parable

DaveMatrix, I was apologizing for misquoting Alicat when I should have cited you as the source for the rather good summary of what the gospel means. And no, you have not offended me at all.

Alicat, I accept your apology about trolling, and am happy to show you wrong about me in that respect. As for the so called conflict between science and faith, or evolution and creation, I have reconciled those by recognizing there is no conflict.

The conflict between science and faith is not a conflict between science per se and faith per se but rather between a mystical worldview and a philosophy that has been derived from the constraint of science known as methodological naturalism. That is, the rule of science is that it cannot go outside itself for its justification or to explain its observations. However, properly understood, that methodology applies only to scientific inquiry. To adopt it as one's worldview is as much a statement of faith as adopting the biblical worldview or any other. The conflict is between a worldview that insists there can be nothing more than can be reasonably infered from inductive or deductive rationality and a worldview that is open to things larger than what can be proven by logic, reason or experiment. This does not make the latter irrational, but rather it includes our ways of understanding things other than just the intellect. Intuition, insight, imagination, consciousness, faith.

As for creation/evolution, there is no conflict here either. If you subscribe to the biblical view, and you read it carefully, it clearly states that creation was over before the fall from the garden of eden, the fall which included the curse of this world being such a difficult place. Since that time, nothing new has been created, in the biblical sense. Rather, and I take this idea from Dr. Ken Milller's book, Finding Darwin's God, what we see happening is change in what was created. There is no denying that evolution is the foundation of modern biology, just as relativity and quantum mechanics are the foundations of physics and atomic theory is the foundation of chemistry and number theory the foundation of math. It is incorrect to say that evolution has created anything, for creation was over a long time ago. If the world looks old, or if life appears to change over time, that has no relevance to how the world was created or what the world was like before the fall. Miller says, what better way to curse the world than to make it a fight for survival every day, having to constantly adapt and struggle. Miller suggests evolution is just the operational principle of the curse.

As for planetary geology, another good book is the Genesis Question, by Dr. Hugh Ross, who has been able to reconcile the order of creation as recorded in genesis and what scientists believe about planetary formation. The key is to adopt the proper initial conditions and reference point for the narrator of Genesis. Rather than assume the narrator is speaking from before time and from a cosmic perspective, Ross argues the order of events can be understood differently by having the narrator on earth some time after the planet was formed. You'll have to read it for yourself because I can't do justice to his excellent treatment.

Finally, and perhaps this is the most important question, how do we solve the problem of evil? I refer you to Dr. Gregory Boyd's book "Satan and the problem of evil". He has resolved the problem of evil to my satisfaction. Here's the gist of his argument:

Evil is a necessary possibility in a world in which the following realities make love possible:

1. Love entails freedom. Freedom to choose otherwise is what gives meaning to choosing love.

2. Freedom entails risk. The risk is that someone may actually choose not to love.

3. Risk entails moral responsibility. People are responsible for their choices because of the consequences they bring. Choices other than love often lead to evil.

4. Moral responsibility is proportionate to the power to influence others. If you are powerful, you have more responsibility than someone who is inconsequential. In Christian theology, Satan was the most powerful agent, so he carries the most responsibility for rebelling against God.

5. The power to influence is irrevocable. God's gifts are genuine, not taken back if abused.

6. The power to influence is finite. God has established boundaries within which we operate, so the consequences of our poor decisions are not infinitely bad for everyone everywhere.

Thus, if you experience evil, it is because someone, including possibly yourself, chose to follow something other than God, and that choice was close enough to you that the consequences were within your sphere of influence.

The bottom line for me is, I have reached a place where the questions you mentioned are no longer important. Instead, I am now free to focus on what's important in life and faith, not these petty divisive distractions.

I don't mean to dismiss them as unimportant, for I struggled with them for years. However, I recognize something larger in science, that it is a means to understand creation and thereby gain insight into the mind of the Creator.