Methods of Creation
This page, about METHODS OF CREATION, builds on the
foundation of the homepage for VIEWS
OF CREATION.
Sections in this page are:
Theological Questions
Methods of Creation
Divine Action & Creation
Evolutionary Creation
Progressive Creation
Young-Earth Creation
Secular & Atheist Views
Divine Design of Natural Process?
Should all Judeo-Christian theists believe that God
intelligently
designed nature? Yes. Does this intelligent design include partial
(or total) "self assembly" by natural process? Should we give
credit to God for a design of nature that allows the birth of a baby
(or a star) by natural process? Should we challenge any implication,
by
a Christian or non-Christian, that "if it isn't a miracle then God didn't
do it"? Should we expect the creation-actions of God to be obvious,
so everyone can recognize and acknowledge what He has done?
Divine Guiding of Natural Process?
Does "natural" mean "without God"? During
the FORMATIVE HISTORY of nature or the SALVATION HISTORY of humans, can God
guide natural process to produce a desired natural-appearing result, and does God
guide natural process in either history or in both?
What makes a theory
of theistic evolution theistic rather than deistic? A process
of natural evolution can be interpreted atheistically as "an unguided
process without plan or purpose" but — if God designed nature so it would
naturally evolve, or if natural process is sometimes (or always) guided by
God — should it
be interpreted this way? And even though evolution can be associated
with weak Christian theology (or with pantheism, deism, or atheism), must it
be? or can it also be associated with strong Christian theology?
What types of intelligent design were used by
God?
Consider three types of intelligent design, with a feature of nature
produced by:
• natural process because, before history began, the
universe was designed so this would happen, or
• natural process that was supernaturally guided by
God to produce a desired natural-appearing result, or
• design-directed action by God that was miraculous-appearing
and is thus potentially detectable by observations.
And consider three possible plans for creation: God
could have decided to create everything by natural process (perhaps partially
or totally guided), or create everything by miracles, or create some things
by natural process and others by miracles.
What does the Bible teach us about creation?
by direct statement: In the Bible, do specific verses
(or general principles) provide support for a claim that God used
one plan-for-creation
instead
of
another?
by historical analogy: In the Bible, during salvation
history God used two modes of divine action — natural (usually) and
miraculous (occasionally) — so does this imply that during formative
history God also used both modes of action? Does a theory proposing "no
miracles in formative history" necessarily imply "no miracles in salvation
history" or — if miracles in formative history were not necessary — could
God decide to do miracles only in the context of human salvation?
And what about the origin of
humans? What
was the historical context of Adam and Eve? When
and where did they
live? Are
they the parents of all humans? Did nonhuman "hominids" exist
before them? Are the lists of their descendants complete, and are the long
lifespans literal or symbolic?
Scripture and Nature: How should we use these two
sources of information graciously provided for
us
by God? Should
we use information from nature — gathered and evaluated using scientific
methods — to help us interpret the Bible, when we ask "what (if
anything) does this passage teach us about the details of when-and-how God
created?"
Appropriate Humility when Answering-and-Discussing
Questions
First, prayerfully consider Job 42:3 ("surely
I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to know")
and carefully think about the appropriate humility (not too little
and not too much) of recognizing that we can answer some questions, but not
others,
with justifiable confidence.
Then ask yourself whether you think each
plan-for-creation would be sufficiently wise and impressive to satisfy you,
so we could honestly say, along with the heavenly elders in Revelation 4:11,
that "You
are worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and power, for you
created all things, and by your will they were created and have their being."
What methods
of creation were used by God?
In the rest of this page you'll see a wide range of perspectives on theological questions (above) about divine action from Christian creationists (evolutionary & progressive & young-earth) plus secular organizations and non-Christians. Although in this page the main focus is theology, many writers also discuss science. But scientific questions are the focus in ORIGINS EVIDENCE where we ask, "What can we learn about the formative history of nature by using scientific evidence-and-logic?"
