©Copyright 2018 GEOSCIENCE RESEARCH INSTITUTE
11060 Campus Street • Loma Linda, California 92350 • 909-558-4548
Christianity and the Beginning of Science–by Timothy G. Standish
It is reasonable to assert that Christianity was an essential component of the culture in which modern science developed because it provided a more encouraging worldview for the investigation of nature than did alternative belief systems.
Scientific Revolutions: Part 1–by L. James Gibson
Occasionally, the scientific community rejects an idea that was previously widely accepted and replaces it with a new idea, which becomes the current consensus. This rapid change in scientific opinion is known as a “scientific revolution.”
Scientific Revolutions: Part 2–by L. James Gibson
Science is not a straight pathway to total reality and truth, but involves numerous tentative conclusions, reversals of opinion, and inherent uncertainty. Its utility is not that it is always true, but that it is useful and leads to further discovery.
What Is Biology? Part 2 of 4–by Timothy G. Standish
There are still some rules that we have to follow if we are to do any science, including biology. The first is that empirical data is the authoritative test of all ideas in science.
What Is Biology? Part 4 of 4–by Timothy G. Standish
There is no simple clear definition of what life is. This is appropriate as life is a wonderful, complex, beautiful, enigmatic phenomenon that defies any effort to over-simplify it. Still, most people have no difficulty recognizing living things and differentiating them from non-living things.
The Great Search–by Richard Hart
In a world drowning in information, there is an even stronger search for ultimate truth. It seems the information age expects each of us to sort out misleading advertisements, internet “facts”, and professionally perpetrated misinformation in our own attempts to determine what is true.
The Disadvantage of Collective Ignorance–by Ariel A. Roth
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.
The Paradigm of Naturalism, Compared with a Viable Alternative–by Leonard R. Brand
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.
Three Kinds of Science–by Ariel A. Roth
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.
Paradigm and Falsification: Tools in a Search for Truth–by Elwood S. McCluskey
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.
Deus Ex Machina–by Ariel A. Roth
Arguments that unexplained phenomena must be due to God's direct activity are called "god-of-the-gaps" arguments, and are regarded as bad arguments. However, if God is truly active in nature, we can expect to find some phenomena that truly point to God as a cause. Just because some appeals to God's direction action have been abandoned does not mean there are no such appeals that are valid. Published in Origins v. 21, n. 1.
When Assumptions Cease to be Assumptions–by Clyde L. Webster Jr.
Assumptions may eventually become so widely accepted they are no longer recognized as assumptions but take the status of truth. Two examples that relate to origins are assumptions of abiogeneis and long ages. These points should not be assumed but tested if one wants to discover truth. Published in Origins v. 18, n. 1.
What is Happening to the Philosophy of Science?–by Ariel A. Roth
The perceived nature of science has changed from that of an ideal system for discovering truth to more of a more ordinary human effort to discover how nature works. Published in Origins v. 17, n. 2.
Real Life Is More Than Simple Integers!–by Clyde L. Webster Jr.
Science strives to produce models of physical phenomena. Such models are useful, but usually simplifications of reality. Published in Origins v. 16, n. 2.
The Dishonor of Dueling–by Ariel A. Roth
Dueling has a long and tragic history. Although dueling to death is largely abandoned, we still see unnecessary quarrels, including among scientists. Calm reflection and rational dialogue are much to be preferred. Published in Origins v. 16, n. 1.
Truth–by Ariel A. Roth
It is fashionable in some circles to doubt everything, but experiences with reality show us that truth does actually exist. The person who searches for truth is more likely to succeed than one who doubts everything. Published in Origins v. 16, n. 2.
Creationists Challenge Creationists–by Ariel A. Roth
Disagreements among creationists can lead to better understanding and improvement in creation thinking, and should not be ignored or regarded as an embarrassment. Creationists learn the same way as everyone else, and disputations are expected in the search for truth. Published in Origins v. 15, n. 1.
Cliches [Today]–by Ariel A. Roth
Cliches may convey little knowledge yet have much influence. Careful thought and study is much better than accepting unwarranted simplifications of reality. Published in Origins v. 14, n. 2.
