Home
Topics
About
Science & Faith
Apologetics
Archaeology
&
Ant
Astronomy
&
Cosmology
Bible
& Science
Creation
& Evolution
Education
Environment
Ethics
Historical
Studies
Mathematics
Origin
of Life
Philosophy
Physical
Science
Psychology
&
Neuroscience
Science
&
Technology
Ministry
Teaching
& Research
Worldview
Whole-Person
Education
Youth
Page
Publications
JASA/PSCF
Articles
Book
Reviews
ASA/CSCA
Newsletter
__________________
__
| Papers |theology | webLinks |
The
place of the Bible in the scientific task of understanding the natural
world has
conflicted the minds of Christians at least as far back as the
time of Augustine.
Over two
millenia the role of Scripture in scientific explanation
has ebbed and flowed according to
the time and place. Recently,
there has been an increasing number of books and articles
seeking to
analyze the role of scripture in episodes ranging from the role of Noah's
Flood
in Earth History, Galileo's
conflict with the Church, and Adam to
present-day
Creation
Science's confrontation with mainstream science. Special
attention is being
paid to the interpretation of Scripture, especially
the first chapters of Genesis. Today's
analysis of Bible/Science
relationships is complex and tentative, yet rewarding.
Finally, there is the role of theology.
Christian theology considers the attributes of God,
religious doctrine,
and God's relationship with humanity and nature. Theology is rational
and usually linked with philosophy. Our theology (often unknowingly)
shapes the way we
view everything - including nature. Theological
reflections on science related themes
are explored below.
The
pages of Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith (PSCF) offer
divergent views
on the questions that continue to vex and often divide
believers. Those who work in the
sciences and the Christian in the
pew are challenged to consider the place of the creation
and the task of
those who would understand it. This part of our world view is difficult
to grasp
but important to how we value nature and its use for our
welfare. We challenge the reader
to seriously take up this challenge as
exemplified in the work of the authors who follow.
_____________________________________________________________________________
A
helpful introduction is found in the article Science
and the Bible: Are They Incompatible?
Ernest Lucas. Science
and Christian Belief, Vol. 17,
No. 2, October 2005, pp. 137-154.
Currently Tutor
in Biblical Studies at Bristol Baptist College Ernest Lucas, spent seven
years as a research biochemist
before turning to theological and
ministerial pursuits. In 1986 he became Education D irector of the
Institute for
Contemporary Christianity in London. His interest in Old
Testament studies and science and faith issues are combined
in Can we
believe Genesis Today? (IVP, 2001).
An earlier article by Conrad
Hyers provides an interesting approach to the subject. Resolution
of science/religion conflicts is often thwarted by polarization into
extreme viewpoints, such as "scientific creationism"
and
"scientific naturalism." Not only do the extremes attempt to
dismiss each other; ironically, they often have much
in common. They
both place religious and scientific statements on the same level; they
both try to draw religious and
anti-religious conclusions from
scientific data and theory; they both interpret religious texts, such as
the creation
accounts, in terms Of scientific fact and model-either to
defend the scientific truth of the Bible or to reject the Bible as
primitive science. If one carefully distinguishes between the special
literature and language of the Bible and that of
modern science,
resolution of apparent conflicts is possible.
Another valuable introductory
article considers the "two books" concept. "Reading
God's
Two Books," George Murphy, PSCF 58 March
2006): 64-67. My purpose here,
however, is not
simply to reject the two books concept. It is rather to
ask some questions about it, point out its limitations, and suggest
some
cautions about its use.
See also: G. Tanzella-Nitti, "The
Two Books Prior to the Scientific Revolution," PSCF 57
(September 2005): 235-248. The
relationship between the revelation of God through nature and through
Scripture is here studied by
focusing on the metaphor of “the Two Books” as it was used from the
Fathers
of the Church up to the seventeenth century. According to the
majority of the Fathers, the book of nature is
as universal as the book
of Scripture, and the content of each is to some extent equivalent. The
authors of the Middle Ages emphasize that the capability of human reason
to recognize God through the book of nature has been
weakened by sin.
Thus, it becomes necessary the reading of a “third” book, the book
of the Cross.
Dialogue
When Faith and Reason Clash: Evolution and the Bible A classic discussion.
John A. McIntyre, "The Real Adam and Original Sin," PSCF 58 (June 2006): 90-98.