An introductory overview about creationist views (evolutionary, progressive, young earth) — plus links to pages where you can explore more deeply — is in THREE VIEWS OF CREATION. And questions about human origins are in HUMAN EVOLUTION? — THEOLOGY & SCIENCE.
DIVINE ACTION in Creation
In addition to the pages below, most pages in later sections — about creationism
(evolutionary, progressive, young earth) and more — also talk about
divine action in creation.
• It's
a Miracle! Or is it? by Krista Bontrager, who describes different ways
God
interacts with his world — in Ordinary Providence and Extraordinary Providence
(with Nontranscendant Miracles and Transcendant Miracles) — to clarify
the views of Hugh Ross (9 k + 3k)
•
Divine Guiding of Natural Process by
Craig Rusbult, describes theistic action (foundational & active)
and includes ideas from 10 authors (13 k + 10k) / And
in another page,
3 main authors (plus 4 more & NABT)
ask, "Does evolution occur without
purpose
and
without
God?"
• Special
Providence and Genetic Mutation: A New Defense of Theistic Evolution is a
summary (5 k) of a conference paper by Robert John Russell, who explains
how quantum mechanics is "one domain where the effects
of God's special action might occur." {the paper is also available,
in shorter/revised form, in Perspectives on an Evolving Creation} Another
summary of a Russell chapter is Divine
Action and Quantum Mechanics: A Fresh Assessment. (6 k outline)
• Word
Studies in Genesis One by Hugh Ross, is the text of Genesis 1 plus definitions
for each word. (hint: open this page in two windows side-by-side, to
show text & definitions) / IOU — We'll find more
resources with differing views of what Genesis 1 says about creation. (and this
is in some pages below)
• The Robust Formational Economy
Principle in a Generously Gifted Creation by Howard Van Till, who thinks "creation
was gifted from the outset with functional integrity — a wholeness
of being that eliminated the need for gap-bridging interventions to compensate
for formational capabilities that the Creator may have initially withheld from
it." (6 k) / • reflections
on the Calvinistic theology (re: free agency) of Charles Hodge by Terry Gray,
who is "sympathetic with Howard Van Till’s notions
of functional integrity [with God designing nature so it could fully evolve]" but
thinks "the traditional Calvinistic formulation is fully able to bear our
current understanding without the problems that accompany [Van Till’s]
appeal to process theology." (16 k)
• Science
and Divine Action is a collection of pages from the Counterbalance Foundation, with
general overviews plus descriptions of the views of Arthur Peacocke and John
Polkinghorne, who is probably closer (than is Peacocke) to the views of most
evolutionary creationists in ASA.
• DIVINE DESIGN OF NATURE is
a links-page asking why nature is fine-tuned
to allow life: Is it trivial (anthropic
principle),
the
inevitable
outcome of a multiverse, or extremely intelligent divine design?
God of the Gaps
What does "God of the gaps" mean? When current naturalistic
scientific theories seem implausible, in their attempts to explain some feature
in the formative history of nature, is this science gap due to the
inadequacy of current science, or does it indicate a nature gap (a
break in the continuous cause-effect chain of natural process) that was bridged
by miraculous-appearing divine action? Should a theory proposing a
nature gap be criticized by calling it a "God of the gaps" theory? Is
the term "God of the gaps" imprecise because it has too many meanings? These
questions are examined in another links-page, GOD
OF THE GAPS.
EVOLUTIONARY CREATION (Theistic Evolution)
DEFINITION — A theory of evolutionary creation proposes that God cleverly designed the universe so physical structures (galaxies, stars,... planets) and complex biological organisms (bacteria, fish, dinosaurs,... humans) would naturally evolve.