Science, A Good Place to Begin ...–by Ariel A. Roth
Science has produced many wonders of technology and is probably the best place to start in the quest for understanding the physical world. However, it is limited in its scope, and is a bad place to end the quest. There is a realm of reality beyond the reach of science, and this realm is perhaps more important than the physical realm. Published in Origins v. 14, n. 1.
Doublethink of SCICOM–by Clyde L. Webster Jr.
Holding two mutually contradictory opinions at once is called "doublethink." This is not the way to find truth, and should be abandoned by all. Published in Origins v. 13, n. 2.
Historical Science–by Ariel A. Roth
Scientific inquiry may explore immediate results as in an experiment, or a historical event that cannot be replicated experimentally. Experiments offer greater confidence than attempts to study historical questions, and it is not true that evolution is as much a fact as gravity. Published in Origins v. 13, n. 1.
The Disregard for Discards–by Ariel A. Roth
Some prominent scientists had educators have declared that creation has failed the test of science and has to be discarded. However, ideas that have been discarded are sometimes found to be true. Creation should not be discarded, because there is no better explanation for design in nature and the origin of life. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 1.
Is Creation Scientific?–by Ariel A. Roth
Evolutionists commonly claim creation is unscientific and should be excluded from science. However, scientists study phenomena for which the mechanism is not known, science itself is not clearly defined, and evolutionists use science to try to disprove creation. These points suggest the agenda driving opposition to creation is more philosophical than scientific. Published in Origins v. 11, n. 2.
It Appears That ...–by Ariel A. Roth
Observers may be led astray by superficial examination of apparent patterns. Two examples are given: the 20-year cycle of U.S. presidents dying in office, and N-rays. Published in Origins v. 11, n. 1.
Where Has the Science Gone?–by Ariel A. Roth
It is regrettable that the inquiry into the fundamental question of origins has degenerated to such an emotional level. Attitudes must be improved, and efforts now devoted to name-calling should be redirected towards good scholarship. Published in Origins v. 10, n. 2.
Puzzles–by Richard D. Tkachuck
Studying origins from a scientific perspective can be compared with assembling a puzzle when some of the pieces are missing and the overall picture is unknown. To produce a picture at the meaning level can be done only by patterning it after one's world view the composite of all one's acquired knowledge and experiences. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 2.
Axioms–by Richard D. Tkachuck
Axioms, or untestable assumptions, are a necessary part of science. Creationists and evolutionists differ in their axioms, and this leads to conflicts in their interpretations. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 1.
Perceptions of the Nature of Science and Christian Strategies for a Science of Nature–by Gary L. Schoepflin
When scientific pronouncements and religious beliefs conflict, what options are open to the Christian? The answer depends upon a host of things, but surely upon how science and religion are perceived. The present essay is confined largely to a consideration of the potential role played by various views of science, though many of the points made might be adapted readily to views of religion as well. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 1.
Scientific Creationism?–by Robert H. Brown
Creationism can be structured as a biblically-based religious doctrine, or as a method for exploring the world that is open to the possibility of creation. It would be inappropriate for religious creationism to be taught in public schools, but a scientific approach that considers the possibility of a creator need not be excluded. Published in Origins v. 8, n. 2.
But Is It As Much Fun?–by Richard D. Tkachuck
Many scientists worry that acknowledging God's activities in nature would hinder scientific advance, but it might make science more exciting and fun if there is always the possibility that God is active in nature. Published in Origins v. 8, n. 1.
Supernatural Problems–by Richard D. Tkachuck
It may be an oversimplification, but the separation of evolutionary and creation ideas pivots around the rejection and acceptance of the presence of the miraculous. Published in Origins v. 7, n. 2.
Beyond Design–by Richard D. Tkachuck
Creationists who want to use the scientific method need to develop and test theories based on creation, and not to be satisfied merely to show that some phenomenon is designed. Published in Origins v. 7, n. 1.
Beyond Science–by Ariel A. Roth
Exclusion of the supernatural by science has restricted theories of origins to purely naturalistic processes. Large numbers of people are looking for broader explanatory approaches that accommodate their own experiences of love, morality and beauty. Published in Originsi v. 7, n. 1.
Is Truth Dead?–by Ariel A. Roth
We should be careful to present our views in truthful and informed ways because it is more important to find truth than to defend our ideas. Published in Origins v. 6, n. 1.
