Here is my sermon for June 7. The text was Genesis 1:1-2:4a:
Last week I said that Peter’s line that the disciples aren’t drunk
because it was only 9 am was one of my favorite, but the opening line from
today’s Genesis passage is one of the most important in scripture, because it
proves that baseball is the greatest sport there is, because God starts the
creation in the big inning. Perhaps it’s also a sign that maybe the season will
start soon. But the opening line here is probably one of the most famous in
scripture, although what we have in Christianity, is more than likely a
mistranslation. The Jewish Publication Societies translation, as other Jewish translations
say, “when God began to create heaven and earth,” which might be more accurate,
but it ruins my baseball joke, and so we’ll pretend as if it’s not there. This
is the first of two creation stories in the Bible, and they are very different
stories, as we will see, and contain different reasons for being and different
understandings of God, and we’ll explore some of them over the next two weeks.
But the simple fact that there are two different creation stories, telling of
creation in different ways, should eliminate most of the arguments that we have
about the Bible verses evolution.
But, unfortunately it doesn’t, and I can’t say why, but for simplicity
sake, and I know this won’t be a problem for most watching today, you can
indeed both be a Christian and believe in evolution. They are not incompatible
ideas, and we’ll touch only briefly on this, but the earliest church’s
opposition to evolution came not because of contradiction with scripture but
because of the idea of social Darwinism, or survival of the fittest in
humanity, which still exists today, which argued that he poor, handicapped,
criminals, and others deemed unworthy, or unimportant by society should be
weeded out, allowed to die, or purposely killed in order to protect humanity as
a species. In arguments saying that we should just let senior citizens die
so that we can get the economy going again is a social Darwinist argument, and
something, I hope, that we find morally repugnant. But, that’s a different
message for a different day.