Proponents of Evolutionary Creation
•
Complexity,
Design, and Miracles by Loren Haarsma & Terry Gray, who ask: Did
God design nature to produce a full biological evolution? and should Christians
hope the answer is yes or no? (7 k
+1k)
• The
Fish Wars: A Battle Between Two Worldviews ... Or is it? by Wendee Holtcamp,
who explains why (if we think and behave with unity, liberty, and love)
"the Fish Wars can move beyond foolish debate and into
the realm of common sense and peacemaking." (13 k
total, for Parts 1 and 2)
• Evolutionary
Theory And Continuous Creation by Keith Miller, is an overview explaining
why "there
is no inherent conflict between evolutionary theory and a Christian faith with
a high view of scripture." (20 k)
•
Evolution — without purpose
and without God? contains excerpts from papers
& letters in ASA (the journal of ASA) by John McIntyre, Douglas Hayworth,
and David Lahti (23 k
total)
describing two logical fallacies — "a dismissal
of God's existence is not logically warranted on the basis of evolutionary
theory" and "a
belief in God does not logically warrant antagonism to evolution as
science" (Hayworth) — and you can read the entire paper by
Lahti,
One
Spiritual
Danger in Creationism: Drawing a Red Herring Across a Track (12 k)
• Evolutionary
Creation by Denis Lamoureux; the first part (18 k) emphasizes
that some evangelical Christians with conservative theology think God created
through a process of evolution; the second part (also 18 k) begins
by acknowledging that "the greatest [perceived]
problem with evolutionary creation is that it contradicts the traditional literal
interpretation of the opening chapters of the Bible" and explains
why, with a credible interpretation that allows conservative theology, this
perceived problem isn't an actual problem.
• A
Personal View of the Evolution Issue by Alan Harvey, who thinks everyone
should "reject the philosophical falsehood that having
a scientific explanation for something in nature excludes God from being
the creator and sustainer
of that something." (16 k)
• Can
a Christian be an evolutionist? Can an evolutionist be a Christian? by
Terry Gray, "addressing skeptics and seekers" with
the hope that
"if your being convinced of evolution (together
with your intellectual integrity) has prevented
you from becoming a Christian, that this particular objection will be removed." (16 k) (other
essays about faith-and-science by Gray)
• The Robust Formational Economy Principle in a Generously Gifted Creation by Howard Van Till
• Chiasmic
Cosmology and Creation's Functional Integrity by
George Murphy, describes "a theology of divine
action in which the self-limitation of God [as revealed in the incarnation
of Christ and his humble death on the cross]... makes
it possible to speak theologically about the design of a universe which displays
functional
integrity." (28 k, PSCF)
• How did it all happen? by
David Wilcox (this is a links-page with two creation statements, book information,
and more)
• Theologies
of an Evolving Creation by Robert
Schneider, is an overview of responses to Darwin, evolution vs evolutionism,
and theologies of evolutionary creation: immanence and panentheism, providence
and causality, fully gifted creation, Creator as lover, vulnerable God on
the cross, and Teilhard de Chardin. (40 k)
• Robert Schneider
was co-chair of a science committee for the Episcopal Church that wrote a Catechism
of Creation and, in June 2006, passed a resolution to Affirm
Creation and Evolution (3 k); also, Statements
from 19 Religious Organizations (72 k total) assembled by NCSE
• Keith Miller
wrote An
Evolving Creation: Oxymoron or Fruitful Insight (27 k + 8k) as
the opening chapter (to address theological and scientific questions about
interpreting scripture and nature) in a book he edited, Perspectives
on an Evolving Creation; and a decade earlier in 1993, Theological
Implications of an Evolving Creation (17 k + 2k, PSCF) he describes
how "the creation-evolution debate has sapped vital
energy from the Christian community,... it has been both destructive to the
unity of
the body of Christ and a distraction from its God-given mission... to live
as God's image bearers, exercising stewardship over His creation, and proclaiming
His message of reconciliation to the world."