Closed Minds and Academic Freedom–by Ariel A. Roth
The freedom to consider any idea, regardless of its source, is an important basis of academic freedom and the search for truth. This principle should be applied to teaching about origins in the public schools. Published in Origins v. 5, n. 2.
The Ignorance of Isolation–by Ariel A. Roth
Specialization is a necessary result of our limitations in dealing with the vast amount of information known. Specialization may lead to isolation, which can be at least partially avoided by using multidisciplinary approaches. Published in Origins v. 5, n. 1.
Implications of the Spread of Darwinism–by Ariel A. Roth
Darwinism has become the dominant paradigm of origins, despite recognition of its deficiency of evidence. The reason for the success of Darwin's theory is more due to sociological and philosophical factors than to scientific evidence. Published in Origins v. 4. n. 2.
Does Evolution Qualify as a Scientific Principle?–by Ariel A. Roth
The claim that evolution is a "principle of science" is refuted by its lack of prediction, its status as unfalsifiable, and the logical circularity of some of its most important claims. Published in Origins v. 4, n. 1.
Does God Play at Dice?–by Albert E. Smith
Humans certainly seem to have free will, but how then can God see the future? The statistical nature of quantum theory offers the possibility of unpredictable, chance events. Perhaps God has voluntarily given up some of His ability to see the future in order that free will is possible. Published in Origins v. 4, n. 1.
Zeal and Hoaxes–by Ariel A. Roth
Bad arguments undermine one's credibility. It is more important to be accurate than to be able to prove one's position. Published in Origins v. 3, n. 2.
Can the Christian Afford Scientific Research?–by J. Mailen Kootsey
Yes, the Christian may very well have time for research. Because of his sense of urgency and because he considers all his resources as valuable gifts and not to be wasted, the Christian will be more careful about his reasons for research. Published in Origins v. 3, n. 2.
Some Philosophical Implications of the Theory of Evolution–by John D. Clark
Evolution is not primarily a scientific theory, but a comprehensive metaphysical world view that implicitly and explicitly has frightening implications in all of the most important categories of human existence. Published in Origins v. 3, n. 1.
The Pervasiveness of the Paradigm–by Ariel A. Roth
A paradigm is an unquestioned framework within which research is conducted, generally without questioning the assumptions of the paradigm. Evolution is a paradigm that should be challenged because of the data that do not fit comfortably within the evolutionary paradigm. Published in Origins v. 2, n. 2.
Science Against God?–by Ariel A. Roth
Scientists commonly object to the idea that God might be active in nature because this would interfere with scientific inquiry. This may be true for a capricious god, but it is not true for the rational God of the Bible, and scientists need not fear that this God will prevent science from advancing. Published in Origins v. 1, n. 2.
A Philosophic Rationale for a Creation-Flood Model–by Leonard R. Brand
In our efforts to aid honest people in gaining confidence in revelation, the one thing that will make the difference is a demonstration that in the practical world of research, flood geology works! Published in Origins v. 1, n. 2.
Why a Publication on Origins?–by Ariel A. Roth
Origins is a new journal, aimed primarily at the Seventh-day Adventist educator, with the goal of rightly representing the Creator and His relationship to the created world. Published in Origins v. 1., n. 1.
Towards the Development of a General Theory of Creation–by Berney R. Neufeld
A general theory of creation is proposed, consisting of ten postulates derived from divine revelation and informed by observations of the created world. Published in Origins v. 1, n. 1.
Rationalism, Empiricism and Christianism as Philosophical Systems for Arriving at Truth–by Conrad D. Clausen
The use of the scientific method in the context of the philosophical system of christianism has advantages over its use in empiricism. The unity of truth makes the position of the scientific method within a system which encompasses all truth the more reasonable and reliable alternative. Published in Origins v. 1, n. 1.
The Bible and Biology–by Leonard R. Brand
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.
An Adventist Approach to Earth Origins.–by Benjamin L. Clausen
Science/religion issues are important because they have to do with ultimate realities, such as whether a supreme being is above the creation and can supernaturally intervene with events such as miracles, an Incarnation, a resurrection, a new birth, or an Advent.
Integrating Science and Scripture: The Case of Robert Boyle–by Kevin C. de Berg
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.
