What Does the Fossil Record Tell Us?
There is broad agreement among Christian earth scientists who trust the biblical account that the general aspect of the fossil record is catastrophic—one of destruction and death.
There is broad agreement among Christian earth scientists who trust the biblical account that the general aspect of the fossil record is catastrophic—one of destruction and death.
To interpret Genesis 2:17 as announcing natural consequences instead of a juridical penalty ignores the overwhelming biblical evidence of how authors used the phrase in question throughout the Old Testament. As such, the natural consequences interpretation seems to establish human arbiters as higher authorities than the text to determine its truthfulness and relevance.
In discussions of science and faith, one often gets the impression that either science or Scripture can be believed—not both. In the secular world, science is by default seen as the true source of knowledge.
For a large part of the 20th century, there was much discussion about evolution’s difficulty in explaining altruism. This was an important, unsolved problem.
Scientists applying the scientific method while using similar equipment to study the same aspect of nature can and do arrive at different conclusions. Why does this occur?
If we had perfect knowledge, our science and our theology would never be in conflict because the same God who reveals Himself through Scripture has also revealed Himself through creation, and God is not in conflict with Himself. Thus, when we see conflict between our best theology and our best science, this is merely an indication of our lack of complete understanding.
Truly, in our planet, life is everywhere. And without water, this profusion of life would not be possible. In the battle over origins, Darwinism cannot offer a convincing explanation when advocating for the random emergence of life and matter, including water.
Recently, the city buses in my neighborhood gained a new set of brightly-colored advertisements along their sides. In bold letters, they proclaimed that humans and chimpanzees are 98% identical: “Come and meet your relatives.”
The first reason that what we believe about Creation matters is that the Bible sets forth a clear position on it; and the Adventist Church accepts Scripture as authoritative. A second reason why it matters what we believe about Creation follows the first naturally: Jesus had a position on Creation, and the church’s position should be in harmony.
While Dembski’s position is that Intelligent Design is a scientific rather than a religious concept, in actuality his proposal falls within Berkouwer’s problem of the immortal soul.
One would be exegetically blind to not see differences between the first (Gen 1:1–2:4a) and the second (Gen 2:4b-25) Genesis creation accounts. Do they stand in opposition to each other?
The ‘genre’ of Genesis 1 has long been debated, with approaches centering largely on traditional form criticism. From a textlinguistic perspective—especially examining such elements as clause types, word order, grounding, lexical repetition, prose particles, and linear structuring—this study argues that the first pericope of the Hebrew Bible is better read as a historical narrative text type in its own right. Article originally published on Valley View University Journal of Theology 1 (2011): 18-35.
Many of us struggle to correlate catastrophe and the Creator – and perhaps never more frequently than now.
In spite of some interpretative difficulties with Gen 1:1-3, the main message and intent of the author are clear: God is the Creator of the heavens and earth, i.e., the whole universe and the ultimate source of life. The creation process was done by his special intervention.
To understand how human beings acquire and evaluate knowledge, and how to determine what is true involves consideration of the relationships between data, interpretations, assumptions, and worldviews. All of these contribute to the scholarly search for truth, and none can be safely ignored.
In a "land of plenty" it is not easy to be motivated about being fugal with the earth's abundant treasures. Yet, when God brought the children of Israel to the "Promised Land," He carefully instructed them on good ecology.
We have no information in Scripture as to how long ago God created the universe as a whole. But there is evidence strongly suggesting that the Creation week described in Genesis was recent, some time in the past several thousand years, and not hundreds of thousands.
The whole purpose of the great controversy scenario is to vindicate God from the responsibility for the evil that theistic evolution attributes to Him by virtue of how He created.
The focus of this article is on Genesis 1. The most crucial questions which are persistently raised will be considered, including the relation of v. 1 to the rest of the chapter, the meaning of the terms "deep" (v. 2) and "expanse" (vv. 6-8), and, finally, the creation of light on the first day with the somewhat oblique references to the sun, moon, and stars on the fourth day.
While science has been associated with “reason” and thus is expected to be reasonable, creationism has been associated by many with “faith,” and thus seems to be incompatible with anything “reasonable.” But biblical faith, in this case faith in creation, is “reasonable” in the sense that it is not mythical and/or irrational; on the contrary, it presents historical (the Bible is also a historical document), natural and sensible evidence for its claims.