Criticisms of Evolutionary Creation
•
What can a Christian believe
about evolution? by Craig Rusbult, is a criticism and defense (18 k
for Sections 5A-5G) and is a shorter variation of Theistic
Evolution & Theology (25 k
+ 7 k + 6k)
• Some
Problems for Theistic Evolution by Robert Newman (56 k,
PSCF)
• Young-earth creationists define all old-earth views as "evolution" so
most arguments in 10
Dangers of Theistic Evolution (by Werner Gitt) apply to either evolutionary
creation or progressive creation. (9 k) / response by
Greg
Neyman, an advocate of progressive creation who defends the theology of evolutionary
creation (7 k)
• The "sad
and sorry god" of Theistic Evolution by Troy Lacey (young-earth), reports
on
a
symposium
about
Evolution and God (17 k)
Intelligent Design and Evolutionary
Creation
There are three types of divine design and evolutionary
creationists accept two (design of natural process, and design-action by a guiding
of natural process) but reject the one type (design-action that is miraculous-appearing
and thus might be scientifically detectable) that is most controversial and is
the common meaning of Intelligent Design. Much
of this section explains why evolutionary creation involves intelligent design. The
relationships between evolution and design are also examined
in INTELLIGENT
DESIGN IN SCIENCE.
Evolutionary-and-Progressive?
• The
views of Peter Rüst are difficult to categorize, because (like Robert
John Russell and other evolutionary creationists) he proposes only divinely
guided
natural process during creation, but (unlike Russell but like proponents of
intelligent design) he thinks that maybe unguided natural process could
not produce the biocomplexity (and associated information) we observe in the
time available
during the history of evolution. Creative
Providence in Biology by Peter Rüst (18 k) plus
a response by Howard
Van Till, Does
God choose among hidden
options? (21 k) and counter-response
by
Peter
Rüst, God's
Sovereignty in Creation (18 k), all in PSCF
• Evolutionary Creation & Progressive Creation — Similarities and Diferences by Craig Rusbult, uses quotations — from Howard Van Till, Keith Miller, Terry Gray, Loren Haarsma, George Murphy, Robert John Russell, Peter Rüst, Gordon Mills, Stephen Jones, and Hugh Ross — to show their ideas, and his own, about divine guidance of natural process, evolutionary creation with intelligent design, progressive creation with common descent, and appropriate humility about theological & scientific questions. (8 k intro-overview, then 67 k + 16k)
PROGRESSIVE CREATION (Old-Earth Creation)
DEFINITION — A theory of progressive creation proposes
that, during a long history of nature spanning billions of years, God occasionally
supplemented natural process with miraculous-appearing
creations.
VARIATIONS: 1) The miracles
might have been independent
creations "from
scratch" (so
a new species would not necessarily have any relationships with previously
existing
species) or creations by modification of genetic material (by changing,
adding, or deleting it) in an existing species. 2) Progressive
Creation is compatible with any interpretation
of Genesis 1 (framework, day-age, ancient near east,...)
except 144-Hour with a young earth.
Proponents of Progressive Creation
•
A
Testable Creation Model from Reasons to Believe by Hugh Ross, explains
how
his
model agrees with Genesis 1 and with scientific evidence about chronology
(if
each
"day" is
a
long
period
of
time) and biology (if "God
repeatedly
replaced extinct species with new ones" by independent creations). (7 k)
• Logical Evalution of Evolution by
Craig
Rusbult, explains why "evidence for common descent...
can count against one theory (with independent creation) but not another (with
creation by genetic modification)." (7 k for Section 4
plus "defining by descent" in the appendix, and the whole page is 17 k
+ 9k)
• Why
I accept Common Ancestry — Stephen Jones describes the reasons for
his
personal journey from independent creations to creations
by genetic modification. (80 k)
•
An
Overview of Progressive Creation by Dale Tooley, compares progressive
creation with theistic evolution and young-earth creation; he rigidly
defines progressive creation as "the day-age interpretation" but
is open-minded about how God created, although (especially in the final
section, on the origin of humans) he thinks genetic evidence indicates creation
by genetic modification. (25 k)
• Is "Progressive
Creation" still a helpful concept? by John Jefferson Davis, offers
theological and scientific reflections on an influential book (The Christian
View of Scripture and Nature by Bernard Ramm, 1954) a generation later,
and explains why progressive creationism "is broad enough
to encompass both the immanent presence of God working within the laws of nature
and the
transcendent
power
of God
above
the laws of nature." (30 k
+ 17k, PSCF)
• A
Theology of Progressive Creationism by Pattle Pun, covering: The Two
Books
of
God, Immanence of God, Genesis Interpretation, Natural Selection in Creation,
Fall & Incarnation; Progressive Creation by Comparison (with Young-Earth
Creation, Theistic Evolution, and Creation Myth of Neo-Orthodoxy) and by Definition,
as an "attempt to delineate the immanence of God in His providential involvement
in His Creation." (50 k +
references, PSCF)
• Yes and No — by Craig
Rusbult, asks "Is
progressive creation inconsistent because it accepts one scientific consensus
(the earth
is old) but not another (the process was totally natural)?" (15 k
+
6k)
• A Design
Theory of Progressive Creation by Gordon Mills, is outlined in a collection
of pages with lots of science content (which is more relevant
for
the "origins evidence" area) plus some theology.
