April 1, 2021

Download PDF

This article was originally published as a chapter in the book “Design and Catastrophe: 51 Scientists Explore Evidence in Nature"

My research studies plate tectonics horizontally, the geologic column vertically, and radiometric dating measurements of time. This research finds catastrophes throughout the geologic record, but no working scientific model to fit them within a short time frame. In contrast, Exodus 20:11 indicates that God is the Creator of everything and that He did it all in six days. This conflict upsets many people and no solution is readily available. Following is the resulting approach of someone who believes, not because most questions have been answered, but despite many questions remaining unanswered, which is the example the Bible often presents.[1]

Learn from history. Many founding fathers of science were Christians and studied nature to glorify God. Modern science developed within a Judeo-Christian culture where (1) God is a personal God. Since nature is not god, it can be studied without fear. (2) God is a God of law and order, so His creation follows cause/effect relations. (3) God created and pronounced it good, so the creation is worthy of our study. (4) God was free to create otherwise, so nature is known by observation, not just appeal to reason or philosophy or authority. This is the perspective from which I do science.

Know the issue. If God is all good and all powerful, why is there evil? I agree with Charles Darwin in his May 22, 1860, letter to Asa Gray: “I cannot persuade myself that a beneficent & omnipotent God would have designedly created the Ichneumonidæ [wasp] with the express intention of their feeding within the living bodies of Caterpillars.…” I ask about evil, “How long, O Lord?” (Rev. 6:10) and believe that God wants to get the bad stuff over with as quickly as possible.

Do good science. The church wants global scientific leaders[2] and has been incredibly supportive of the research group that I coordinate. God would want us to do good science. These are the guidelines we use:

• Work toward a constructive big-picture model rather than attacking scattered features in existing models. We aim not to alienate, but to learn. Look at all the data. Problems with the current model do not automatically mean our alternative is better.

• Do the research to test models against the data from nature, and claim from the data only what it can support. Do not expect science to prove the Bible. We are looking for coherence, but not forcing it.

• Collaborate within mainstream science to study the processes governed by natural law. Be slow to invoke God’s use of fiat over process. We recognize that God may intrude in unexpected (supernatural, miraculous) ways at times, but that He generally works through His beautiful and well-designed enduring laws.

Study large-scale geology. The Genesis record suggests that our research should include physical processes over all space, varying rates of physical processes over all time, and the substantial effects of water on both. This has resulted in flourishing research on data from the literature and that our research group has collected.[3] We are finding that

• Geological processes interrelate worldwide. Horizontally, plate tectonics is the basic cause for much of what happens geologically. Vertically, the geologic column describes the historical flow of events that affects the crust, mantle, and core. Large data analysis is necessary to understand the interdependence of all the parts.

• Geological rates vary over Earth’s history. Tectonic plate movement changes speed and direction. Magmatic activity forming granites and volcanoes experiences flare-ups and lulls. Magmatic heat flows at different rates by conduction, convection, advection, and radiation. Rates for these processes are affected by fluids. Stable isotopes can help establish fluid sources. Radiogenic isotopes reflect plate tectonic and magmatic processes and sources, as well as age.

Recognize human limitations. Humans are limited in their interpretation of both the Word and the world, meaning that at times reinterpretation is necessary. We know only in part, and even that knowledge will vanish (1 Cor. 13:8–9). God’s ways are higher than ours (Isa. 55:8–11). Jesus had many things to say to His disciples, but they were not able to bear them (John 16:12).

Coherence may not be readily available, and apparent paradoxes may easily exist. Physics has the paradox of light being both wave and particle. Theology presents the paradox of God’s omniscience and human free will and of Jesus being both divine and human.

Evidence and reason are important, but often more is needed. Jesus stated that He is the truth, not a set of data or arguments (John 14:6). Søren Kierkegaard talks of reason plus a leap of faith.[4] G. K. Chesterton proposes that “you can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it.”[5] C. S. Lewis suggests in his essay “On Obstinacy in Belief ” that it is not an argument that demands your assent, but the personal Christ who demands your confidence, because faith in a theory is proportional to the evidence, but faith in a person is based on experience.[6]

Treat people well. “We draw people to Christ not by loudly discrediting what they believe, by telling them how wrong they are and how right we are, but by showing them a light that is so lovely that they want with all their hearts to know the source of it.”[7]

The church leaders in Christ’s day wanted a Messiah to conquer the Romans, but Jesus came to conquer the heart. Our research group wants to win hearts more than arguments. We will only be trusted in subjects scientists do not know if we are trusted in subjects they do know. My belief is based on the picture the Bible and nature present of God’s character, of a good and powerful God fully existing as Jesus Christ (8ol.81–2).[8]

Recently a geology colleague and I submitted a joint letter to a geology discussion group. The letter stated that we not only communicate about science and religion but also work together. We are good friends who trust and respect each other. We are doing great science funded in part from church sources. His life has been enriched by the kind and thoughtful people in my church. I have become a portal into the church community about science and faith. Together we communicate using the two-book approach.

The research group I coordinate aims to respect God’s Word, God’s world, and people created in God’s image.

NOTES

[1] B Clausen. What Adventists have to share with the scientific community. Dialogue 2018; 30(3):10–14. Available from https:// dialogue.adventist.org/3065/what-adventists-have-to-share-with-thescientific-community [accessed June 25, 2020].

[2] A McChesney. Adventist schools called to become global scientific leaders. Adventist Review 2014; 191(26): 8–9. Available from: https:// www.adventistreview. org/affirming-creation/adventist-schools-called-tobecome-global-scientific-leaders [accessed June 25, 2020].

[3] See http://bclausen.net/ [accessed June 25, 2020].

[4] S Kierkegaard. Kierkegaard’s concluding unscientific postscript. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1944, pp. 15, 90–6, 105, 306, 340, 343.

[5] GK Chesterton. The maxims of maxim: Daily News, February 25, 1950. In: D Ahlquist, J Pearce, A Mackey, editors. In defense of sanity: the best essays of GK Chesterton. San Francisco (CA): Ignatius Press; 2011, p. 90. https://books. google.com/books?id=A9IwDwAAQBAJ [accessed January 26, 2021].

[6] CS Lewis. On Obstinacy in Belief. In: The world’s last night and other essays. New York: Harcourt; 1973, pp. 13–30.

[7] M L’Engle. Walking on water: reflections on faith and art. Colorado Springs (CO): WaterBrook; 1980, pp. 140–141. 8.

[8] Clausen 2018, op cit.

---

Ben Clausen has worked at the Geoscience Research Institute for more than 30 years, during which he has organized many science/ religion meetings. He received an MS in Geology from Loma Linda University and a PhD in Physics from the University of Colorado. His nuclear physics research at many particle accelerators and at the University of Virginia resulted in more than 20 papers. His geochemistry research as an adjunct professor at Loma Linda University has been presented at meetings on six continents and in a number of publications. He has lectured and directed field trips on local geology in dozens of countries around the world.