Many people believe that Christians have to reject evolution in order to believe in the biblical account of creation in Genesis 1. Scholar and author John Walton, as well as physician, Francis Collins argue that this is not necessarily true. Walton reminds us that we have to read the Bible carefully, as it was not written for us but for the Israelites. Walton also argues that observing natural effects does not mean that we have to remove God from our thoughts. He cannot just reveal all the scientific details that were going to occur because the past generations would not understand. The Bible is the proof of His love and patience for humans, not a science textbook. Even though it was not for us, we still read it since the Scripture is God's word. As for Collins, he states that nature, such as the occurrence of Big Bang, will point us to the Lord. I always thought that faith allows us to imagine who God is while reason allows us to see who God is, so I do agree with Collins. The story of Genesis or the Scripture must be taken metaphorically because of the potential mistakes made by the culturally diverse authors; therefore, His six days creation in the other reality should be allegorically interpreted as evolution in our reality.
Collins is a physician and a former atheist. During the third year of his medical school, Collins saw many good people with diseases that cannot yet be cured. This is when thoughts of God started to linger around him. Collins started to read sacred texts that seemed confusing, and finally ended up talking to a church minister. As Collins read and learned more about the Christianity and it's beliefs, the thought of having a God seemed very exciting to him. Collins argues that the nature came out of nowher...
... middle of paper ...
...4. Retrieved from http://library.gcu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true& db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001866309&site=eds-live&scope=site.
POLLACK, R. (2013). Can Faith Broaden Reason?. Genewatch, 26(4), 31-34. Retrieved from http://library.gcu.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true& db=a9h&AN=91891326&site=eds-live&scope=site.
Snyder, G. F., & Shaffer, K. (2009). In the beginning: Genesis 1:1-5; 2:1-4a, 15. Brethren Life And Thought, 54(1-2), 102-107. Retrieved from http://library.gcu.edu:2048/login?url= http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=rfh&AN=ATLA0001771713&sit e=eds-live&scope=site
Statham, Dominic. (2009). A review of The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate by John H. Walton. Retrieved from http://creation.com/review-walton- the-lost-world-of-genesis-one.
Coogan, Michael David., Marc Zvi. Brettler, Carol A. Newsom, and Pheme Perkins. "Genesis." The New Oxford Annotated Bible: With the Apocrypha. New York: Oxford UP, 2010. Print.
MacArthur, John. The Battle for the Beginning: The Bible on Creation and the Fall of Adam.
Humans have asked questions about their origin and their purpose on earth for eons. The Bible tells humans that God created them and explains their purpose. However, since the Renaissance, humanism answers questions about origins by naturalistic means and science has been redefined in the process. Most institutions of higher education and many individuals have adopted the naturalistic theory of evolution to explain human origin without considering its effects on faith. In contrast to prevailing thought at Goshen College, a literal six-day creation is foundational to the Gospel message. Combining evolution and Christianity makes one’s faith less logical and opens one’s science to new quandaries.
The idea of evolution by Darwin indicated that the world is not created by God, but through some kind of modification. This controversial idea is strongly objected by most of the religions, such as Catholic, Christian, and Islam etc. These religions sturdily believe that God is the creator of the world, the creator of everything. However, to some extent, Buddhism does teach the similar theory to Darwin’s idea, which Buddhism does not include the idea of God. Also, like the way Darwin talks about “Natural Selection”, Buddhism says that if a person wants to have improvement, he or she must do the good things and undo the bad things. Therefore, as a Buddhist, the idea of evolution shown a positive affect on my beliefs, and it emphasizes and truly proves the teaching of Buddha in a scientific way.