• IOU — Later, we'll have pages (about
E and TE, OEC, divine action) by other OECs, plus more critiques (by YECs and
ECs) below.
Criticism of Progressive Creation by Evolutionary Creationists
•
Criticism of Progressive Creation by Young-Earth Creationists
• What's
wrong with Progressive Creation? by Ken Ham & Terry Mortenson, from
AIG's War of the Worldviews (19 k)
• Recent Creation is
a Vital Doctrine by Henry Morris (11 k)
Criticism of Hugh Ross by Young-Earth Creationists
• The Days
do Matter by
Henry Morris (9 k)
•
young-earth
response by Jonathan Sarfati (11 k) to 10
similarities &10
differences by Hugh Ross (3 k total)
• critique
of Progressive Creation / Rossism by Ken Ham (10 k)
• critique
of a Hugh Ross intro-chapter by Jonathan Sarfati, as
part of AIG's Operation: Refuting Compromise (59 k)
• IOU — more pages will be gathered from AIG's links-page for Creation Compromises
YOUNG-EARTH CREATION
DEFINITION — A theory of young-earth creation proposes that God miraculously created everything in the universe during a 144-hour period less than 10,000 years ago. Later, most of the earth's geology and fossil record were formed in a global flood. { In a variation that is less common, the earth is young but the universe is old. }
• Tenets
of Creationism (Biblical and Scientific) by Henry Morris (1980),
leading pioneer of the modern young-earth creation movement, summarizes
his educational philosophy (for public and Christian schools) and his
TWO models — not three or more — of origins history. (12 k)
• Let
the Word of God be True by Henry Morris, criticizing ASA
in 1953 (plus most Christian scientists since then) because they "took
strong exception to my premise that the Bible should govern our interpretation
of the
geological
data." (10 k)
• IOU — I've
found suitable pages by the most prominent ye-C organizations (AIG
and ICR) and authors (Morris, Morris, Ham,...) and some of these will be
here by August 2008; but separating age-questions and methods-questions
will be difficult (well, impossible) so there
will be
some mixing of age & methods.
Criticisms of Young-Earth Creationism
Some papers in other sections, by proponents of old-earth
views — either
evolutionary creation or progressive creation — offer theological
(and scientific) arguments against young-earth views.
And the "young
or old" question is examined in other LINKS-PAGES:
•
SCIENCE — According to most Christians who are scientists, strong
evidence against a young earth comes from nature, in
many areas of science spanning a wide range. This evidence, which seems
to show us that the earth and universe are old,
is examined in AGE OF THE EARTH — SCIENCE. But
advocates of a young earth think we should use information from scripture
to interpret nature, not vice versa. How should we use THE
TWO BOOKS OF GOD?
• SCRIPTURE — Proponents
of other views also challenge young-earth interpretations of Genesis 1 (the
six days) and Genesis 6-9 (the flood),
as you can see in CREATIONIST INTERPRETATIONS
OF GENESIS 1 and NOAH'S FLOOD — THEOLOGY
& SCIENCE which compare young-earth and old-earth interpretations.