Searching for the Creator through the Study of a Bacterium–by George T. Javor
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.
Biblical Approaches to Biology–by George T. Javor
The integration of Bible and science is an uphill work that requires careful reading of both the Bible and of scientific data. Because no other natural science has traveled so great a distance down an anti-biblical road, no other science requires this corrective procedure more than biology.
The Bible and Physics–by Bill Mundy
The concept of a monotheistic God, who is the same yesterday, today and forever, not a plurality of capricious gods, suggested the universality, consistency and coherence of His creation. Among the contingently created beings were humans created in God's own image. This led to "the idea that we lesser rational beings might, by virtue of that Godlike rationality, be able to decipher the laws of nature."
Evolution, Theology and Method: Part 1: Outline and Limits of Scientific Methodology–by Fernando Canale
The creation-evolution debate generally takes place at the level of conclusion without taking into account the nature of the processes through which theologians and scientists arrive at their respective beliefs.
Evolution, Theology and Method: Part 2: Scientific Method and Evolution–by Fernando Canale
Is the epistemological certainty of evolutionary theory so absolute that Christian theologians should feel rationally compelled to accept its conclusions even if they explicitly contradict the teachings of biblical revelation on the origin of life on our planet?
Evolution, Theology and Method: Part 3: Evolution and Adventist Theology–by Fernando Canale
Revelation, rather than reason, is the source of explanation and truth for those who believe in God and his revelation in Scripture. The Bible's words and inner logic, however, still need interpretation. That is why we need to place all Christian theologies, including Adventist theologies, under careful methodological criticism to make certain we understand biblical thinking on its own terms and not from hermeneutical presuppositions defined by philosophy, science, and culture. Only then can we say in practice that the Bible is the foundation of truth.
Seventh-day Darwinians, Redux–by Clifford Goldstein
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.
Basic Issues Between Science and Scripture: Theological Implications of Alternative Models and the Necessary Basis for the Sabbath in Genesis 1-2–by Norman R. Gulley
This paper divides into four sections: (1) Some problems facing evolutionists and biblical creationists. (2) Alternate models for creation held by Bible believing scholars, including views held by some Seventh-day Adventist scholars. (3) The biblical record of creation with a literal week as a necessary basis for Sabbath-keeping. (4) The biblical meaning of the Sabbath as unfolded in biblical history, with its solid basis in the creation account.
The Moral Implications of Darwinism–by Earl M. J. Aagaard
When Christian ethicists reach the same conclusions as Darwinists about our obligations to our fellow humans, it’s time to do some careful thinking. God created us, and He knows the evil of which we are capable. For this reason, He instructed us to treat all humans as worthy of equal dignity and respect.
A Believer’s Approach to the Sciences–by Earl M. J. Aagaard
Everyone believes in someone or something. Even scientists have a belief system. In view of this, Christian believers need not be apologetic about their faith system. Instead, when they approach sciences, they should do so with (1) thoughtful respect for the scientific enterprise when it deals with the strictly empirical; and (2) humility and tolerance for other views with evidentiary support in various areas of historical science.
What Size is Your God?–by E. Theodore Agard
We should be cautious in seeking, from our human perspective, to place a limit on the person and power of God. We cannot measure or understand God from the standpoint of our inadequacy. Nor can we appreciate fully the role of God in this earth and its history from the limited perspective of our intelligence.
Footprints in the Sands of Time–by Leonard R. Brand
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.
Faith and Science: Can They Coexist?–by Leonard R. Brand
Many would say scientists must leave all religious influences out of their scholarly pursuits, because to do otherwise would compromise the search for truth. However, I believe the God of the Bible understands the highest levels of scholarship, not just comforting inspirational themes.
Geological Records and Genesis Time Frame–by Leonard R. Brand
We have much study to do before we will truly understand how to fit together all the evidence into a coherent picture. But I as a Christian and a scientist find a three-step process helpful: trust God's communication to us in Scripture; study carefully and seek to recognize human ideas that we have incorrectly read in between the lines in Scripture; and follow up with careful scientific work.
Is the Theory of Evolution Scientific?–by Leonard R. Brand
I suggest that the level of confidence any one person has in the truth of evolutionary history directly reflects the degree of confidence they have that science is the surest way of finding truth in any topic, and/or the confidence they have in the assumption of naturalism.