- Peter Yoder, "Will
the Real Adam, Please Stand Up!," PSCF 58 (June
2006):
99-101. - James P. Hurd, "Reply
to the Real Adam and Original Sin," PSCF 58
(June 2006): 102-103. - David Wilcox, "The
Original Adam and the Reality of Sin," PSCF 58
(June 2006):
104-105. - John A. McIntyre, "A Reply to the Responders," PSCF 58 (June 2006): 106-108.
- George L. Murphy, "Roads
to Paradise: Christ, Evolution, and Original Sin,"
PSCF 58 (June 2006): 109-119.
Big Bang
Johnson, Beverly Howard
"In
The Beginning..." I Think There Was A Big Bang!"
PSCF 46 (March 1994): 58.
Creation
Bossard,
David C. "The
Stones Cry Out: How Early
Christian Geologists Enlarged their
Understanding
of the Creation Account," IBRI Research Report
#57
(2006)
Andrew J. Brown,
"The
Relevance of Augustine's Views
Re-evaluated," PSCF
57
(June 2005): 134-146.
Snoke, David, Why
Were Dangerous Animals Created?
PSCF 56.2:117-125
(6/2004)
Orr, James "On Creation" The doctrine of creation expounded.
Young, Davis A., "The
Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation"
PSCF
40.1:42-45 (3/1988).
Glenn R. Morton,
"The
Dilemma Posed by the Wee People," PSCF 58 (June
2006):
142-145.
Perry G.
Phillips, "Did
Animals Die Before the Fall?," PSCF 58 (June
2006):
146-148.
Wilcox, David
L., "Establishing
Adam: Recent Evidences for a Late-Date Adam
(AMH@100,000 BP)" PSCF 54
(March 2004): 49-55.
McIntyre, John A., "The
Historical Adam," PSCF 54
(September 2002): 150.
Fischer, Dick, "In
Search of Historical Adam: Part 1," PSCF 45
(December
1993): 241.
Fischer, Dick "In Search of Historical Adam: Part 2," PSCF 46 (March 1994): 47.
Young, Davis "The
Antiquity and the Unity of the Human Race Revisted,"
Christian
Scholar's Review XXIV: 4, 380-396 (May, 1995)
Zimmer, Raymond J., "A
Possible Natural Complement to the Story of the Fall,"
PSCF
54 (September 2002): 158.
Isaac, Randy "Chronology of the Fall," PSCF 48 (March 1996): 34-42.
Hill, Carol J., "Qualitative
Hydrology of Noah's Flood," PSCF 58 (June
2006):
120-129.
Hill,
Alan E., "Quantitative
Hydrology of Noah's Flood," PSCF 58 (June
2006):
130-141.
Arlen Blodgett, "Result
of a Survey of Archaeologists on the Biblical Flood,"
PSCF
57 (June 2005): 127-128.
Hill, Carol J., "The
Noachian Flood: Universal or Historical?" PSCF 54
(September
2002): 170.
Morton, Glen R. The Mediterranean Flood," PSCF 49 (December 1997): 238.
Siemens, David F.,
Jr., "Some
Relatively Non-Technical Problems with
Flood Geology" PSCF
44.3:169-174 (9/1992).
Age of Earth (further material)
Irons, Lee "Animal
Death Before the Fall: What does the Bible Say?," Upper
Register, 2007. A
thorough study of the Biblical text
Fischer, Dick, Young-Earth
Creationism: A Literal Mistake PSCF 55.4:222-231
(12/2003) Biblical
literalism” often is blamed when conservative Christians find
themselves unable
to cope with certain realities of this world and its
encompassing universe, specifically, in respect to the
great age of our
surroundings—around 15 billion years for the universe and about 4.6
billion years for
our global habitat. This article endeavors to shift
the blame away from the written Scriptures, and place
it squarely on the
shoulders of those who to this point have been unable to comprehend
them. Scribal
errors and translation mistakes have led to flawed
interpretations, and some of the problem can be
traced to those who
wrote Bible commentary centuries ago. But the Bible itself can rise
above these
difficulties. All we have to do is read it, and except in
obvious instances, take it literally!
Watts, Rikki E., "Making Sense of Genesis 1" Contributed paper, June 2002.
Report
of the Creation Study Committee (Presbyterian
Church in America, 2000).
A thorough
discussion illustrating the complexity of the age question for a
conservative denomination.
Westminster
Theological Seminary and the Days of Creation A
Brief Statement
(1999).
Irons, Lee, Gen. 1.1-2.3 The
Framework Interpretation: An Exegetical Summary
PSCF (December 1998): 272.
