New book helps answer questions contradicting biblical teachings

Dr L James Gibson
Director, Geoscience Research Institute
Loma Linda, California, USA

We need more written material about Creation, particularly about the scientific challenges to the biblical account. I co-edited Understanding Creation: Answers to Questions on Faith and Science (Pacific Press) with Dr Humberto Rasi, now retired, a former director of education for the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist Church, to help with this need.

The book will add to the discussion in the church about Creation, but Humberto and I didn’t want to be polemic; we’re pragmatists.

Students and young professionals say they are asked regularly to explain their Christian beliefs of Creation, particularly about fossils and the Flood. We took 20 frequently asked questions and had 20 authors provide scholarly answers in language anyone can use.

Half of the book addresses philosophical and theological questions, including the supposed conflict between the Bible and science, the science of evolution, Darwinism and morality and living without all the answers. The other half of the book addresses scientific questions, including the Big Bang, radiometric dating, plate tectonics, dinosaurs and fossil records.

The biblical account of Creation is a vital part of the gospel message because it challenges human pride and emphasises the power and goodness of God. Many aspects of the account have implications for Christian thinking. Here are three:

1. God is freely active in His Creation

Science is built on the suppositions nature is governed by fixed laws and God does not intervene with these laws. Many scientists fear a decrease in the trust in science as the standard of truth if God did intervene. This is an offense to human pride. If God causes miracles, we should accept Scriptures as God’s primary revelation and reject claims science is the most reliable source by which we learn about Creation.

1. Humans were created better than they are now

Despite being made in His image, our first parents did not trust God. This lack of trust brought death into this world. God’s response: to implement the plan of salvation, sending His son, Jesus, to earth to die in our place. Many people oppose this view of human nature because they have not found evidence of superior human ancestors or a world without death. The revelation of humans as sinful, fallen beings is also an offense to human pride.

1. The seventh-day Sabbath

Observing the seventh-day Sabbath symbolises our faith in the biblical account of Creation. The Bible gives no other reason for keeping the Sabbath on the seventh day. Observing the Sabbath also symbolises our fallen nature and our dependence on God for knowledge of our origins, our nature and our destiny. This is an offense to human pride, too, because it reminds us of our tendency to get things wrong.

Understanding Creation helps Christians proclaim the gospel by dealing with questions underlying its logic—the biblical account of Creation, the bringing of death into the world and the provision for Christ to redeem and restore us to relationship with Him in a new creation.—Adventist News Network

Understanding Creation: Answers to Questions on Faith and Science

Dr Lynden Rogers
Senior lecturer, School of Science and Mathematics
Avondale College of Higher Education
Cooranbong, New South Wales, Australia

Understanding Creation: Answers to Questions on Faith and Science (Pacific Press 2011) unpacks an exciting range of Seventh-day Adventist perspectives on origins. It includes essays by 20 Adventist authors, mostly scientists, although the fields of archeology, education and medicine are also represented. Joint editors are Dr L James Gibson, director of the Geoscience Research Institute, and Dr Humberto Rasi, now retired, a former director of education for the worldwide church.

This book is generally written well. It is also readable, although it offers no support to the suspicion scientists never use a short word when a long one will do!

A number of questions are addressed, such as: why do scientists interpret the same data so differently? The book includes discussions on the nature of science—these are excellent—and, as expected, on design, from cosmic anthropic considerations to the complexity of living organisms.

To argue the book represents predominately new ideas is misleading. Its central thesis is that of a recent, six-day creation. However, it also demonstrates Adventism is still a “movement,” presenting some views that would have been unacceptable to our pioneers. Many of these would still have been controversial in the days of the great Adventist creation warrior, George McCready Price. These include:

• Two creation events, not one. The first, “in the beginning,” billions of years ago, saw the creation of most of the cosmos, possibly including our earth. In the second, six-day event, less than 10,000 years ago, God developed this earth and created life. Perhaps deGroot’s article on the Big Bang gives fullest expression to this idea. Although this may not be the majority view among Adventists, it is gaining ground, particularly in Adventist institutions.
• The admission the fossil sequences of the geologic column present some problems for recent creationists, as they do for evolutionary theory.
• The recognition the Flood is not responsible for all sedimentary rock.
• The recognition the data does not overwhelmingly support recent creationism. Burdick’s closing article explores options for surviving in the face of evidence for which there are no apparent answers. This sets the book apart from much creationist literature.

The book also provides frank treatments of topics often ignored by Adventist publications, including:

• Tectonics. Among other mentions, it is good to see an accurate presentation of plate tectonics and continental drift by Clausen. He notes the success of this theory and the difficulties of alternative young-age models.
• Theories of human origins. Although noting in his opinion this data is not convincing, Nalin presents a useful summary of current scientific ideas on human origin.

I found some logic a little difficult.

One author cites the Galileo incident in the context of his contention that the theistic or atheistic nature of a scientist’s worldview plays a major interpretive role in their science. However, the same author admits later that, since Galileo was a Christian, this was not really a Bible/atheism conflict but one involving biblical interpretation.

Another author notes some systems, such as viper envenomation, appear well designed—to kill, no less—while others, such as the human back, appear not so well designed. He argues these factors do not mitigate against design but does not develop a rationale for regarding them as the handiwork of an all-provident God or explaining them in terms of the fall. Of course, word count may have been against him.

Also, one author implies most creationists believe dinosaurs disappeared during the Flood. Three pages later, he states most creationists believe dinosaurs disappeared during or shortly after the Flood. I believe the latter statement is more correct, as early Adventists were almost unique in placing the disappearance of dinosaurs at the Flood, a position inferred from Ellen G White’s Spiritual Gifts.

Finally, if a wider readership is intended, the frequently implied or explicit exclusive association of theism with recent creationism might offend other Christians prepared to consider longer age options.

I recommend Understanding Creation to those interested in learning more about mainstream Adventist thinking on this important topic.

Understanding Creation is available through Avondale Library or at Adventist Book Centres.