It’s been 40 years since the first Earth Day and I don’t see us making a whole lot of progress towards a sustainable future, and I think our out-dated theology of this omnipotent God (who will fix things in the end) plays a large part in this.

Tom