Kline, Meredith G., " Space
and Time in the Genesis Cosmogony" PSCF 48.1:2-15
(3/1996).
Philippidis,
Alex, "Cosmic
Controversy: The Big Bang and Genesis 1," Perspectives
on Science and Christian Faith 47.3:190-194 (9/1995)
Menninga, Clarence
"Creation,
Time, and "Apparent Age" PSCF 40 (September
1988): 160-162.
Neglect
of Geologic Data: Sedimentary Strata Compared with Young-Earth
Creationist Writings (PDF, 3.6 MB) by the late Daniel
E. Wonderly. This is a 2006
electronic republication of this 1987 book
now available on-line through the ASA.
This work is an attempt to enlist creationists in a serious study of the actual characteristics
of the earth's sedimentary strata. Creationist organizations are emphasizing some important
truths about creation, but they have neglected the data of earth-science research... In this
carefully documented book the author encourages evangelical Christians to take an interest
in the real data of earth science...
VAN TILL, HOWARD J., "The
Legend of the Shrinking Sun- A Case Study
Comparing Professional
Science and "Creation Science" in Action," PSCF
38.3:164-174 (9/1986)
KRAUSE, DAVID J. "Apparent
Age and its Reception in
the 19th Century," JASA 32
(September 1980): 146-150.
PHILLIPS,
PERRY G., "Meteoritic
Influx and the Age of
the Earth," JASA
28 (March 1976): 14-16.
Kline, Meredith G.
"Because
It Had Not Rained,"
Westminster Theological
Journal 20 (1958):146-157.
Used by Permission
General Papers
Krista Kay Bontrager, "The
History of the Universe in a Nutshell: Reflections on 2
Peter 3,"
PSCF 57 (December 2005):
318-324.
2 Peter 3...provides intriguing insight into how
the biblical authors may have viewed the early chapters of
Genesis,
including the creation account.
Graeme Finlay, et al., "Creation
Versus Creationism," PSCF 58 (September
2006):
236-239. A view from New Zealand.
Stephen M. Barr, "Retelling
the Story of Science." First Things 131
(March 2003):
16-25.
Roberts, Michael "Taking Darwin and the Bible Seriously" (January 2001).
Schneider, Robert J., "Does
the Bible Teach a Spherical Earth?" PSCF 53
(September
2001): 159 [PDF]
Morton, Glen R., "Lauguage
at the Dawn of Humanity," PSCF 54 (September
2002):
193.
Brush, Stephen, "Creationism
Versus Physical Science," APS News November
2000.
(a view from the outside)
Paul Seely, "The
First Four Days of Genesis in Concordist Theory and in Biblical
Contest,"
PSCF 49 (June 1997): 85-95.
Woodall, David L.
"The
relationship between Science and Scripture in the Thought
of Robert
Boyle," PSSCF 49
(March 1997): 32-39.
Howarth, Oliver W., "Genesis 1: Proto-Science?" PSCF 38.1:63-63 (3/1986)
Ramm, Bernard, "The
Relation of Science, Factual Statements and the Doctrine of
Biblical
Inerrancy," JASA 21 (December 1969):
98-104.
Wonderly, Daniel E., "Fanciful
Bible-Science Stories' Harm: A Call to Action," PSCF
44.2:131-133 (6/1992).
David A. Booth, Biological and
Cultural Inheritance of the Image of God and of Original
Sin |
Mark Shelhamer, Continuing Creation in
Neuroscience: Implications for Understanding
the Creator |
George L. Murphy, Science-Theolog
presented at the ASA/CIS Meeting, Edinburgh 2007.
George L. Murphy, "The
Need For Theology," PSCF 53 (June 2001):
72-73. The reports
of the April
2000 "Nature of Nature" conference in the July/August 2000 Newsletter
of the ASA and CSCA
by
Glenn Morton and Bryan R. Cross bring out--I think
inadvertently--
Design movement. More broadly
speaking, they reveal a problem in many of today's conversations about
science and religion: A failure to appreciate the need for theological
expertise in such discussions.
Ross H. McKenzie,
"Foundations
of the Dialogue between the Physical Sciences
and Theology,"
PSCF 56 (December 2004): 242--254.
