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?
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.
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in the sense that it is not mythical and/or irrational; on the contrary, it presents historical (the Bible is also a historical document), natural and sensible evidence for its claims.
Christianity is a relationship with God and Jesus Christ. It is not an imaginary, contentless relationship, but one based upon knowledge of the “only true God” (John 17:3). If our relationship is with any other deity, it is idolatry. Whether in its Darwinian form that rejects the existence of God, or in its theistic manifestation that claims God as influencer of the evolutionary process, the theory of evolution denies the biblical doctrine of God.
Creation in the prophetic literature of the Old Testament is employed as a constant literary and theological reference which connects to a historical past, motivates the interpretation of the present, and moves towards a perspective for the future by means of a continuous contextualization of the topic via the triad creation–de-creation–recreation.
There is a great need for teachers to educate students for evaluation of ideas, problem solving, cultural sensitivity, and interpersonal skills. This educative process will introduce challenging issues and perspectives, some of which may clash with certain students’ personal beliefs. If teachers use appropriate teaching methodologies, these challenges will help their students to understand why there are different perspectives and equip them with the tools to use in evaluating them.
True science isn’t God’s enemy. Rather, science can be a valid, affirming means of revealing God to us.
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.
Our mission is to prepare people to give account of themselves to a sovereign, yet loving, almighty moral governor and to prepare them for the eschatological restoration of all things which begins at the second coming of Christ in glory. It seems clear that the expulsion of teleology required by Darwinism will be catastrophic to the mission praxis of the Adventist church.
If, in Paradise Regained, it appears that the tree of knowledge has outplayed its peculiar role, that it is not there, or that it is somehow fused to its sister tree, forming an arch over the river of life, we should hesitate to conclude that God will ever be in retreat with respect to the ideology of freedom.
How should we, as Adventist educators, relate to such dissonance between Christian belief and secular knowledge?
Studies of species in the sixteenth century began with numerous suggestions of wide variability, but after Francesco Redi helped to falsify spontaneous generation, scholars began to view species as essentially fixed. 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.
The purpose of these notes is twofold: first, to evaluate John H. Sailhamer's argument that Gen 1:14 does not place the creation of the heavenly lights on the fourth day of Creation; and second, to determine whether the term "appointed times" in Gen 1:14 is used to designate annual sacred times or particular rhythms of the natural cycle.
How do dinosaurs fit into a biblical worldview?
