This paper proposes that mutation and natural selection can produce biological change, but are not sufficient to explain the origins of biodiversity and complexity. Instead, the authors argue that genetic complexity is the result of intelligent design, and was at a maximum when life on Earth first came into being. Published in Origins v. 20, n. 2.
It is unwarranted to assume a priori, as in the past that all upright petrified trees had grown in the place where they are now found. The transport of trees and their deposition in an erect stance is not as unlikely or as rare as might be expected. Upright fossil trees within the geological column are compatible with a Flood model. Actually, when all factors are considered, a catastrophe involving water and many floating trees is a more satisfactory explanation for their origin.
The current scientific picture of the origin of the Universe seems at odds with the Genesis account. Is this a serious problem for those who believe the latter to be reliable? Are there ways to harmonize the two? Or should we be looking for alternatives to the so-called Standard Model for the origin of the Universe? Published in Origins v. 19, n. 1.
A recent survey shows about 9% of the population accepts the viewpoint of naturalistic evolution, about 40% accept divinely guided evolution, about 47% accept a recent creation of humans, and about 4% registered they don't know. These results are nearly the same as a similar survey taken three years before. Published in Origins v. 18, n. 2.
Assumptions may eventually become so widely accepted they are no longer recognized as assumptions but take the status of truth. Two examples that relate to origins are assumptions of abiogeneis and long ages. These points should not be assumed but tested if one wants to discover truth. Published in Origins v. 18, n. 1.
In this essay I have attempted to outline the world as it is, reality as it is perceived through the lens of science and scripture in terms of the concepts of order and chance.
The purpose of this paper to compare and contrast scientific and religious paradigms and their communities. Similarities include the fact that it is possible to analyze both in terms of the formal components of a paradigm, that a community is essential to both traditions, and that the intersubjective testing and universality, along with data and experience, are important for "rational objectivity" in both communities.
One day a minister said to me, "There seems to be a contradiction between chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis. Chapter 1 tells us that God created the animals first and then created man, but chapter 2 says that God created man before the animals. How do you ex plain this difficult problem?"
There is a need in Christian education for an integrational approach to the study of God and nature, and Christian educators should promote the integration of faith and learning.
The prepaternal data of Gen 5 and 11b were found to be artificial and unilaterally derivative; LXXA contained data which SP rearranged and the highly schematized MT later drew upon both LXXA and SP for its arrangement.
The creation accounts (Gen 1-2) coupled with the portrayal of disruption and divine judgment presented in Gen 3 have been described as of seminal character and determinative for a biblical theology of human sexuality.
The first two chapters of the Bible deal directly with the question of human sexuality. Not only is human sexuality presented as a basic fact of creation, but an elucidation of the nature of sexuality constitutes a central part of the Creation accounts.
Disagreements among creationists can lead to better understanding and improvement in creation thinking, and should not be ignored or regarded as an embarrassment. Creationists learn the same way as everyone else, and disputations are expected in the search for truth. Published in Origins v. 15, n. 1.
The translation of 1781 as the preposition "with" removes the anomaly of the stars being created on the fourth day of the creation week. It follows that the issue of the creation of the stars is not necessarily a specific topic within the horizon of the creation pericope of Gen 1:1-2:4a.
Belief in creation is far more widespread than the impression given in the mass media, and is increasingly coming to the attention of the scholarly community. The Bible and naturalistic science are both regarded as authoritative sources, and it is unlikely the conflict between them will go away soon. Published in Origins v. 14, n. 2.
Science has produced many wonders of technology and is probably the best place to start in the quest for understanding the physical world. However, it is limited in its scope, and is a bad place to end the quest. There is a realm of reality beyond the reach of science, and this realm is perhaps more important than the physical realm. Published in Origins v. 14, n. 1.
The US Supreme Court ruled that the Louisiana law requiring schools to present evidence for creation whenever they studied evolution is unconstitutional because it requires a religious idea be taught in public schools. Published in Origins v. 14, n. 1.
The practice of science does not depend on the beliefs a scientist has about origins. Creationists are able to conduct scientific research , and may even be aided by ideas that derive from the Bible. Conflicts may arise between science and religion, but this is an indication of the need for more study. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 2.
A review of the book, Abusing Science: The Case Against Creationism. The book gives responses to criticisms of evolutionary theory by creationists, and presents several criticisms of creation theory. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 2.
A collection of short commentaries on scientifc papers published in 1983-1985, covering topics such as amino acid dating, problems in evolutionary theory, God and the New Physics, Scientists Confront Creationism, transgenic mammals, philosophy of science, and In the Minds of Men. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 2.