A theoretical physicist gives
an
appreciative but critical review of recent work by Alister McGrath on
the dialogue between science and
theology. Some of the important areas
of dialogue that have been identified include the explicability and
rationality of the physical world, the “fine-tuning” of the
universe, and the faith involved in going from
“inference to the
best explanation.” Realist perspectives are important (and
controversial) in both physical
science and theology. An important idea,
advanced by Torrance, is the parallel between the constraints
imposed by
physical reality and revelation, independent of the observer and “common
sense.” Some
concerns are raised about McGrath’s treatment of modern
physics, the role of postmodernism, the
evangelical perspective, and the
fidelity to the agenda of Thomas Torrance. Finally, some words of
exhortation are given to all writing on the relationship between science
and theology.
Alister E. McGrath,
"On
Writing a Scientific Theology: A Response to Ross H.
McKenzie,"
PSCF 56 (December 2004): 255-259. Alister
McGrath responds to an important
recent critique of his exploration of
the dialogue between science and theology by the noted Australian
theoretical physicist Ross McKenzie. The criticisms concerned relate to
the use made of modern physics,
the engagement with postmodernism, an
evangelical perspective on theology, and fidelity to the thought
of T.
F. Torrance. A response is offered to these concerns, noting
particularly the extended and more
developed discussion of these issues
in A Scientific Theology (2001–2003).
Ladislav Kvasz,
"The
Invisible Link Between Mathematics and Theology," PSCF
56
(June 2004): 111-116. If
we compare the mathematics of antiquity with that of the seventeenth
century, we find differences in a whole range of aspects. For the
ancients, notions like infinity, chance,
space, or motion fell outside
mathematics, while in the seventeenth century new mathematical
theories
about these notions appeared. I believe that this fundamental
change can be ascribed to the influence
of theology. For the ancients,
ontology and epistemology were in unity. They considered the world to be
as it appeared to them; the phenomena as infinity or chance, which
appeared to them as ambiguous,
they held to be really so. For modern
humanity, ontology and epistemology differ in a fundamental way.
The
being of the world is determined by the omniscient God, therefore it is
perfect, while our knowledge
of the world is determined by our finite
capacities, and therefore it is ambiguous. It is this gap between
ontology and epistemology, which makes the mathematicization of notions
such as infinity or chance,
despite their apparent ambiguity, possible.
John E. McKenna,
"Natural
Theology," PSCF
49 (June 1997):96. This
paper argues
that "natural theology" conceived as a conceptual
system antecedent to the interpretive framework
provided by the
self-revelation
heart of that revelation. In this way, science and theology may find new
powers of integration that can
help the modern debates between them, and
it may do this in the light of the real historical contexts
in which
their respective enterprises are pursued. Here scientists and
theologians discover a deeper
appreciation of their disciplines and
perhaps the ground for more creative interaction.
Sara Joan Miles,
"From
Being to Becoming: Science and Theology in the
Eighteenth 
Century,"
Perspectives on Science and
Christian Faith, 43 (December
1991): 215.]
Voltaire (1694 1778)
pseudonym of Francois - Marie Arouet
French writer, the embodiment of the 18th Century Enlightenment
The 19th century
French historian, Ernest Renan, characterized the conceptual
shift
that took place during the 18th century as a change from being
to
becoming. At the beginning of the century, it was believed that
an immutable
God had created a static Nature and given us an absolute
revelation of Himself
in Scripture. Natural theology, utilizing Lockean
sensationalism,
studying Nature as a means of learning about God. This
approach undermined
the authority of Scripture by giving primacy to
reason and by linking particular theological views to specific
scientific theories. When those static theories, emphasizing
being, gave place in the 19th century to more
dynamic
explanations, the theological views were viewed as having also been
overturned. The scientific
theories of the French philosophes ,
relying on a different view of Locke, eliminated God and revelation.
Their theories, however, displayed the characteristics
the direction
of 19th century science. The theological position associated with
becoming was developed
by John Wesley. Looking at Locke in
yet a third way, Wesley tried to validate a continuing, dynamic
revelation of God. But this revelation was subjective, and according to
Locke, incapable of being
communicated to another individual. In a
culture that valued scientific objectivity, subjective religious
knowledge was irrelevant. Thus the 18th century, while not presenting
Christian theology with major
scientific challenges in the form of
theories, did raise basic epistemological
provided the answers that proved to be
acceptable.