Where Genesis I describes a more ordered creation - the manifestation of a more primitive cultural influence than was responsible for the multi-layered creation in Genesis II - the second creation story focuses less on an etiological justification for the physical world and examines the ramifications of humankind's existence and relationship with God. Instead of Genesis I's simple and repetitive refrains of "and God saw that it was good" (Gen 1:12, 18, 21, 25), Genesis II features a more stylistically advanced look at "the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens" (Gen 2:4). While both stories represent different versions of the same Biblical event, Genesis II is significantly more complex than its predecessor and serves both to quantify the relationship between God and his creations and lay the foundation for the evolving story of humankind as well.
Schungel-Straumann, H. (1993) ‘On the Creation of Man and Woman in Genesis 1-3: The History and Reception of the Texts Reconsidered’. In: Brenner, A. (ed.). A Feminist Companion to Genesis. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press. pp.53-76.
Franz Delitzsch, A New Commentary on Genesis: Vol. I (New York: Scribner & Welford, 1889), p. 409.
In many aspects of our lives, the use of faith as a basis for knowledge can be found. Whether it is faith in the advice of your teacher, faith in a God or faith in a scientific theory, it is present. But what is faith? A definition of faith in a theory of knowledge context is the confident belief or trust in a knowledge claim by a knower, without the knower having conclusive evidence. This is because if a knowledge claim is backed up by evidence, then we would use reason rather than faith as a basis for knowledge . If we define knowledge as ‘justified true belief’, it can be seen that faith, being without justification, can never fulfill this definition, and so cannot be used as a reliable basis for knowledge. However, the question arises, what if a certain knowledge claim lies outside of the realm of reason? What if a knowledge claim cannot be justified by empirical evidence and reasoning alone, such as a religious knowledge claim? It is then that faith allows the knower to decide what is knowledge and what is not, when something cannot be definitively proved through the use of evidence. When assessing faith as a basis for knowledge in the natural sciences, the fact arises that without faith in the research done before us, it is impossible to develop further knowledge on top of it. Yet at the same time, if we have unwavering faith in existing theories, they would never be challenged, and so our progress of knowledge in the natural sciences would come to a standstill. Although I intend to approach this essay in a balanced manner, this essay may be subject to a small degree of bias, due to my own non-religious viewpoint.
Creationism being taught in public schools is not right because there are many beliefs about how the earth was created. Many science teachers have different beliefs on this particular subject. Some believe it should not be taught in public schools but on one’s own time at home, church, or another place. Other science teachers think students should be taught all the believable theories about evolution and creationism. Some science teachers have gotten in trouble with the law by not obeying other laws regarding evolution and creationism. This has lead to a lot of controversy in the science world. Even though many students have different views on creationism, not all of them are very accurate in the ways they portray the teachings of evolution and creation. This is why others should stop fighting about creationism and start obeying and respecting laws regarding this topic.
The Language of God is a thought-provoking book by Dr. Francis Collins examining a question that pervades modern society: can science and faith be reconciled? Dr. Collins was the head of the Human Genome Project and the current director of the National Institute of Health. He is also a Christian. Collins steps the reader through his journey from atheism to faith and examines reasons for faith such as the Moral Law and the Big Bang. Finally, he considers the different positions one can take on evolution and decides if, and how, faith and science can exist peacefully within a person.
