Creationism

Stimulated to thought by Dave's thoughts on the evolution/intelligent design debate. I'll attempt to add to the discussion.

I am currently reading the book "The Myth of Certainty". I have barely begun, but the author seems to be describing me to a T. He discusses so called "reflective Christians" and the difficulties they run in to. Good review of it here. Essentially, reflective believers are caught between subcultures. They refuse to toe every line of the institutional church, while at the same time not totally measuring up to the demands of secularism. They are Christians of deep faith and commitment with a willingness to think outside of the Christian box. To ask difficult questions, and possibly receive difficult answers. Here is a quote:

". . . each group is impatient with the recalcitrant who wants to retain parts of both worlds. Conservative Christendom will allow you to think, as long as you think 'correctly,' or keep dangerous thoughts to yourself. The secular world will allow you to be a Christian, as long as your faith is kept in quarantine and not allowed to influence your judgments or lead to you to question secular presuppositions." P 60

Thus we come to the Creation/evolution debate. On the one hand, we have literal seven day creationists a great example would be the good folks at Vision Forum. Their statement on creation can be seen here. They are closely allied with the Institute for Creation Research. The very basic tenets these groups hold is this: The bible was written by God, is therefore inerrant in every possible way, and literally true Therefore, the earth is 7000 years old and was created in seven literal days. If we find any evidence contrary to this using the scientific method, then our methodology is incorrect because the evidence can not overrule God's inerrant word because only God was there in the beginning.

I have great respect for the folks at both institutions, especially their devotion and integrity of their faith. I also disagree with them.

On the other hand, we have secular humanism which completely rejects the possibility of an interactive God out of hand (just as close minded as the literal bible believers I might add). Since they believe God does not and can not exist, they must explain everything naturally. If it does not add up, then we simply don't know enough yet. The disturbing endpoint of this thinking is that everything and everyone is a random event with no meaning, no purpose. Might as well blow your brains out. What the secularists have going for them is the scientific method and empiric observation.....truth if you will.

I have great respect for science and the scientific method, but find the Secularists to be as close minded as the Christians at times.

What is the answer? I'm not smart enough to tell you. The bible is God's word. The scientific evidence suggests an old earth. We are here, so we came from somewhere, but evolutionary theory has thus far not been able to explain pre-biotic (life from non-life) evolution in any satisfactory manner. Where did all the energy for these processes (big bang) come from in the first place?

In the first Chapter of Velvet Elvis (highly recommended), Rob Bell states there are two different kinds of philosophical stances. One is a brick wall where if even one brick is removed, the whole thing is in danger of toppling. This represents the biblical literalists, and their fear of thinking outside of the doctrinal box as well as humanistic thinkers who categorically deny a personal God. The other stance is more like a trampoline that stretches and bends, but generally retains its shape. This represents Christians who are willing to probe and think, and push the limits. the whole thing will not necessarily break down.

I'm too tired to think so I might update this in the future....or not. No conclusions unfortunately, other than we are all a bit more close minded than we think.