Rev, Daniel J. Price,
"Discovering
a Dynamic Concept of the Person in Both
Psychology and Theology,"
Perspectives on Science and
Christian Faith 45
(September 1993): 170-180. In
the past century and a half scientists have increasingly perfected their
tools for the study of human persons. Little surprise, then, that the
relatively new field of modern psychology
has steadily grown in
influence. Traditionally, there has been a good deal of animosity
between modern
psychology and Christian theology. This has been
especially true of the psychoanalytic tradition begun by
Freud and
carried on by a number of his followers. Does this longstanding
antipathy need to remain? Post-
Freudian object relations psychology has
developed from Freud's insights into the unconscious processes
which
influence human behavior. But object relations has, for the most part,
rejected Freud's biological
reductionism. Object relations theories have
built upon Freud's foundational discovery of the importance of
childhood, while pushing back the veil from the infant's relations to
the parent. Could there be analogies
here between what the object
relations psychologists are uncovering and what the Bible tells us about
ourselves? I propose that such is the case if one compares the
theological doctrine of the person found
in the writings of Karl Barth
with certain aspects of object relations psychology.
David F. Siemens, Jr.,
"Neuroscience,
Theology, and Unintended Consequences,"
PSCF 57,
(September 2005): 187-190. Most
contemporary neuroscientists hold that soul or mind
is no more than what
emerges from complexly organized matter, that is, is strictly a function
of brain. While
not necessary, this view has been adopted by some
evangelicals who seek current relevance. They, of
course, have to posit
a nonmaterial deity, something clearly not part of science. Their claims
have been
disputed on grounds of incompatibility with the resurrection,
with spiritual beings, with free will, and with
eternal life. None of
these criticisms has noted an even more fundamental problem:
nonreductive physicalism
apparently makes the Incarnation impossible.
Steven
Hall, ",Toward
a Theology of Sustainable Agriculture," PSCF
54, ( June 2002):
1 - 5. Sustainable
agriculture provides for present food and fiber needs, gives fair
compensation to those
entrusted with caring for the land, encourages
healthy communities, and can continue far into the future.
Few
Christians have yet tackled this daunting field. The benefits to
Christians and others may be great.
Christians must recognize the
biblical imperative of good stewardship of God’s creation, and the
special
issues of agriculture, so common in biblical themes. Secular
companies, governments, and other institutions
can gain from the wisdom
and values of the Scriptures, still highly esteemed by many, and tied
closely to
our collective roots.
Terry
M. Gray, "Give
Me Some of That Old-Time Theology: A Reflection on Charles
Hodge’s
Discussion of Concursus in Light of Recent Discussions of Divine
Action
in Nature," Contributed Paper, ASA Annual Meeting
July 26, 2002. Howard
Van Till has
suggested that traditional theological categories are
unable to bear our current understanding of the
character of the
universe resulting from modern scientific investigation. He claims that
notions such as
“functional integrity” and the “Robust Formational
Economy Principle (RFEP)” are not compatible with
traditional
discussions of creation and providence. He uses in a derogatory manner
words and phrases
such as “coercion,” “supernatural intervention,”
“apparent creaturely action,” and “divine Puppeteer.” For
a
solution he appeals to process theology and its panentheistic view of
the relationship between God and
the world together with the language of
“persuasion” and “authentic creaturely action.” (I also suspect
that
the problem of evil raised by traditional Calvinistic views of “divine
providence” also contribute to Van Till’s
exploration of process
theology.) While I am sympathetic with Van Till’s notions of “functional
integrity”
and “RFEP,” I disagree that we need to rework our
traditional understanding of the relationship between
God and creation.
Perhaps we simply need to review it. The discussion of concursus
in the context of divine
governance in Charles Hodge’s Systematic
Theology addresses many of these same issues. The traditiona
l
Calvinistic formulation is fully able to bear our current understanding
without the problems that accompany
an appeal to process theology.
Dorothy Boorse,
"Anti-Aging:
Radical Longevity, Environmental Impacts, and
Christian
Theology." PSCF 57
(March 2005): 55-64. Current
biomedical research shows
promise for prolonging human life spans.
Responses to these possible technologies vary from extreme
caution, to
exuberance, to a futuristic vision of humanity transforming itself.
Bioethicists express concerns
about big social and individual costs.
Some views are expressed in the rhetoric of a culture war similar to
those over cloning, stem cell research, and euthanasia. The possible
effect on the environment is
unknown. The biggest effect is likely to be
on an increase in individual consumption of resources by a
few and
greater gaps between the rich and the poor. On a number of levels,
radical longevity affects
our view of self, humans in community, and our
role in the natural world. I propose that prolonging
human primary life
span substantially is not a biblical mandate and is only appropriate
when placed
in the context of our role as humans and current
environmental and social issues.
