As a scientist, I frequently find myself taking a polemic stance in defense of creationism. In doing this, I easily lose sight nature as a revealer of its Creator. It is a pleasant change to contemplate my field of scientific interest, looking for insight about the Creator.
As biological knowledge has increased, the argument for design has been revived and expressed in more sophisticated ways, such as the argument from “irreducible complexity.” The existence of certain features that could not survive in intermediate stages is evidence of a Designer. It is also evidence of a Designer God who created by special intervention—Creation—and not through a continuous process such as evolution.
An examination of archaeological evidence, linguistics, and literary traditions shows that a local Mesopotamian river valley flood cannot adequately explain the biblical flood.
An examination of archaeological evidence, linguistics, and literary traditions shows that a local Mesopotamian river valley flood cannot adequately explain the biblical flood.
The seven biblical principles discussed in this article regarding the effect of sin on nature show how the Christian may discern God’s loving character in nature and also the marks of Satan’s activity.
Science and scripture are generally in agreement. Nonetheless, believing scientists will necessarily encounter tension between science and scripture. Ultimately, however, nature is a grand subject for study, and science, guided by scripture, can be an appropriate method for studying it. It is therefore perfectly appropriate, even desirable, for Adventists to participate in science.
While we keep fitting pieces into the puzzle of nature, we should be aware that we are only working on a small corner and that the hope of dropping in the last piece is beyond our grasp.
Frequently press reports describe the finding of bones and fossils of animals that existed millions of years ago. As a Bible-believing Christian and a creationist, my impression is that they can’t be that old. But I’m not sure. How can scientists determine the age of those specimens? How reliable are their dates?
The doctrine of Creation occupies an important place in Seventh-day Adventist message and mission. The reason for this is twofold: First, Adventists believe in a fiat Creation; and second, they are committed to the proclamation of the three angels’ message of Revelation 14.
Any credence given to the study of mathematics must recognize that God is the original mathematician. And though, through the ages, humankind has experimented to be able to draw conclusion in the areas of mathematics, God's laws are error-free and constant. His everlasting watch-care in the "natural" cyclic phenomena of this earth daily prove His mathematical supremacy. Galileo is remembered for having acknowledged that "mathematics is the language that God used to create the universe."
Given the current database on fossil hominids, caution is warranted. Indeed, it would be premature to draw any definitive conclusions with regard to the origins of these organisms and their relationship to the Genesis record.
This descriptive analysis provides a comprehensive and wholistic view of Creation in the Book of Psalms.
Long ago, the Psalmist recorded a gem of inspiration: "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands." Nature calls us to recognize its Creator and nature invites us to probe its mysteries. Within the context of that call and that invitation, there need be no conflict between biblical Christianity and science, between faith and reason. A scientist can indeed be a Christian.
Darwin's theory is in crisis. The academic ball is in its court. What will the Adventist ministry speak in response? The general community, for the time being at least, is listening.
Ancient fossil reefs are considered to be a challenge to the biblical concept of creation. But do these fossil reefs really negate the biblical account of beginnings? Published in Origins v. 21, n. 2.
An analysis of Genesis chapter 1 is not as simple and straightforward as a casual reading of the biblical text may suggest. Modern interpretation of biblical cosmogony (understanding of origins) in Genesis 1 is extremely complicated, divided between the non-literal and the literal. We will briefly describe seven such interpretations, and evaluate each in the light of the biblical data.
This paper suggests that from its beginning, science has been one of those factors informing the Christian understanding of human and Divine causality. We conclude that the new physics suggests a wide-open universe in which the interaction of a Creator-Sustainer god can be postulated with far less confrontation with rational and scientific views of the natural order than was the case with the older Newtonian worldview.
Coconino Sandstone research has demonstrated how catastrophists can use their theory to develop specific hypotheses about a geologic feature (the Coconino Sandstone), and successfully carry out scientific research to test that hypothesis. This is one criteria that science used to determine the scientific value of any theory.
Now is the time to tremble at the words of the God of Israel, particularly in the creation and flood narratives, and not to tremble at the words of Darwin, whose theory is in crisis.
A structural study of Genesis chapters 2 and 3 reveals the presence of a chiasm in the narrative and strongly suggests the unity of the story as argued by scholars.
