I received a free copy of Clearing a Path for the Gospel - A Lutheran Approach to Apologetics by Arthur A. Eggers and Geoffrey A. Kieta and have begun reading it. I enjoy reading the perspective of a scientist who warns us about overstating our case for creationism by citing scientific evidence for a young Earth and attacking the scientific evidence for an "old" Earth and universe. A quote that has stuck with me is:
"Science can only measure things as they appear, not as they really are. Therefore, there cannot be anything called "true science" which will find precisely what the Bible says. Efforts of sinful human beings simply cannot duplicate the revelation of the Lord."
The authors also contrast "apparent age" (as measured through scientific dating techniques) vs. "actual age." The apparent age is the best science can determine with the techniques that scientists currently have. They also explain that anytime something is created it appears to have age. For example, if you would meet Adam after creation week (without divine revelation) you would probably conclude that he had been an infant, child, teen, etc. and had an apparent age of 20+ years even though his actual age was just a few days.
Fossils
pg. 120-121 "To the Christian, the source of these fossils is also clear; namely, the God of the Bible put them where we are finding them. Many will respond, 'That's just plain crazy! Why would God do such a thing?' Well, for one thing, he is God. He can do whatever he pleases and owes us no explanation. . . . We might be curious to learn when God buried the fossils around the earth. . . . Not only do we not know when or how he did it, but we have no ability to learn this information. What we can be sure of is that it did not happen primarily by the natural processes of which we are now aware. Geologists have gathered evidence from many thousands of sites and have been able to create a model of how the world works which is consistent with the fossils being buried naturally over the course of almost a billion years. (Some might object that because God created a perfect world, it could not have had death in it in any manner, for death is associated with sin. Yet, when Adam picked fruit to eat on the first day (after Creation week), the fruit died, and fertile soil, at least as we know it, required decaying plant or animal remains in it. If the fossils are merely props which had never been part of living creatures, then not death would have been involved in their generation. God cannot be limited by how we stablish our definition of 'perfect.' If he did choose to do it this way, then his creation was still perfect in his eyes.) Obviously, God did not use this process, so he must have used a supernatural process or changed the rules of nature." (Eggert and Kieta)
Logic vs. God's Plan
"The apologist should point out that just because an argument makes sense philosophically does not mean that it is true scientifically, where the standard of truth is reproducible experimental results." (Eggert and Kieta)
Biological Evolution
"As apologists, we are tempted to look at biological evolution, to draw a line in the sand to say, 'It didn't happen because scientists will be X or explain how Y could have happened.' This temptation must be resisted. If a major breakthrough occurred and scientists were suddenly able to do X or explain Y, what would happen to our credibility on other subjects once an it-can't-be-done claim we had made was shown to be false? . . . Apologetics based on the sciences of men rather than on the revelation of God is always sitting on the slippery slope of new discoveries just above the quicksand of folly." (Eggert and Kieta)
"Our purpose is not to explain scientific evidence better than the scientists, but to proclaim that no scientific discovery will shove the Lord off his throne as the Creator and Preserver of the universe. We must make clear that everyone is still accountable to him, and that is why his law and his gospel matter as much as ever." (Eggert and Kieta)
"Science can only measure things as they appear, not as they really are. Therefore, there cannot be anything called "true science" which will find precisely what the Bible says. Efforts of sinful human beings simply cannot duplicate the revelation of the Lord."
The authors also contrast "apparent age" (as measured through scientific dating techniques) vs. "actual age." The apparent age is the best science can determine with the techniques that scientists currently have. They also explain that anytime something is created it appears to have age. For example, if you would meet Adam after creation week (without divine revelation) you would probably conclude that he had been an infant, child, teen, etc. and had an apparent age of 20+ years even though his actual age was just a few days.
Fossils
pg. 120-121 "To the Christian, the source of these fossils is also clear; namely, the God of the Bible put them where we are finding them. Many will respond, 'That's just plain crazy! Why would God do such a thing?' Well, for one thing, he is God. He can do whatever he pleases and owes us no explanation. . . . We might be curious to learn when God buried the fossils around the earth. . . . Not only do we not know when or how he did it, but we have no ability to learn this information. What we can be sure of is that it did not happen primarily by the natural processes of which we are now aware. Geologists have gathered evidence from many thousands of sites and have been able to create a model of how the world works which is consistent with the fossils being buried naturally over the course of almost a billion years. (Some might object that because God created a perfect world, it could not have had death in it in any manner, for death is associated with sin. Yet, when Adam picked fruit to eat on the first day (after Creation week), the fruit died, and fertile soil, at least as we know it, required decaying plant or animal remains in it. If the fossils are merely props which had never been part of living creatures, then not death would have been involved in their generation. God cannot be limited by how we stablish our definition of 'perfect.' If he did choose to do it this way, then his creation was still perfect in his eyes.) Obviously, God did not use this process, so he must have used a supernatural process or changed the rules of nature." (Eggert and Kieta)
Logic vs. God's Plan
"The apologist should point out that just because an argument makes sense philosophically does not mean that it is true scientifically, where the standard of truth is reproducible experimental results." (Eggert and Kieta)
Biological Evolution
"As apologists, we are tempted to look at biological evolution, to draw a line in the sand to say, 'It didn't happen because scientists will be X or explain how Y could have happened.' This temptation must be resisted. If a major breakthrough occurred and scientists were suddenly able to do X or explain Y, what would happen to our credibility on other subjects once an it-can't-be-done claim we had made was shown to be false? . . . Apologetics based on the sciences of men rather than on the revelation of God is always sitting on the slippery slope of new discoveries just above the quicksand of folly." (Eggert and Kieta)
"Our purpose is not to explain scientific evidence better than the scientists, but to proclaim that no scientific discovery will shove the Lord off his throne as the Creator and Preserver of the universe. We must make clear that everyone is still accountable to him, and that is why his law and his gospel matter as much as ever." (Eggert and Kieta)
Comments
Post a Comment