Seventh-day Darwinians, Redux
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 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in the sense that it is not mythical and/or irrational; on the contrary, it presents historical (the Bible is also a historical document), natural and sensible evidence for its claims.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.
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?
Current debate over Intelligent Design is simply the latest installment of one long argument. Published in Origins, n. 62.
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.
A commentary and review of the book, Scriptural Geology, 1820-1860: An Essay and Review. 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.
A review of the book, Darwin's Nemesis: Phillip Johnson and the Intelligent Design Movement. Published in Origins n. 61.
Do Christians have a legitimate interest in environmentalism, or might it be a distraction from the real work of the gospel?
A review of the book Before Darwin: Reconciling God and Nature. Published in Origins n. 60.
A review of the book The Evolution-Creation Struggle. Published in Origins n. 60.
How do dinosaurs fit into a biblical worldview?