Allen G. Padgett,
"Dialectical
Realism in Theology and Science," PSCF 54
(September 2002): 184-192. I
seek to provide a philosophical framework for bringing theology
and the
sciences into a closer relationship. This closer mutual modification can
be described as
developing a Christian and scientific world view. I
advocate, first of all, a dialectical approach, building
upon Greek
theologians (Pseudo-Dionysius and Maximus the Confessor) and a German
philosopher
(T. W. Adorno). I also argue that a sophisticated,
dialectical realism is superior to both naive realism
and anti-realism
for progress in the religion/science dialogue.
Harrison, Peter "The
Bible and Emergence of Modern Science," Faraday
Institute
Lecture (5/24/2005) Lecture
(19.4Mb)
MP3
Humphreys,
Colin, "Can Scientists Believe in Miracles?,"
Faraday Institute Lecture
(2/3/2004) •
HTML • PDF
•
MP3
John Brooke, et. al. eds., Science
in Theistic Contexts: Cogitative Dimensions, Osiris
Vol. 16. History
of Science Society, Chicago (2001).
John Brook and Geoffrey Cantor, Reconstructing
Nature: The Engagement of Science
and Religion, T&T Clark,
Edinburgh (1998).
W. Robert Godfrey, God's Pattern
For Creation: A Covenantal Reading of Genesis 1,
R&R
Publishing, Phillipsburg NJ (2003).
David C. Lindberg and Ronald L.
Numbers eds., When Science & Christianity Meet,
University of
Chicago Press, Chicago (2003).
W. Mark Richardson and Wesley J.
Wildman eds., Religion and Science: History,
Method, Dialogue,
Routledge, NY (1996).
Biblical
Archaeology Resources
Archaeologists and enthusiasts locate links to
excavations, writings,
discoveries and discussions related to sites and events described
in the
Bible. (web link)
BibArch
A helpful introduction
to the field (click enter when asked for a
Password)
Foundation
for Biblical Archaeology - North Carolina based non-profit
organization established to promote the science of biblical archaeology
by
providing funding and support for research.
Survey of Current Books that discuss the Question of Age
Works chosen for Christian
Audiences that primarily discuss the age question.
There are many other books which deal with the age as part of a
more general discussion
and many articles on the web that deal with the
subject.
Science Books
Written For a General Audience. (may
touch on religious ideas
but primarily from a historical context)
"Ancient Earth, Ancient Skies:
The Age of Earth and Its Cosmic Surroundings," G. Brent
Dalrymple
(1991), (2004). PB. A
very popular book written for the general reader (no equations).
Nothing on science-faith issues.
"Mysteries of Terre Firma: the
age and Evolution of the Earth," James Powell,
2001.
For general reader.
Integrates the biblical/historical dimension with modern science.
Young Earth
Works For Christians . (Collectively,
a negative response to
main-stream science and biblical
interpretation)
Creation Science Evangelism.
(Kent Hovand.) Has a number of cheap, colorful
paperbacks and
a package ($45.00). Authors
include Don DeYoung, Weston W. Fields,
Kent Hovand, and van B.
Taylor that deal with "scientific" and
"theological" arguments for their case.
Discussion starts with
a literal reading of scripture; science follows.
"The Young Earth," John D. Morris (1994) PB. Provides
standard "young earth scientific"
arguments. Widely
used. "The real key, however, for resolving the
creation/evolution controversy
is in a study of the age of the earth.
Evolution demands long periods of time, but if the earth is much
younger, as the Bible teaches, then evolution is even more
foolish."
"Creation and Time: A report
on the creationist book by Hugh Ross," van Bebber
and
Taylor. (1996) PB. Reacts
against Ross' Progressive Creationism and "theological" errors
"Creation and Change: Genesis
1:1 - 2:4 in the Light of Changing Scientific
Paradigms,"
Douglas Kelly (2003) PB. The
main thesis of Dr Kelly's book is that the author of the Hebrew text
of
Genesis 1:1-2:4 can only have intended to write a straightforward,
historical account.
Old Earth Works For Christians (a mixture of books: some
consider only the biblical
text and others draw on science and the
Bible)
"Christianity and the Age of the Earth,"
Davis A. Young (1988) PB Historical
introduction, geology
based arguments. Probably
dated, but excellent.