Creation and a Logical Faith–by Ed Christian
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.
Science and Religion: Pursuing a Common Goal–by Mart de Groot
Is there a possibility that the matter of faith and faith in matter can have some talking point? What are the aims of Christianity and those of science? Can we conceive of common goals for both? Where lies the final answer to human queries?
Genesis and the Cosmos: A Unified Picture?–by Mart de Groot
How should the Bible and natural science be related, explained, or studied? At least two positions seem possible. On the one hand, there are those who hold that a conservative understanding of the Bible and the findings of science cannot be harmonized. On the other, there are those who believe that conclusions drawn from the two disciplines can be harmonized to fit into one overall view of the world.
Are the Bible and Science in Conflict?–by David B. Ekkens
In discussions of science and faith, one often gets the impression that either science or Scripture can be believed—not both. In the secular world, science is by default seen as the true source of knowledge.
Issues in Intermediate Models of Origins–by L. James Gibson
Many models have been proposed that tend to blur some of the contrasts between the biblical and naturalistic theories. A number of attempts have been made to develop intermediate models in which elements of the biblical story of creation are mixed with elements of the scientific story of origins. All of these models share the biblical idea that nature is the result of divine purpose and the “scientific” idea of long ages of time, but all suffer from serious scientific problems or are entirely ad hoc and conjectural.
Intelligent Design: Is It a Useful Concept?–by L. James Gibson
This article explores the usefulness of the idea of intelligent design in the context of modern (scientific) efforts to understand nature. Among the questions to be considered are whether intelligent design is a necessary inference from the properties of nature, and whether its incorporation into science would improve our ability to explore and understand nature.
Religion Always Loses?–by Paul A. Giem
Whenever religion and science have a dispute about some question of fact, religion always loses. So goes a common belief. The implication is that religion should never make any factual claims, as it has no contact with reality. For some religions, such an assertion is irrelevant, as these religions do not make any claims about the physical universe. But for biblical Christianity, such an assertion would be fatal.
Life: A Chemical Dilemma–by Clifford Goldstein
Because it is based on materialism, science implies (at least hypothetically) that everything should be accessible to experiment and empirical validation. Ideally, there shouldn’t be room for faith in a scientific universe, yet the very nature of that universe demands it.
Data and Interpretation: Knowing the Difference–by Elaine Graham Kennedy
Scientists are fairly confident that they know what they are doing. However, especially in the area of origins, science alone cannot assess the complete database because the scientific approach does not consider the possibility of supernatural involvement in nature and in the history of our Earth. For Christians, the Bible provides a source of information that suggests there is a better way to approach science. Christians expect harmony because they recognize God as the Creator of nature and its scientific “laws.”
Understanding how Nature Works: Last Piece of the Puzzle?–by J. Mailen Kootsey
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.
When Science Rejected God–by Ariel A. Roth
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.
Integrating Faith and Science–by Rahel Davidson Schafer
In the current debate between theology and science, many of the issues seem insoluble and irreconcilable. The conflict has indeed been great at times in my own mind and experience as a student. I would like to share my perspective and journey as a student in both areas.
Bits and Particles: Information and Machines Sufficient to Infer an Intelligent Designer–by Timothy G. Standish
The molecules of life suggest no need for Christians to become sycophants to materialistic philosophy posing as science. On the contrary, science liberated from the artificial constraints of materialism provides an elegant mechanism for study of the creation and logically points to a wonderful Creator.
A Dialogue Between Contemporary Perspectives and Ellen White on Divine Action and Quantum Physics–by Michael F. Younker
The way in which God interacts with the world, or divine action, has long been a matter of discussion for theists in the philosophy of science, and continues to remain a complex and controversial topic. In recent decades, this question has taken on additional complexity with advances in contemporary physics, namely quantum physics, which posits a random or probabilistic world in contradistinction to the apparently completely deterministic natural world of Isaac Newton.
A Critique of Current Anti-ID Arguments and ID Responses–by Leonard R. Brand
There have been a number of carefully written books and articles arguing that ID has failed to make its case. ID advocates have published responses to these arguments. Which of these lines of argument is most convincing, when compared to what is known about living systems?
