Thank you for your explanation. I understand your frustrations. However,
I don't quite agree with what you wrote about "philosophy." Note, I don't say
philosphers. Not all philosophers and theologians think in the way you describe
it. That is the main reason I write. They do not all have a closed mind. I
believe, you simplify things too much. My view of evolution is more or less
like Van Til's, though, there are some diffrences. That view may be seen in the
report of the study committee on "Creation and Science" of the Christian
Reformed Church reporting to her Synod of 1991, published in the Agenda of that
Synod, and co-signed by me. (Note not all members of the committee agreed
completely. Even one scientist did not sign. He insisted that Adam and Eve
were created in a special way. Another scientist did not sign for reasons
explained in a note. One philosopher-theologian did not sign. We were a
committee of three scientists, three theologians and three philosophers. I was
in there as philosopher, and contact person from the synod which appointed the
committee.)
Though I don't agree with your view on Genesis, I respect and admire your
criticisms of geological (and other) statements, which contradict findings of
science. Personally, I would summarize my view as follows. We must not forget,
that the OT was written by Hebrews for Hebrews. Hebrew outlook on life
(philosophy) was quite different from the Greek outlook philosophically. The
Greeks say that a statement is correct (according to fact) or wrong (that is
factually untrue.) Hebrews may use a story which is "factually" (in Greek
sense) not true, in order to make Truth clear. I have therefor no problem to
read Gen.1 as a kind of a poem to show the Israelites: God created the sun and
the moon and the stars and etc., the Sun is not God the Moon is not God, no star
is God, no Cow should be worshipped. They are all created just like we are.
Even more, man is important, he may take care of the creation ( not rule it.)
But, in connection with Romans 5:16,17, I do insist, that all humanity descended
from one man. Thus I am not so sure, that one will ever find "proof" of a
world-wide flood.
Science is not allways right either. In many cases jumps in evolutionary
history are needed. Are they maybe connected with major catastrophes? I don't
know, and I have not enough life time left, I think, to study the geological
records and compare them with biological givens. But I do think, that it is
necessary to debunk some theories from both sides which are not conform reality,
and/or which contradict the litterature. That is another reason I will not be
drwan into a debate about "facts."
Jan de Koning
Willowdale, Ont.
Canada