The second entry for this book review
The Investigation Begins
Fazale Rana continues and he explains: 'My first exposure to creation science jarred me into appreciating why so many scientists lack openness to Christianity. It also motivated me to undertake a serious study of the relationship between science and the Bible.' (16).
(Note: the belief in scientism, Scientism Scientism II is also a philosophical reason, I deduce, many scientists, lack an openness to Christianity)
Previously, Rana notes that the contents of many creation science works were 'riddled with scientific errors' (16). 'Instead of providing a scientific basis for Christianity, these works linked the Bible's truths with scientifically inaccurate ideas.' (16).
Rana did and does find the work of astronomer Hugh Ross (co-author) useful. (16). Ross is stated to have 'successfully demonstrated how nature's record, embodied in the latest scientific discoveries, integrates with the Bible.' (16). Rana views Ross as a researcher that can show how science and scripture are intertwined. (16). The idea that 'all truth is God's truth', comes to mind here.
Over the years, the authors have been working on scientific evidence and the origins of life issue. (16).
Oxford Dictionary of Science
According to the Oxford Dictionary of Science: a 'Creationist: A proponent of the theory of *special creation.' (203). Under 'special creation', is the belief from the biblical book of Genesis, that every species was individually created by God in the form which it exists today. (771). The species is not capable of undergoing any change. (771). In other words, Oxford is stating that special creation denies any form of evolution.
Further the entry states that special creation is contradicted by fossil evidence and genetic studies. (771). It notes that 'pseudoscientific arguments of creation science cannot stand up to logical examination.' (771).
As a non-scientist, it seems to me that both Origins of Life and Oxford Dictionary of Science do not subscribe to 'classic' fundamentalistic creation science. Oxford states that creation science largely comes from the fundamentalist movement in the USA, because Darwinian theory still has unanswered problems within it that cannot be entirely explained. (771). I appreciate the academic honesty here from Oxford.
Solving The Mystery
Near the end of Origins of Life within Solving The Mystery the book states: 'Rather than reflecting naturalistic evolution, life's step-by-step origins, the fossil record, and Earth's biodeposists testify to the Creator's carefully timed and well-designed introductions, and later removals, of the just-right species at the just-right locations at the just-right populations levels...' (221).
Origins of Life, neither holds to fundamentalist creation science, nor the Darwinian evolution of the Oxford Dictionary of Science. Origins of Life does believe in 'well-designed introductions, and later removals' which to me reads as progressive creationism and Biblical creation, but not Darwinian evolution.
From Reasons To Believe, the publisher of the text...
Cited
Reasons to Believe emerged from my passion to research, develop, and proclaim the most powerful new reasons to believe in Christ as Creator, Lord, and Savior and to use those new reasons to reach people for Christ. I also am eager to equip Christians to engage, rather than withdraw from or attack, educated non-Christians. One of the approaches I’ve developed, with the help of my RTB colleagues, is a biblical creation model that is testable, falsifiable, and predictive.
I enjoy constructively integrating all 66 books of the Bible with all the science disciplines as a way to discover and apply deeper truths. 1 Peter 3:15–16 sets my ministry goal, "Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience."
It appears to me Reasons To Believe embraces microevolution...
The newsletter explains that within a microevolutionary (not macroevolutionary model) migrating humanity can be explained through 'natural selection', 'sexual selection', and 'genetic drift'. September/October (2013:1).
Reasons To Believe Newsletter, September/October 2013, Glendora, California.
Microevolution happens on a small scale (within a single population), while macroevolution happens on a scale that transcends the boundaries of a single species. Despite their differences, evolution at both of these levels relies on the same, established mechanisms of evolutionary change:
Microevolution and macroevolution both being within Darwinian evolutionary theory. I do understand that because they both reply on established mechanisms within evolution, that parsing the difference is not always done with reasonable certainty.
As a philosopher of religion and theologian within a biblical, Reformed tradition, I take the initial creation of humanity in Genesis 1-3, as religious history, as not myth, even with aspects of figurative, literal language in Genesis 1-3. I take Genesis 1-3 and its connection to religious history throughout the Hebrew Bible and New Testament, including the atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, as a type of Adam (Romans 5), as not myth. Obviously humanity has evolved and progressed, in a sense, from Adam and Eve to a humanity of various ethnic groups and different skins colours, etcetera.
As an intellectual, academic accuracy requires that I intentionally take evidences from numerous academic disciplines objectively. Bias exists but it must be checked by reason, evidence and facts.
OXFORD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE (2010) Oxford, Oxford University Press.
RANA, FAZALE and ROSS, HUGH (2004) Origins of Life, Biblical and Evolutionary Models Face Off, Reasons to Believe, Colorado Springs. (Science and Christianity).
Reasons To Believe Newsletter, September/October 2013, Glendora, California.