Intelligent Design: The Argument from Beauty–by Bernard Brandstater
There is more to design than complexity. I am proposing that it is time to advance beyond an analysis of complexity, fruitful though that has been. We are able to expand the scope of design arguments to include the existence of beauty, which points to design of a different kind.
Science and Design: A Physicist’s Perspective–by Gary Burdick
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.
Order and Chance in Nature and Scripture: Towards a Basis for Constructive Dialog–by Kevin C. de Berg
In this essay I have attempted to outline the world as it is, reality as it is perceived through the lens of science and scripture in terms of the concepts of order and chance.
Intelligent Design and its Critics–by John C. Walton
The debate raging around ID is not one of scientific fact versus religious faith. The real clash is an ideological one in which scientists are seeking to maintain the intellectual and cultural dominance of the humanist/atheist worldview.
How Do We Know What is True?–by Leonard R. Brand
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.
How Can I Live without Having All the Answers?–by Gary Burdick
If we had perfect knowledge, our science and our theology would never be in conflict because the same God who reveals Himself through Scripture has also revealed Himself through creation, and God is not in conflict with Himself. Thus, when we see conflict between our best theology and our best science, this is merely an indication of our lack of complete understanding.
When Faith and Reason are in Tension–by L. James Gibson
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.
Why Do Different Scientists Interpret Reality Differently?–by Humberto M. Rasi
Scientists applying the scientific method while using similar equipment to study the same aspect of nature can and do arrive at different conclusions. Why does this occur?
Science and Theology: Focusing the Complementary Lights of Jesus, Scripture, and Nature–by Martin F. Hanna
The purpose of this study is to explore the complex relations between science and theology and to suggest a viable solution to this group of problems.
The Bible and Science–by Leonard R. Brand
In this essay we will seek to find a balanced, practical approach to the relationship between science and God's Word.
A Biblical Approach to the Sciences–by Benjamin L. Clausen
What kind of relation should exist between science and religion? between nature and revelation? Should it be one of the conflicts or cooperation? The inspired writings present both views.
A Believing Scientist Approaches the Sciences–by Benjamin L. Clausen
Both faith and reason are needed in a complete worldview, and finding a reasonable faith is a continuing process. Reason can suggest to the unbeliever that his worldview doesn't completely fit with reality, and to one who is weighing the evidence that science does not need to stand in the way. For the believer, reason and evidence serve to confirm a faith that is already present.
An Adventist View of Science–by L. James Gibson
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.
God and Nature: An Approach to Creation–by L. James Gibson
Origins may sometimes be a contentious issue in science and faith because of differing presuppositions about God's relationship to nature. An argument has been presented here that it is eminently reasonable to believe that direct supernatural action was involved in the origins of the universe, life, and humanity, and that a scientific process restricted to observable physical mechanisms is inadequate to discover and explain our origins.
Comparison and Contrast of Scientific and Religious Paradigms and their Use–by Bill Mundy
The purpose of this paper to compare and contrast scientific and religious paradigms and their communities. Similarities include the fact that it is possible to analyze both in terms of the formal components of a paradigm, that a community is essential to both traditions, and that the intersubjective testing and universality, along with data and experience, are important for "rational objectivity" in both communities.
Can Faith and Science be Divorced?–by Gary B. Swanson
True science isn’t God’s enemy. Rather, science can be a valid, affirming means of revealing God to us.
A Biblical-Christian Approach to Teaching Philosophy of Science: A Proposal–by Susan Thomas
How can a teacher present Christian values to students. Can a Philosophy of Science teacher reveal Christ in an enviromnent of academic pressure, secularism, and an indifference to the Christian worldview?
What Makes the Whole More Than the Sum of Its Parts?–by Alfredo Suzuki
A living being is more than the collection of the multitude of organic components of which it is made.
Miracles and Natural Law: Are They Compatible?–by Glauber S. Araújo
With the scientific knowledge we currently have of nature, is it still reasonable to believe in miracles?
A Biblical Perspective on the Philosophy of Science–by Leonard R. Brand
This paper describes three models of the relationship between religion and science, which differ in their view of the nature of theology and how it should or should not interact with science. Published in Origins n. 59.
