Science and the Sacred (RJS)

I would agree. I have time for following 1 blog only, and this has been it for a few years. I value links to other things going on, this suits my interest having both a science and religion education, but prefer the breadth of topics at Jesus Creed.

Travis,

I have every intention of continuing - we have a somewhat different niche.

On the last two - the answers may be "easy" but the devil is in the details of course. The next part of each question on my final exam is "If so, how?"

"If so, how?"

I've found the baby analogy to be quite useful. Do we believe that God created every human being on the planet? Yes. But of course, by created, we don't at all mean that God individually, all at once, constructed each person as a special act of creation. The usual channels were used: human interactions, natural biological processes, cells dividing and so on.

So with evolution.

Although I do have a question that I don't believe we've addressed, to which I don't know the answer. What is the current science on the actual origin of life? Evolution, as I understand it, is about the development of life into all the various forms we see. But how did life itself originate? And how does that question interact with Genesis?

Travis,

The origin of life (as opposed to the origin of species) is much more speculative - there is much less known, and less evidence to go on. I think that we can identify an approximate time (very shortly after the formation of the earth - relatively speaking). But how it came about is a tough one - how the first self replicating, information containing, molecule appeared - wow... it is amazing.

I would like to thank you for your efforts in addressing relations between Science and Christian Faith. It has been the best I have been aware of lately. Maybe you could become one of the currently few female contributors to the new blogs. The problems of our view of science as Christians has not disappeared. I have become interested recently in the psychology of belief and how it interacts with evidence. Mark Noll addressed this in the Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. This is captured in the following quotes from Richard Dawkins concerning the YEC scientist Kurt Wise. How is this mind set related to holocaust denial, climate change denial, HIV denial, etc? Is there any hope for intellectual processes in which faith seeks understanding. Is there any role for rational thought in Christian faith?
Dawkins has written:
"Kurt Wise doesn’t need the challenge; he volunteers that, even if all the evidence in the universe flatly contradicted Scripture, and even if he had reached the point of admitting this to himself, he would still take his stand on Scripture and deny the evidence. This leaves me, as a scientist, speechless."[6]
"We have it on the authority of a man who may well be creationism’s most highly qualified and most intelligent scientist that no evidence, no matter how overwhelming, no matter how all-embracing, no matter how devastatingly convincing, can ever make any difference."[6]

RJS
I've really enjoyed your contributions on science and faith. I hope you'll continue. I have been faithfully reading. I haven't been able to comment much lately because quite frankly the issues are pretty complex and deserve more than a 5 minute thought and comment. I've also been interested in watching your personal theology evolve. I have felt privileged to observe you and others here lay their beliefs on the table and publicly grapple with them

Mariam and MatthewS,

You bring out the strength of civil conversation. The intent isn't to layout expert answers and be done - but to state a case and discuss it. If we can converse - watching tone and trying to keep to the point - perhaps we can all learn something. We are thinking in public and inviting others to join in.

RJS wrote:

"although I waver at times on the importance of the Fall as an historical event."

These days I'm leaning toward a gradual and not necessarily unidirectional fall, as explored in the posts listed below. I would very much enjoy interacting with any folks here on that.

A Gradual Fall?
http://thinkingaloud99.blogspot.com/2009/05/gradual-fall.html

On the Evolutionary "Chisel," the Divinely Intended "Sculpture," and the Glorious Meaning and Destiny of our Lives in Christ
http://thinkingaloud99.blogspot.com/2009/04/on-evolutionary-chisel-divine-sculptor.html

I'll echo others on the value of RJS' contributions in this venue; we need for her to stay in business.

One thing that concerns me about BioLogos is that, from a brief look, the whole project seems to be people from the "science" side. Where are the professional theologians and/or pastors? Without some "buy-in" and participation from that side of things, the impact of this, wise as their answers seem to be, is likely to be small. Collins' book, for example, I thought had some missteps on the non-science side of things (not blunders -- more not addressing significant questions). Many of the best people in this area (George Murphy, Alister McGrath, John Polkinghorne) are people with professional training in both science and theology. And a pastor like Daniel Harrell (or Tim Keller) could also help make the effort something that would have a real impact at the level of the people in the pews.

Also echo the concerns about women -- well qualified people would include prominent women from the American Scientific Affiliation (past ASA President Ruth Douglas Miller, Deborah Haarsma, Jennifer Wiseman) and Fuller's Nancey Murphy from the theology side. Not to mention RJS.