Seventh-day Adventist schools and colleges were founded by a church concerned to provide an education that did not alienate its children from their Biblical beliefs and Christian worldview. I believe that Adventist educators must become evangelists for Biblical theism.
Historians of science have suggested that the Judea-Christian environment of western Europe and the belief in a monotheistic God were responsible for the development of modem science in that culture. Today students can still see that Christianity and physics are compatible and that similar assumptions underlie both.
Zoology and genetics are required courses for biology majors. Both subjects are usually structured around the theme of the theory of evolution. A careful examination of the scientific basis of these disciplines shows that the evolutionary framework doesn't fit with a lot of their fundamental aspects, however. Some of these topics even constitute strong evidence in favor of intelligent design.
If the stranglehold of naturalism can be weakened enough for open discussion of the philosophical issues, the resulting open-minded discussion of design vs. chance will be very beneficial to science. There is a great need of this openness in science. Science should be an open-ended search for truth, rather than a closed system that will not consider certain ideas.
Science and Scripture are built, according to Boyle, on the same epistemological features of revelation, reason, and experience but with different relative contributions from each.
Science/religion issues are important because they have to do with ultimate realities, with whether to "worship" the Creator or the creature (creation), with whether a supreme being is above the creation and can supernaturally intervene.
Could not God have used the process of natural selection to create living organisms? What evidence might one use to answer that question? Published in Origins v. 25, n. 2.
Modern cosmology, represented by the Big Bang theory, may have its virtues in explaining numerous aspects of the physical, inanimate universe, but that it is a poor model when it comes to explaining everything, and that it leaves too many of our questions unanswered.
This brief monograph was written to champion the views of a minority in the scientific community. This minority holds that it is possible to accept this ancient report of Earth's creation at face value — and still be a true scientist. But the main purpose is to go a step further. It will be argued that a close examination of life can lead observers to the logical conclusion that life itself is an actual evidence for creation. Published in Origins v. 25, n. 1.
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.
It must be emphasized that Chemistry, like any other area of scientific knowledge, is neither good nor bad, but like everything else that was marred by the entrance of sin, man's ability to manipulate his environment has led to misuse. Instead of giving in to technicism, where technology sets the agenda for life on planet Earth, the ethics of the Bible should be the basis on which we make decisions on the value of life and on the conduct of life.
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.