Naturalism: Its Role in Science–by Leonard R. Brand
The philosophy of Naturalism dominates scientific thinking, for reasons that can be understood from review of the history of scientific thought. This article evaluates the nature and implications of Naturalism. Published in Origins, n. 64.
Worldviews and Predictions in the Scientific Study of Origins–by Leonard R. Brand
However one defines the scientific method, the role of predictions is of significance. A researcher, from his/her knowledge of a topic, makes a prediction of a phenomenon to be found or verified by future research. Published in Origins, n. 64.
Playing the Game of Science by the Rules–by L. James Gibson
Suppose we consider science to be a game. What are the rules of the game, and what difference would this approach make? Published in Origins, n.. 64.
Why Science?–by L. James Gibson
Why would a creationist be interested in science, when the dominant voices in science deny any divine action in nature? Published in Origins, n. 63.
Seeing the Forest and the Trees–by Timothy G. Standish
A review of the book, A Meaningful World: How the Arts and Sciences Reveal the Genius of Nature. Darwinian reductionism dissolves appreciation of the genius behind masterpieces. In the real world, science and the arts each enrich and complement understanding of the other; both, at their best, are part of and point to the same Truth. Published in Origins, n. 61.
Friend or Foe?–by Jerry R. Bergman
A review of the book, Beginnings: Are Science and Scripture Partners in the Search for Origins? Published in Origins n. 60.
Is Intelligent Design Harmful to Science?–by Jim Gibson
Three claims have been made that, if true, might suggest that scientists should be wary of intelligent design.... What is the status of these claims? Published in Origins n. 59.
Palaetiological Science and Cultural Power–by L. James Gibson
Historical sciences are generally regarded as less rigorous than the experimental sciences, a point that raises objections among scientists in historical disciplines. The discussion of which science is more "scientific" than the others reflects sociological concerns more than interest in scientific discovery. Published in Origins n. 53.
Literature reviews: Science and Its Limits–by L. James Gibson
Review of the book, Science and Its Limits. Published in Origins n. 54.
Annotations from the Literature
A collection of short commentaries on scientifc papers published in 1983-1985, covering topics such as amino acid dating, problems in evolutionary theory, God and the New Physics, Scientists Confront Creationism, transgenic mammals, philosophy of science, and In the Minds of Men. Published in Origins v. 12, n. 2.
Literature reviews: Darwin’s God–by L. James Gibson
Darwin's God: Evolution and the Problem of Evil. Published in Origins n. 55.
Literature reviews: Finding Darwin’s God–by Paul A. Giem
A review of the book, Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution. Published in Origins n. 55.
Does Religion Always Lose?–by Paul A. Giem
The claim that religion always gives way before the authority of science is discussed and challenged. Published in Origins n. 55.
Detecting Design in Nature–by Timothy G. Standish
Design in nature can be detected using criteria similar to those for searching for extraterrestrial life, such as purpose, extreme improbability, or specification. Published in Origins n. 56..
Reuniting Facts and Values–by Paul A. Giem
A review of the book,Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from its Cultural Captivity. Published in Origins n. 58.
Follow the Evidence–by Henry A. Zuill
Literature Review A review of the book By Design or By Chance? The Growing Controversy on the Origins of Life in the Universe. Published in Origins n. 58.
Does Free Will Exist?–by Stephen Bauer
A review of the book, Agents Under Fire: Materialism and the Rationality of Science. Published in Origins, n. 57.
Conflating Answers: to and from Design Questions–by Timothy G. Standish
The argument to design is that nature shows evidence of design but does not attempt to identify the designer. The argument from design is that the design seen in nature is best explained as the result of a specific designer, most often the Christian God. Published in Origins n. 57.
Literature Reviews: Philosophical Weeding–by Ashby L. Camp
Review of the book, Thinking About God: First Steps in Philosophy. Published in Origins n. 58.
Literature Reviews: Can Science Refute Design?–by Cornelius G. Hunter
Review of Why Intelligent Design Fails: A Scientific Critique of the New Creationism. Published in Origins n. 58.
How to Write an Unpublishable Paper–by Timothy G. Standish
It is important in science that authors avoid ad hominem attacks, faulty logic, sloppy handling of data, straw man arguments, switching definitions mid-argument, and using prejudicial definitions and arguments. Published in Origins n. 58.
