creation and evolution

I am reading up on creation and evolution. Normally I avoid divisive issues, but I think the evidence for a very old earth and an older universe is compelling and irrefutable, and that the evidence for evolution is nearly as compelling to the point that we can hold both to be true. I continue to read on this, so I'm in a learning mode right now.

God has given us two great books to read: nature and Scripture. Or in the words of Deborah B. & Loren D. Haarsma, from their helpful book, Origins: A Reformed Look at Creation, Design, & Evolution, from God's world and from God's Word. We need to read them both and let them both speak for themselves, never letting one change the other. And we need to remember that the problem lies in us- in our lack of understanding, not in either of the books, when there seems to be contradiction between the two. That book is actually designed for use in churches, and is comprehensive in an introductory way to the issue of origins, and the interplay between faith and science.

From what I gather, much of Charles Darwin's science is good, and has been verified to the point that he is more influential now, near his 200th birthday- February 12- than ever before. Unfortunately he ended up letting his problem with Christianity as he saw it, impact his science to some extent. Although it doesn't impact the main point of it.

The problem that we as Christians have to battle, as I see it, is not differences where Christians lie on this issue, some for example, holding to Young Earth Creationism, as opposed to those of us who hold to a Theistic Evolutionary model. The problem is where an anti-Christian faith has impacted the science of such people, like Richard Dawkins. Their view would be a part of what is called evolutionism. The idea that all can be explained in naturalistic evolutionary terms, so that natural selection makes any notion of a god not only unnecessary, but undesirable. So that we end up battling evolutionism and naturalism, which in themselves are not scientific. By the way, in Richard Dawkins' case, his recent diatribe against faith in God has really undermined his academic standards, according to those who understand the scientific and philosophical issues involved in that, from what I have heard and am gathering.

There is more that I intend to read on this. So it's a formative time for me in my understanding on origins. There is so much to say here, and a good place to start is with the book I cite above. It interacts with different Christian views, and it comes out where these two scientists are themselves, both professors at Calvin College. They cover in an introductory fashion scientific and theological issues in this.

(Many of my thoughts here come directly through the book mentioned on this post. I take no credit for originality or first hand learning, here. Strictly based on reading others, and forming judgments from that, and especially in this post, from the book mentioned above.)

What might anyone like to add here?

faith and science

Lately I am doing some interesting reading on faith and science (a book I'm in now). Nowadays in evangelical circles science has a bad name, and in some respects that is deservedly so, due to the deference paid to naturalism as part of its tenets. Of course naturalism is drawing metaphysical conclusions which are not to be confused with the science itself, though at times can impact it.

Science can answer the questions to what is, and observe, while hypothesizing and continuing to test and observe what is, and keep on doing so, in a sense a never ending process. This doesn't mean science can't find things that are demonstrably true. Gravity is an obvious easy one. But of course science can never answer the questions of why we're here, or how it all began.

There is general revelation and there is special revelation. General revelation is God's creation seen in nature, and observed in science, while special revelation is God's word given to us in Scripture and in Jesus Christ. Both are important from God, so science can actually be a help and blessing to both believers and nonbelievers alike. Science itself must not be seen as the enemy of truth, but we do need to discern what is added to science apart from the science itself. God does not deceive us with the revelation he has given us. Both parts of revelation stand on their own in the ways they are intended to, as well as together.

A big battle over science has been ongoing and more is yet to come it seems, as far as evangelical Christians are concerned. This post is simply to say we should let science do its work and take it seriously as it stands. While at the same time we must critique the naturalism scientists mix in with their scientific work.

What might you like to add here?