I consider myself fairly well-educated and informed on matters of both science and orthodox Christian theology. I grew up in a smallish Oklahoma town (college town, in fact, which likely matters here), and paid attention in classes like chemistry, physics, calculus, history, and literature (I did skip out on biology somehow, though). I also attended a Baptist church through high school and college. I identify myself as an evangelical, born-again Christian, even though I hate most of the ways those terms are defined these days and certainly don't agree with many other people who would claim the same.
I have attended public primary and secondary schools, a public university in the reddest state in the nation, a private law school that throws a keg party for the students and professors every Friday afternoon, and a seminary of the Presbyterian Church in America, an evangelical Christian denomination that holds to the inerrancy of the Bible, traditional views of sexuality and marriage, and a complementarian view of women's roles in the church.
With this background, I have no trouble at all accepting the scientific view of the origins of our universe and the evolution of life within it. I recognize the current state of scientific knowledge on these topics to be the most widely accepted conclusions reached after hundreds of years of empirical observation of the world around us.* I embrace the scientific ideal of seeking to learn as much as we can about our world, both to find new ways of improving our position within it and to simply answer the age-old question: Why?
I do not believe that my view of science conflicts with my faith in the existence of God, God's role as the sole creator and sustainer of the universe and all life within it, or God's continued daily involvement in the lives of the people he created. I do not believe that the Bible must be interpreted as a fable to justify my view of science. I do not believe that religious faith and scientific curiosity are antithetical.
So here's my honest question: am I delusional? Am I missing something in my knowledge of either the implications of current scientific understanding or of the bases of Biblical religion that clearly negates the other? Was there something in that high school biology class that I never took, or in that sermon I slept through, that would make it clear to me that I cannot believe in both evolution and creation? Did I not pay close enough attention to Inherit the Wind?
________________________________
* Then I read stuff like this, and I know that we're still working from a very, very small sample size.
You are not delusional. As a scientist, you merely study to understand God's creation. Who am I to question how He created?
ReplyDeleteI guess it depends on your understanding of "evolution". If by "evolution" you mean that man somehow evolved into its current state from some primitive state, such as a chimpanzee, then I would have to point you to Genesis' creation account. You already mentioned that you believe God is the "sole creator and sustainer" of life, however you didn't mention your view of Scripture. If by "evolution" you mean that man has adapted and survived as the strongest, I could agree to that.
ReplyDeleteI have two thoughts about popular scientific ideology: 1) If there was a big bang, it originated when God spoke the universe into existence. This is no joke to me; a plausible solution. 2) Concerning the age of the earth, Genesis says in 1:2 "The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters." How long before He created night and day, thus day one, was the earth covered in water, and what effect could that have on the earth? Could God create a new earth that appears by all scientific measure, old?
Just food for your thoughts.
Caleb