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.

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 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.

At present, there is an almost absolute exclusion of God from scientific textbooks and journals. Unfortunately, such a closed attitude prevents science from following the data of nature wherever it may lead. Science cannot evaluate evidence for God as long as He is excluded from consideration.

As science develops more complete naturalistic explanations to describe the universe, it may appear that there is less room for God in the picture. And if science ever discovers a “complete” theory, it could be presumed that it would describe a universe without God. I am confident, however, that this conclusion is neither necessary nor valid. Drawing upon examples from physics, my purpose is to show that in developing a more complete picture of the universe, scientists are led to greater evidences for God and His design.

This paper evaluates a representative sample of the best anti-ID and pro-ID publications and presents a conclusion as to the present state of the evidence and arguments regarding these positions. Published in Origins, n. 63.

A review of the book, Explore Evolution. This is written as a supplemental Classroom textbook exploring the controversies surrounding neo-Darwinism. Published in Origins, n. 63.

Current debate over Intelligent Design is simply the latest installment of one long argument. Published in Origins, n. 62.

A review of the book, The Tinkerer's Accomplice, How Design Emerges from Life Itself. Mutation and selection are not sufficient to explain evolution, and another factor, homeostasis, should also be considered. Published in Origins, n. 62.

A review of the book, The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism. Darwinian mechanisms may permit limited adjustment to living conditions, but there have not been enough events in the history of organisms for random mutations to construct complex adaptations. Changes in species are often due to broken genes rather than to new improvements, and intelligent design is necessary to explain complex adaptations. Published in Origins, n. 62.

Since both reason and revelation have their ultimate source in God, they should be in complete harmony. Yet reason and revelation appear to conflict when attempting to explain the world around us. This article will discuss some of the factors contributing to the conflict between science and faith and suggest ways in which Christians might choose to deal with it.

A review of the book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design. Published in Origins, n. 61.

A review of the book, Compositional Evolution: The Impact of Sex, Symbiosis, and Modularity on the Gradualistic Framework of Evolution. Published in Origins, n. 61.

Reactions comprising the nitrogen cycle are catalyzed by complex protein machines, some of which may be Irreducibly Complex (IC). Published in Origins n. 60.

A review of the book Why Is a Fly Not a Horse? Published in Origins n. 60.

A review of the book The Privleged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery. Published in Origins n. 60.

Within a Darwinian framework, this means that all genes shared by humans and sea urchins must have been present in a common ancestor shared sometime before Cambrian strata, which contain both chordate and echinoderm fossils, formed. Published in Origins n. 60.

Is God real? Is the Bible true? What about all those amazing stories in the Bible? Specifically, what about the Genesis stories? Did God really create the world and all that is in it in a literal week? Did that Creation occur only some 10,000 years ago? How could all these biblical accounts be true when so many brilliant scientists advocate otherwise?

Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection was inspired not primarily by his observations of the natural world, but by Thomas Malthus's theory of scarcity.

The last few years have shown that there are a number of views on creation within the Adventist Church. Not all of them can be right. Should theistic evolution become more and more accept ed, we will be in danger of losing the biblical foundation for the Sabbath and our understanding of salvation.