Saturday, November 30, 2002


Paul tells us that the fundamental flaw of the pagan world was that it took God's great act of general revelation--Creation--and turned it on its head. He wrote

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. (Rom. 1:20)

But man turned from that. 'They became futile in their speculations,' Paul wrote. 'Professing to be wise they became fools.'

Ah, but they really like to profess to be wise. Jim Bowen over at No Watermelons Allowed has a couple of great posts (one and two) on Creation and the Big Bang. He writes,

In conclusion, science in general and the big bang theory in particular rely on all manner of unprovable assumptions. That is, upon faith. Just like the creationists' beliefs do. The major difference is that the creationists acknowledge their faith.

Big bang/evolutionist reasoning runs like this:
1) There is no God.
2) We got here somehow.
3) The Big Bang/Evolution theories explains it. Despite the fact that the known laws of science show the vast improbabilities of such a thing occurring, our very existence proves that's the way it happened--we got here somehow, didn't we?
4) Those who believe in Creation by a Divine Being are simply unaware that science has solved the riddle of our existence and are ignorant, Bible-thumpers. They should be ridiculed and then ignored. Science has shown there's no God.
Corollary: We as scientists are also experts on Constitutional law, and any attempt to mention a Deity in schools is an attempt to abrogate the great 'wall of separation between church and state' that Thomas Jefferson wrote with his own hand into the Bill of Rights.

I do disagree with Jim on a couple of points. I have no problem with the Big Bang theory being presented in science classes. In fact I think it ought to be. Students should be aware of major (predominant) scientific theories, although I have no problem with it being limited to, say, high school age. At the same time the very reasonable theory of Intelligent Design ought also to be presented alongside it. As Phillip Johnson says, teach the controversy. Truth never hides from open debate.

No comments: