24 November 2007

Young-Earth PhDs

Here's an article describing an interesting group of scientists (hat-tip to T&S sidebar). It's about the scientists who make up the First Conference on Creation Geology. Two interesting quotes:

The first---unwittingly---makes the Bible into a scientific theory.

“We don’t subscribe to this idea of the ‘God of gaps,’ meaning if you can’t explain something, then blame God,” [John] Whitmore told me before describing a method that hardly seemed more scientific. “Instead, we think: ‘Here’s what the Bible says. Now let’s go to the rocks and see if we find the evidence for it.’ ”
Now, you may not agree that that makes the Bible a theory, and if you do not then I think you should look into how scientists use the word "theory."

The second quote is a very good rule to live by.
“I have faith that the Bible is a true and accurate record of the earth,” [Marcus Ross] said. “I also entertain the possibility that I’m wrong. It would be cartoonish to say I don’t have doubts from time to time. Everybody has moments of doubt. But I can have those moments without my brain exploding.”
Well said.


19 November 2007

Intelligent Design and the Natural Man

Nova recently aired a program about the Intelligent Design trial in Dover, PA. One of the interviewees questioned Darwinism, stating that it robbed man of his dignity.

I wondered whether the scriptures support this idea. My conclusion is that they do not. Yes, we were created in God's image, but our physical creation does not separate us from the animals. Rather, we have the same passions, drives, desires that they do (more or less). Importantly, it is this "natural man" that we must overcome.

We are not born "dignified" because of the manner of our creation any more than we are born "chosen" because we are "children of Abraham." Human dignity comes not by looking like but by acting like Jesus.

(More detail is posted at Feast Upon The Word Blog.)


11 November 2007

Caricatures of Caricatures?

Over on Feast Upon the Word Blog, there is a discussion about the use/creation of scripture-based cartoons. One of the concerns is whether it is a good idea to create "reduced narratives" of the scriptures. I think the concern is that our cartoons are actually caricatures of the scriptures.

But I've been thinking: aren't the scriptures themselves mere representations of something much greater? As beautiful, sacred, and moving as they are, they are still just an expression of our true object of worship.

Which is not to say that scriptures are caricatures of God, but how closely do they really approximate Him?