In the middle of the twentieth century, two
men shared a deep friendship, based on their mutual love of Christ and belief
in the Scriptures: Charles (Chuck)
Templeton, and Billy Graham. Odds are
you have heard of the latter; probably not the former. Chuck
Templeton was nonetheless someone to whom the young Billy Graham looked up (as
Billy admits in his autobiography). They shared rooms together as
well as their dedication to Jesus and their determination to preach the
Gospel. Together Billy and Chuck worked
with the early “Youth for Christ” movement, and when Billy was about to go on
stage to preach the Gospel to 20,000 teens in a Youth for Christ rally in the
Chicago Stadium in 1945, he leaned over to Chuck saying to his buddy, “Pray for
me Chuck; I’m scared to death.” Chuck
did.
Nonetheless,
Chuck and Billy eventually chose very different roads. Chuck attended Princeton Theological
Seminary, and was exposed there to the biblical liberalism then sweeping
through the theological colleges of America.
For him, the supposed conflict between Science and Religion loomed very
large. The front line then was the
account of creation in the Book of Genesis and its supposed incompatibility
with Science. Chuck remonstrated with
his old friend, “Billy, it’s simply not possible any longer to believe the
biblical account of creation. The world
was not created over a period of days a few thousand years ago; it has evolved
over millions of years. It’s not a
matter of speculation; it’s a demonstrable fact.” In his autobiography, Graham recounted that
he honestly struggled with the arguments of his friend, finally resolving the
conflict by simply taking the historical reliability of the Genesis account, as
he says, “on faith”.
Billy
Graham never looked back, which is in part why we all recognize his name. It was otherwise with Chuck. His studies at Princeton, coming after his
fundamentalist upbringing, led him inescapably to the conclusion that the Bible
was wrong. Being a man of integrity he
resigned his evangelistic ministry, and began a new life and job in the secular
world. He became famous in that world as
a broadcaster with Pierre Burton on CFRB radio in Toronto, and published a book
outlining his life story, entitled appropriately enough Farewell to God. After a
struggle with Alzheimer’s disease he died in 2001, after confiding in a
journalist, “I miss Jesus.”
Standing
at a distance from both men, I think I can see both what they shared in common as
well as the matters in which they differed.
As men born and bred in Protestant fundamentalism, both equated “truth”
with “historical truth as currently defined by historians”. That is, the Bible story about (for example)
Jonah was true, and therefore the story about Jonah must be historically true
in the sense that present day historians define historical truth. The story of Jonah cannot be historical
fiction, or allegory, or parable, or anything other than a recounting of
historical events according to the present journalistic canons for accurate
reporting, otherwise it would not be true.
Both men applied this
understanding of truth in their interpretation of the entire Bible, including
the creation accounts of Genesis. Billy
looked at these Genesis accounts and the differences from them in the accounts
of modern science, saw the discrepancies, and rejected “on faith” the
conclusions of modern science. Chuck saw
the same differences and the same discrepancies, and rejected the Bible in the
name of modern science. Neither man was
prepared to question their equation of “truth” with “historical history as
defined by modern historians”. And that
is too bad. Resisting the equation
might have secured a greater measure of credibility for Billy. And it might have allowed Chuck to retain a
belief in the authority of the Bible, and to remain in the Christian Faith. Maybe Chuck needn’t have missed Jesus after
all.
The
tale of the two evangelists is a cautionary tale. Perhaps confession of the Bible as the
authoritative and infallible Word of God doesn’t necessarily commit one to
belief in the creation of the earth “over a period of days a few thousand years
ago” after all. Chuck probably would
have said that he left the Christian faith because he didn’t want to become a
victim of fundamentalism. The irony is
that in his rejection of the Faith he was a victim of such a fundamentalism
after all.
Research suggests that people who rely on intuition are generally more religious than people who rely on logical reason. That could explain the findings of another study that found a difference between religious belief and factual belief. It is this difference that allows people to hold religious beliefs that conflict with their factual beliefs. Billy Graham was demonstrating religious belief in the Bible stories.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2014/10/20/357519777/are-factual-and-religious-belief-the-same?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social