Wasn’t tired last night and the Biffster wanted to hang with me, so around 12:30 I picked up a new book called ‘The Story of Everything’ by John Kotre. It’s a small book (I was done in about 90 minutes); it’s billed as, “A parable of Creation and Evolution”. I’m throwing in a few spoilers here and there below, but I’m leaving the most significant revelation for you to discover for yourself. His two main characters are Adam – who we follow through the book as he grows from boy to mature adult – and an entity called ‘The Story’.
In one way it’s a sad little tale about a gifted boy who loses his grandfather (he dies), grows up to be a young man who loses his wife and son (she leaves him), then loses his dream – and at the end of his working life is still trying to find the point of it all – to make his mark on life and apply his gift. Or the story could be about the idea that, if you’re an otherwise ordinary person who has been given an incredibly huge gift, it might be a talent just too big for you to exercise.
But I don’t think either of those points are the central theme here – nor, for that matter, is the conflict between the creation and evolution parties in all its stupid, pointless anger, stubbornness, reactionary-ism and iconoclasty-ness.
First of all, Kotre is simply trying to point out that, contrary to popular thought, belief does not necessarily change as our understanding changes. Passionate flat-world thinking gave way to the round earth as we learnt more; an Earth-centric perspective eventually gave way to an understanding of planets in orbit. And in both cases, the church held the former view and fought the latter vigorously. Also in both cases, the change in understanding in no whit lessened humanity’s belief in God.
Secondly, even if belief did change our perception of God and His Purpose and Creation, it doesn’t change the reality of what God, His Purpose and His Creation are all about. In the same way, he says, it may be inevitable that creationist thinking will eventually give way to evolutionary thinking. And if so, then the church, like the rest of the world, will move past this issue and get on with life.
Although it’s clear that the entity called Story is sentient (it has a house and can purchase books and software), it’s difficult to reconcile just exactly what story we’re talking about. When we first meet it, we’re told very clearly that the Story is the Bible. It looks at a very old book it owns and remembers being printed onto the book’s pages. As time goes on, however, it remembers earlier versions of itself, back to papyrus and clay (so it clearly isn’t the Bible, which was never stored in cuneiform on clay), and eventually even to oral traditions. This leads us to the possibility that this could be the story of ‘Everything since the Beginning of Existence’, and the Story simply forgot about the earlier bits; just as for a long time people believed the Bible was the story of everything, so Story went along with them and believed that about itself too. Finally, near the end of the book, we come to find out that Story is really Adam’s – what – imagination? World understanding? The key to making sense of the talent he was given? Something along those lines.
Thirdly, Kotre is saying that this new perspective will change as well; that there will be other passionately-held beliefs that will be eroded and will eventually change the landscape. It’s clear from the central character’s words at the end that this is wisdom he is passing on.
I found the book to be easy to read, well-written from the story-telling perspective. It’s evident that the writer is as fed up with the Creation vs Evolution debate as I am, and he’s trying to put it into perspective with this tale. A parable over-simplifies the reality in order to reveal the core components to explain their true relationship. I think that this parable certainly glosses over much of the complexity to achieve that end. But unlike most parables, it also muddles things up a bit. If Story truly is the Bible then it’s difficult to see why it is saying it was wrong – the Bible, whatever humans believe, claims to be inerrant. Or was Story itself supposed to be evolving here? From the Bible to the story of all Creation? In which case it’s hardly a positive move to go from everybody’s story of Everything to just one person’s understanding of ‘How It All Fits Together’.
I’m also uncomfortable comparing the ‘flat Earth’ belief (which had already been disproven by Aristarchus and is not found in the Bible) to the account of creation (which clearly is in the Bible). I’m even less comfortable with the logic that, since conquering the flat-Earth and Earth-centric views didn’t result in sudden widespread disbelief, then conquering the creationist view won’t either. We’re in a different era from the flat-Earth, and peoples’ irritation over church issues are being inflamed by their personal beliefs over the issue – creation/evolution is not only a divisive issue, it has become a catalyst to division, in a way that the other ideas never did.
However: I thought the first ending (on the plane) was quite interesting – resequencing perception can often lead to deep insights. And the second ending (at home afterward) was good too. I do like a good redemption to a story! All in all, a pretty good read.
by Larry Osborne (@LarryOsborne). When I started I was very resistant to his idea of small groups following the sermon each week. It seemed to be very limiting; if you were into something else (a book-by-book Bible study, for instance, or following a great speaker’s videos and discussing them (my small group has just finished Mark Batterson’s 
and is now on his 
)), then you were in the position where the church was pretty much dictating what your group should study.
, which notes that Granger Community Church takes almost the exact opposite view of small groups. The mindset is the same however, and as noted above, Osborne makes the point that no one way is correct for every church.
Mike Killiany (Mike Roots)
fred
Frank Ramsey