• RIGIDITY — Prominent young-earth creationists
claim they have the only view of creation that is authentically
Christian. Unfortunately,
their claim — "if the Bible is true, the earth is young" — is
logically equivalent to claiming
"if the earth is old, the Bible is not true." When
a Christian who thinks "believing the Bible requires belief in
a young earth" examines the scientific evidence and concludes "the
earth is old" and then "if the Bible is wrong about the earth's
age, maybe it's also wrong about the rest," faith can be weakened or
abandoned. / Is it wise to link The Gospel of Jesus with Young
Earth in a package deal, by claiming that young-earth beliefs are necessary
for Bible-based theology? Is
a young earth an essential doctrine that is certain and important, that
is taught with certainty in the Bible and is theologically important? These
questions are examined in AGE
OF THE EARTH — THEOLOGY. { One example of young-earth
rigidity is the TWO HISTORIES
of Death (only young-earth Christian and old-earth atheistic) described by
Ken
Ham — who claims "the
battle between Creation and evolution, between young-Earth and old-Earth
views, is a battle between two totally different histories of death" — which
intentionally denies the third view (old-earth Christian) in THREE Histories
of Death. }
• IOU — Later there will be other non-yeC
responses, to explain how THE
evolutionary philosophy/worldview (as
defined by YECs in their "two model" perspectives that contrasts
YEC with everything else) differs from actual old-earth views, in
both progressive creation and evolutionary creation; these
responses will include pages that already exist, and maybe
commissioned pages, or a "sampler page" containing excerpts from
pages in other sections.
IOU — The sections above and below, about young-earth and secular views, need to be developed more thoroughly.
Views from SECULAR ORGANIZATIONS and NON-CHRISTIANS
SECULAR ORGANIZATIONS (for science & science education)
Here, secular means "not overtly or specifically
religious" (Webster's Dictionary) rather than "atheistic".
•
You can see a fascinating
story in the views & actions of
the National
Association of Biology Teachers who, from 1995 to 1997, declared that
evolution is an "unsupervised" process
so "natural" means "without
God". (this is a links-page with stories about NABT
plus a wide range of responses, 5 k
+ 2k)
• a theist-friendly, pro-evolution approach
by Phina Borgeson (a Christian, writing as Faith Network Director for the
secular National
Center for Science Education) who explains Why
NCSE Should Be Involved in the Science-Religion Dialog (5 k); but
a young-earth response from Answers in Genesis claims that Atheists
Infiltrating Churches is
the strategy of NCSE (7 k); there will
also be some information about NCSE and Borgeson, who is an ordained
deacon in the Episcopal Church and is
a self-proclaimed Christian, not
an
atheist.
•
For more about the views & actions of organizations, see ORIGINS
EDUCATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
NON-CHRISTIANS
These pages are written by authors with worldviews ranging
from Christian through agnostic to atheistic.
• Was
Darwin a Christian? by Michael Roberts (5 k, PSCF)
•
Theological
Insights from Charles Darwin by
Denis Lamoureux (30 k + 18k, PSCF)
• Finding
Gould's God by David Wollert, about views of Darwin and Gould (19 k,
PSCF)
•
The
Cosmos According to Carl Sagan: Review and Critique by Mark McKim, who
criticizes the "scientism" in Sagan's claim that science supports
his atheistic worldview (28 k, PSCF)
• IOU — We'll find more pages, including
claims that E is inherently atheistic, from textbooks
and scholars (Dawkins, Dennett, Sagan, Provine,...) plus views from atheists
who are less hostile, such as Ruse, Gould,...
A DISCLAIMER: |
THREE
TYPES OF LINKS in this website for Whole-Person Education:
An ITALICIZED LINK keeps you inside a page, moving you to another part of it. Above, a NON-ITALICIZED LINK is page-adding, opening a new page in a new window. Below, a NON-ITALICIZED LINK is page-replacing, opening a new page in this window. |
this page, written by Craig Rusbult (editor of ASA's website
for Whole-Person Education),
is http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/origins/methods2.htm
and was revised
May 9, 2008
( almost all links were checked-and-fixed in April 2008 )
other links-pages about Origins Questions are at the top
of this page,
or you can Search the Website