"Creation and Time," Hugh
Ross (1994). PB. A
classic concordistic approach. OE case
drawn from scripture and
astronomy.
"A New Look at an Old
Earth," Don Stoner (1997). PB. A
dated concordistic approach.
Argues case from astronomy, radiometric
dating, some geology. Argues hermeneuctical/theological
case
for OE; refutes literal yom interpretation; offers
some history of the Church's changing views on age.
"Foundation, Fall and
Flood," Glenn Morton (1995). PB. The
first section of the book argues
against YE. Geological,
concordistic.
"Neglect
of Geological Data," Daniel Wonderly (1987) PB. Geological
arguments against
YE claims
"Evidences That Have Led Many
Scientists to Accept An Ancient Date for Creation of the
Earth and
Universe," Hill Roberts (ca. 1998) e
Book. Eclectic.
"The
Genesis Debate : Three Views on the Days of Creation,"
J. Ligon, Lee Irons,
Hugh Ross, M. Kline, et. al. (2000). PB. 24-Hour
View, Day-Age View, Framework View are
each presented and debated.
Hermeneutical discussion of early Genesis for the most part.
"Genesis: The NIV Application Commentary." John H.
Walton (Zondervan, 2001) Has
done some creative thinking on the interpretation of Genesis 1.
"Reading
Genesis One: Comparing Biblical Hebrew with English Translation,"
Rodney
Whitefield (2003) PB. A
thorough study of the first 35 verses of the Bible invalidates the view
that
the earth is young.
"God's Pattern for Creation: a covenantal reading of Genesis
1," W. Robert Godfrey
(2003). PB. A
Literary/Theological study of Gen 1.
"Science
& Faith: Friends or Foes," C. John Collins, (2003).
PB. Hebrew/theological
study.
Argues the Analogical Days View.
Peter Enns, Inspiration and
Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old
Testament, 2005,
Grand Rapids MI: Baker Academic. Short
but valuable discussion of early
Genesis interpretation.
"A Matter of Days: Resolving a
Creation Controversy," Hugh Ross (2004). PB. A
Ross
update emphasizing scripture and astronomy
"Genesis
1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, And Theological Commentary," C. John
Collins
(Feb. 2006). PB. Expansion
of his 2003 work.
Observation:
In
the last decade there has been some serious interest in the hermeneutics
of early
Genesis by evangelical scholars. However, these
"novel" treatments have not been
received with much enthusiasm
by ASA scientists. It is hard to break-away from older
"concordistic"
traditions and difficult for busy scientists to seriously study the
biblical
literature. The ASA Journal offers material on the
discussion of various Bible/Science
topics of the last 50+ years that
can be found using the Google search engine on the
ASA home
page. However, there is no current book that joins the
historical sciences
and the Bible in a compelling fashion. I'm sure that
writers of these books feel otherwise.
editor
APPENDIX I
A listing of earlier studies on Genesis
Books
Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers,
1981. Although not a commentary on Genesis, Alter uses many of the events and persons
in Genesis to demonstrate the use of literary techniques. He is not committed to the
historicity of Genesis, but his evaluations of the literary features of the book are extremely
valuable!
Cassuto, Umberto. A Commentary on the Book of Genesis. 2 Vols. Translated by I
srael Abrahams. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1961.A enormous amount of material on the
first part of Genesis (through 13:5 where the work ends due to Cassuto's death). Good
use of ancient literary backgrounds, Rabbinic traditions, Jewish theology, and
poeticanalysis.
Dodds, Marcus. The Book of Genesis. The Expositors Bible. Edited by Sir W. Robertson
Nicoll. New York: Hodder and Stoughton, n.d. This older work is out of print, but would be
valuable to access through a library because of Dodd's theological/applicational approach.
Fokkelman, J. P. Narrative Art in Genesis. Assen Amsterdam: Van Gorcum Press, 1975.
Although Fokkelman only covers the Dispersion at Babel (Gen. 11:1-9) and the Jacob
cycles, his approach is unique as he unveils the literary character of these units.
Unfortunately, it is out of print.
Geisler, Norman L. A Popular Survey of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Book
House, 1977.This broad overview will not only be a good introductory tool for your study of
the book of Genesis but also as a reference when studying the rest of the Hebrew
Scriptures.
Kidner, Derek. Genesis An Introduction and Commentary. The Tyndale Old Testament
Commentaries. Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1967.This is an excellent one volume
commentary which addresses significant issues in the book without being exhaustive.
