I don't have much faith in logic as a solution to the world's problems, but I do want a logical faith. I don't demand that my faith correspond to "scientific logic" as presently conceived, but I do expect it to be consistent throughout.
Newton was an unusual person—absent-minded and generous, sensitive to criticism and modest. He faced a series of psychological crises. He had trouble maintaining good social relations. Yet, he was one of history’s rare giants—a brilliant physicist, a superb astronomer and mathematician, and a natural philosopher.
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.
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.
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.
A farewell editorial by Dr. Ariel Roth, who has been editor of Origins since its inception in 1973, and Director of the Geoscience Research Insittute since 1980. Published in Origins v. 23, n. 2.
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.
People in positions of power or influence may take advantage of the ignorance of their listeners or followers and lead them to unwise conclusions or actions. Published in Origins v. 23., n. 1.
Most science is conducted under the philosophical assumption of naturalism. A few scientists are developing an alternative paradigm, here called interventionism (generally called theism). Published in Origins v. 23, n. 1.
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.
Scientific activities can be classified in a number of ways, but the suggestion here is to compare science with a naturalistic presuppostion, science with a creationist presupposition, or "methodological science," meaning inquiry open to either naturalistic or supernaturalistic explanations. Published in Origins v. 22, n. 2.
Claims that Christianity upheld the idea of a flat earth through the so-called "Dark Ages" until finally the light of science revealed the true sphericity of the world are fabrications of anti-Christian writers. The overwhelming majority of Medieval thinkers believed in a spherical earth. Such false stories have caused many to "retro-progress," with an increase in ignorance rather than in knowledge. Published in Origins v. 22, n. 1.
Two ideas from philosophers of science are discussed: paradigm and falsification. A paradigm is a useful tool for research, but it would be good to test the paradigm occasionally by attempting to falsify seme aspect of its structure. This might be done by considering "the weight of evidence" relating to the paradigm. Published in Origins v. 22, n. 1.
A review of the book, Dreams of a Final Theory. Attempts to explain all of creation from a naturalistic perspective have limited success. Published in Origins v. 22, n. 1.
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.
Both secularists and religionists have misused the fame of Darwin's name to bolster their claims. Darwin's true views on religion, although not completely known, were somewhat mixed, and it would be better not to invoke his name to support either side. Published in Origins v. 21, n. 2.
Readers are invited to submit their reactions to the articles in our journal. Please address contributions to: ORIGINS, Geoscience Research Institute, 11060 Campus St., Loma Linda, California 92350 USA.