How Final Is Final?–by Benjamin L. Clausen
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.
What is the Problem with Materialistic Science?–by Alfredo Suzuki
Why are we trying to find extraterrestrial intelligence, using our intelligence, while at the same time precluding the possibility that an intelligence was involved in the origin of our world?
Mysterious Solutions–by L. James Gibson
A review of the book, Blueprints: Solving the Mystery of Evolution. The book presents a rather uninformed critical response to creationism. Published in Origins v. 20, n. 1.
Biblical Creation and Ancient Near Eastern Evolutionary Ideas–by Ángel M. Rodríguez
Ancient Near Eastern views should be considered part of the history of the idea of evolution. The biblical Creation account, in describing the divine actions through which God actually brought the cosmos into existence, was likely deconstructing the alternative theories or speculations of origins available in the Ancient Near East. Consequently, the biblical narrative can be used as well to deconstruct contemporary cosmogonies and evolution. This article was originally published on Perspective Digest, v.24/3.
How Can Miracles Be Possible?–by Kwabena Donkor
The denial of miracles is a recent phenomenon based on how modernity has chosen to understand the workings of nature and what is possible in it. Belief in a personal God (theism), however, argues that through God’s actions, an event that is naturally impossible can be transformed into a real historical event. This article was originally published in Perspective Digest, v. 24/2.
The Sleuths Challenge Science–by Wayne Frair
A review of the book, Betrayers of the Truth: Fraud and Deceit in the Halls of Science. Many scientists, famous and otherwise, have failed to live up to the highest ideals of good science, in some cases acting fraudulently and deceitfully. Published in Origins v. 11, n. 2.
The Dogmatic Skeptic–by Katherine Ching
A review of the book, Science: Good, Bad and Bogus. The book vigorously attacks anyone whose beliefs are considered pseudoscience. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 2.
Skepticism and Truth–by Ariel A. Roth
Review of the journal, The Skeptical Inquirer. This journal focuses on debunking ideas considered to be unreliable, but accepts without question a naturalistic foundational basis. Published in Origins v. 9, n. 1.
Evolution: The Seen and the Unseen–by Clifford Goldstein
How can some people be so certain about evolution, while others, with the same certainty, deny it? Part of the answer can, in broad terms, be boiled down to the difference between what is seen and what is not seen. More specifically, and in the context of evolution itself, this disparity arises from the difference between microevolution and macroevolution. What are these two concepts, and how does the difference between them help explain much of the controversy surrounding the theory of evolution? This article was published on the August 2019 issue of Signs of the Times.
Biblical Creationism and Ancient Near Eastern Evolutionary Ideas–by Ángel M. Rodríguez
This article was originally published as a chapter in the book “The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament."
Other Related Resources
Good Creation and Natural Evil
Despite the creation’s elegance and beauty, it is clear that there is something wrong in the…
Believing the Bible and Believing Science
There is a myth that has been repeated over and over again, yet no amount of repetition can…
Leonard R. Brand - Science, Evolution, and Fossils
Leonard R. Brand is a researcher and professor of Biology and Paleontology at Loma Linda University.…
Edward Zinke - Theology, Bible, and History
Edward Zinke has a master's degree in Theology from Andrews University and is the author of…
What attitudes will foster constructive dialogue on the controversial subject of origins? This…
Clash of Ideas, Episode 1
This episode unfolds at the foothills of the Italian Alps, between Venice and Padova. It was…
Thinking Creation - 01 - The Great Debate
This episode traces some of the philosophies that, over the course of millennia, have lead…
Other Related Resources
Leonard R. Brand. 2019. Pacific Press. ISBN-13: 978-0816365029
A book that explores the creationist worldview in the form of a dialogue
Return of the God Hypothesis
Stephen C. Meyer. 2021. New York: HarperOne. ISBN-13: 978-0062071507
Book review by Jim Gibson
The Scientific Approach to Evolution
Rob Stadler. 2016. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform. ISBN-13: 978-1532988097
Book review by Jim Gibson
David J. Galloway. 2021. John Ritchie Publishing. ISBN-13: 978-1914273018
Book review by David G. Pennington
- Ecology & Conservation
- Intelligent Design
- Other Sciences
- Faith and Science
- Origins Journal: Archive