He is at times profound, though brief.
Keil, C. F. "Genesis." In vol. 1: The Pentateuch: Three Volumes in One. Translated by
James Martin. Commentary on the Old Testament. 10 vols. N.p/; reprint ed., Grand
Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1973.This older work wrestles with critical
questions, but does continue to offer the student helpful interaction with the Hebrew text
and theology.
Morris, Henry, and Whitcomb, John C. The Genesis Flood. Philadelphia: The
Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., 1961.
Morris, Henry. The Twilight of Evolution. Nutley, N.J.: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing
Co., 1964. Both works by Morris argue against evolution, and argue for an late date of
creation, as well as a universal flood.
Rad, Gerhard von. Genesis: A Commentary. Translated by John H. Marks. Philadelphia:
Westminster Press, 1961.Rather than an exegetical commentary, this is a theological
analysis of Genesis. Although he is very critical, and analysis source theories, he is
helpful in formulating a biblical theology of Genesis.
Ross, Allen P. Creation and Blessing: A Guide to the Study and Exposition of the Book of
Genesis. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.This work, written by a former professor
at Dallas Seminary, is designed to help several levels of reader from the serious student, to
the pastor, to the scholar. Its value is especially in its theological approach to the book.
In addition, Ross provides exegetical outlines of each unit and full message statements.
Each chapter is concluded with a periodical bibliography for further reading.
________. "Genesis." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the
Scriptures by Dallas Seminary Faculty: Old Testament pp. 15-102. Edited by John F.
Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1985. Although necessarily brief,
Ross concisely develop foundational introductory questions, and helps the reader to
walk through the logic of the book.
Schaeffer, Francis A. Genesis in Space and Time. In The Complete Works of Francis A.
Schaeffer: A Christian World View: Volume Two: A Christian View of the Bible as Truth.
Westchester : Crossway Books, 1982. First published as an individual work in 1972.
Schaeffer's great strength was in writing for the sake of the modern man as he wrestled
with the truths of Scriptures. He is theological, but extremely practical as he develops the
implications of the Genesis 1- 11.
Smith, A. E. Wilder, Man's Origin, Man's Destiny: A Critical Survey of the Principles
of Evolution and Christianity. Translated by A. D. Wilder-Smith. Minneapolis: Bethany
Fellowship, Inc. 1975. Wilder-Smith works in a conservative fashion with questions of
evolution, creation, date of the earth, and dinosaurs.
Walton, John H. Chronological and Background Charts of the Old Testament.
Grand Rapids: Academic Books, 1978. Although this work covers more than the events
in Genesis, it is extremely valuable as a reference source for information gathered in chart
form concerning general OT information, archaeology, chronology, creation to the
patriarchs, the sojourn to the conquest, the judges, the united monarchy, the divided
monarchy, the return from exile, and poetry books.
Wood, Leon. A Survey of Israel's History. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1970. This introductory history of the nation Israel provides an excellent
introduction to the chronology of Genesis and its role at introducing the nation of
Israel through the patriarchs.
Periodicals
Harrell, David A. "An Effective Mother is first a Woman." IBC Perspective ?(?): 88-96.Using
Genesis three, Harrell argues for functional roles of maleness and femaleness as men and
women relate to one and other in marriage. He develops a model of Larry Crabb's.
Rooker, Mark F. "Genesis 1:1-3: Creation or Re-Creation?" Parts I and II Bibliotheca Sacra
149 (1992: July/Sept.; Oct/Dec): 316-23; 411-27.Rooker examines the creation account and
refutes Waltke's approach of a re-creation in Genesis 1:1-3. Rooker holds to an "initial chaos
theory" where the chaos occurred in connection with the original creation.
Waltke, Bruce K. "The Creation Account in Genesis 1:1-3." Part I, Introduction to Biblical
Cosmology; part 2, "The Restitution Theory"; part 3, "The Initial Chaos Theory and the
Precreation Chaos Theory"; part 4, "The Theology of Genesis 1"; part 5, "The Theology of
Genesis 1," continued. BibSac 132 (1975): 25-36, 136-144, 216-228, 327-342; 133 (1976):
28-41.These works are must reading! Waltke argues well for a recreation view of Genesis 1.
His discussions of ANE cosmology and biblical theology from Genesis 1 are very helpful.
--From: David Malick, bible.org
Most Recent Entry: 3/15/2008
Send comments and suggestions for additional articles to the web editor haas.john@comcast.net