Our discussions this week focused on Michael Poole's short book "Science and Belief". It allowed us to discuss the general range of topics that are part of the Faith and Science discussion.
There were several points where comments were made that the bias of Poole was showing and it is important to a) detect author bias and b) to be able to NOT condemn a position that you may not agree with. It was suggested that Poole appears to be a theistic evolutionist and if you strongly feel that is a wrong position then it can stop your ears to the logic that the author is attempting to create.
As the quote on my door says:
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it" Aristotle
2 comments:
After class on Thursday I was confused with the issue of the diet of animals in the Garden of Eden. Were the animals made to be herbivores? In my research I have found that the Bible does in fact say that man and animals were to eat plants in the Garden, “And God said, ‘See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food'; and it was so" (Genesis 1:29-30 NKJV). This point was further explained in an article by James Stambaugh titled “Death Before Sin? This article is found on the Institute for Christian Research website. This article notes that “there is not much said about the diet of man and the animals in the Garden of Eden. An integral part of the evolutionary scenario is that both men and many of their animal ancestors have always been carnivorous. Yet God said very clearly that both man and animals were only to eat plants, in Genesis 1:29. This we can see as part of being "very good," and is God's best for His creation. We are not told when animals became carnivorous, yet we do know that man was not to eat meat until after the Flood (Genesis 9:3). Stambaugh also mentions that, “Those who accept the Bible believe that death is a punishment for sin; death must have come into existence after Adam fell.” This means that there were no carnivorous animals before the fall. In Isaiah 11:7 it says, “…And the lion shall eat straw like the ox”. When the new heaven and earth occur the world will be as God had intended and all will be at peace. Therefore the lion will eat plants along with the other animals.
Stambaugh also reflects on the issue discussed in class concerning people not having an excuse for choosing to reject God (found in Romans 1:18-23). The Bible says that man can see God in his creation of the world as well as in the image of man. Despite the marred image of God in mankind it is still possible to search to learn the truth about God. Stambaugh states that, “Man is now a fallen sinner, and so God shows him what his spiritual state is like when he looks at nature. So when man looks at nature, he can see the glory of God, although it is veiled by the curse of sin. Such a demonstration of the results of sin should drive men back to God for His solution to sin and death.” Even though man does not accurately reflect the image of God this allows man to realize that his sin has created the separation between God and man and that man needs a resolution to sin: Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.
References:
Ham, Ken. Did Adam Have a Belly Button? And Other Tough Questions About the Bible. Arizona, New Leaf Publishers: 1999. Page 16.
Stambaugh, James. “Death Before Sin”: Impact. Institute for Creation Research. On-line: http://www.icr.org/article/295/. 2007.
The issue of the created form of animals before and after the Fall is really only discussed by conservative / fundamentalist thinkers such as the ones that you quote. It is true that the Bible explicitly indicates that death in all its forms did not occur before the Fall. For many animals this requires a complete change in physiology and nutritional biochemistry after the Fall and many scholars do not find this scripturally supported. On reflection there may have been a tone in the discussion that may have casually dismissed the idea that tigers ate herbs before the Fall but the intention was to edge students towards reflecting on the fact that this is scientifically impossible but still the common sense understanding of Scripture. Some Christians simply refuse to engage the debate.
On the second issue from class concerning the problem of seeing some form of the Gospel in Creation. It is a matter of doctrine that in fact the only path to peace with God is via the cross of Jesus Christ. Any revelation from Creation may allow the perception of separation but cannot reveal the true gospel. An incomplete gospel is an insufficient gospel and one would wonder why God would cruelly "tease" the lost who have no hope of hearing the gospel.
Post a Comment