This position does not immediately make assumptions that Genesis is a material account of creation, but instead looks at it with the text’s intention and date of writing in mind. Upon deeper reading and careful analysis, it is obvious that Genesis was never intended to act as a scientific account. The ancient people for whom this text is intended for would have never understood the lofty measures of science society understands today, and God recognized this; he choose to speak to them in their language, on a level they understood. This is why Genesis is should be interpreted in a nonliteral way; as John Walton says, while the text was meant for people, it was written for and in the language of the ancient people to which it was given to. In addition to this textual and historical support, Evolutionary Creationism also has the support of science. In this view, science has no conflicts, and in fact shows a lot of evidence in favor of intelligent design and creation. Consider the Earth and its suitability for life. It is the perfect distance away from the Sun so that it is neither too hot or too cold for life; the atmosphere contains the right amount of oxygen and other gases; these are just a few examples of how perfectly shaped the world is for life. No other planet discovered thus far has been found to have life or the
Pope John Paul II once said, “Faith and reason are like two wings on which the human spirit rises to the contemplation of truth; and God has placed in the human heart a desire to know the truth – in a word, to know himself – so that, by knowing and loving God, men and women may also come to the fullness of truth about themselves.” (Fallible Blogma) Based on this significant and powerful quote, one can infer that faith and reason are directly associated and related. It can also be implied that the combination of faith and reason allows one to seek information and knowledge about truth and God; based on various class discussions and past academic teachings, it is understood that both faith and reason are the instruments that diverse parties are supposed to use on this search for truth and God. There are many stances and viewpoints on the issues of faith and reason. Some believe that both of these ideas cannot and should not be combined; these parties deem that faith and reason must be taken as merely separate entities. However, this writer does not understand why both entities cannot be combined; both terms are so closely compatible that it would make sense to combine the two for a common task. Based on various class discussions and readings, there are many philosophers and theologians who have certain opinions regarding faith, reason and their compatibility; these philosophers include Hildegard of Bingen, Ibn Rushd, Moses Maimonides, and St. Thomas Aquinas. The following essay will examine each of the previously stated philosopher’s viewpoints on faith and reason, and will essentially try to determine whether or not faith and reason are ultimately one in the same.
In today’s modern western society, it has become increasingly popular to not identify with any religion, namely Christianity. The outlook that people have today on the existence of God and the role that He plays in our world has changed drastically since the Enlightenment Period. Many look solely to the concept of reason, or the phenomenon that allows human beings to use their senses to draw conclusions about the world around them, to try and understand the environment that they live in. However, there are some that look to faith, or the concept of believing in a higher power as the reason for our existence. Being that this is a fundamental issue for humanity, there have been many attempts to explain what role each concept plays. It is my belief that faith and reason are both needed to gain knowledge for three reasons: first, both concepts coexist with one another; second, each deals with separate realms of reality, and third, one without the other can lead to cases of extremism.
Therefore, we cannot believe the Bible. Sometimes we are led to believe that true scientist are not Christians or do not believe in God. Yet, this is none but farther from the truth. As we know, the Bible is not a science book, but as of right now, there is no scientific evidence that can prove the Bible to be incorrect. When the Bible makes a statement relating to a scientific principle or fact, it is always accurate. Let us see some examples of how the Bible can coincide with science. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). The book of Genesis was written by Moses through the inspiration of God, or the Holy Spirit in about 1500 B.C. In 1820 A.D. Hubert Spencer presented the world with five scientific principles by which, “man may study the unknown.” These principles are time, force, energy, space, and matter (11). Yet, Moses, by inspiration through the Holy Spirit, gave us those scientific principles in the first chapter of Genesis. Let’s break Genesis 1:1 down to show those scientific principles. “In the beginning”---time; “God”—force; “created”—energy; “the heavens”—space; “and the earth”—matter (12). As you can see, all of the principles Spencer presented are in the very first verse of the
Faith has several strengths and weaknesses when used as a basis for knowledge in religion and the natural sciences. In order to fully analyze these strengths and weaknesses and determine which of the two is more prevalent, faith, religion, and the natural sciences should be distinguished from one another. In The New Merriam-Webster Dictionary faith is defined as the “belief and trust in God” or “allegiance to duty or a person” (270), religion as “an organized system of faith and worship” (617), and science as “knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through the scientific method” (650). Faith may be considered a strong basis for knowledge in religion as religion is usually built around the concept of faith. However, faith may be a weak basis for knowledge in religion as certain teachings in a religion may not have a direct link to the concept of faith. Similarly, in the natural sciences, faith may also be seen as a strong basis for knowledge as a scientist has faith in the hypothesis he may be testing. Likewise, faith may be perceived as a weak basis for knowledge in the natural sciences as faith and the natural sciences tend to offer incongruous solutions to the same problem.