Three Views on Creation and Evolution

An underlying theme in "Three Views" is that how one understands the nature of science is of primary significance for guiding where one ends up on the creation/evolution issue. Theistic evolutionists, along with secular and atheistic evolutionists, believe that methodological naturalism is a necessary component of science. Restricting science to natural categories of explanation, it is claimed, does not mean, however, that metaphysical naturalism as a worldview follows from that. The connection is supposedly spurious, the assumption being that the scientific theory of evolution is valid and supported by good, objective scientific evidence, and is not connected whatsoever to any form of evolutionism. However, I believe that theistic evolutionists are mistaken about both methodological naturalism being a necessary part of science, and the separability of evolution from evolutionism. Science is not a strictly objective, metaphysically neutral, value-free activity: it operates, rather, as part of a paradigm, a way of looking at the world which includes a set of assumptions and questions that may or may not be asked. Currently a positivist (ie. materialist) paradigm reigns in biological science, with all the assumptions and limitations that we are told are part of the necessary nature of science itself. But prior to Darwin, biologists, or naturalists, as they were then called, practiced science within a paradigm of theistic science. In the former paradigm, it was entirely appropriate to integrate theological beliefs as part of scientific practice, and God's primary activity as part of an explanatory apparatus. Methodological naturalism became integral to biology only after the paradigm shift, and it would be wrong to say, in hindsight, that the previous generation of naturalists had not been practicing science because they had not adhered to that stipulation. This new limiting of biology to the natural world was also not simply done to refine scientific practice and enable inquiry to go beyond the dead ends that sometimes occurred when scientists appealed to the mysterious purposes of God and would investigate no further, although there certainly was that element. The belief was also that if biology was to be a true science on par with chemistry and physics, it too had to be a closed system. There had to be the a priori working assumption that there was a physical explanation for everything in biology, and that God could not be active in the physical world. Darwin himself was very frustrated, not so much that there was resistance to his theory, but that many of those who embraced it thought that God guided the process. This indicated to him that they just didn't understand his theory: natural selection became superfluous as a driving force in evolution if God was actually in control of it. Darwin wasn't promoting atheism per se, just atheism in the practice of biology. But the implications of this, even if not over

For Christians, the issues raised by the different views on creation and evolution can be challenging. Can a "young earth" be reconciled with a universe that appears to be billions of years old? Does scientific evidence point to a God who designed the universe and life in all its complexity? Three Views on Creation and Evolution deals with these and similar concerns as it looks at three dominant schools of Christian thought. Proponents of young earth creationism, old earth creationism, and theistic evolution each present their different views, tell why the controversy is important, and describe the interplay between their understandings of science and theology. Each view is critiqued by various scholars. Paul Nelson and John Mark Reynolds provide a clear explanation of the differences between theistic evolution, young earth, and old earth creationism. Young and old earth creationism both share a view that there are discontinuities in biology and real design in nature. Yet theistic evolution does not share this view. Robert C. Newman then explains that his approach is to harmonize both nature and Scripture. Theistic evolution is problematic because of its common refusal to let Scripture speak to matters of origins. Young earth creationism is problematic in that it does not permit science to speak. Wiester argues that the natural record provides many challenges to evolution--such as the explosion of life during the Cambrian period. Finally Howard J. Van Till expounds his view of a "fully gifted creation" where the universe was created to bring life into existence through natural laws. He finds claims that Scriptures provide "privileged information" to be "embarrassing" because they show little regard for the "informed judgment" of the scientific community. Phillip Johnson finds Van Till's views self-contradictory: Van Till argues that God should "withhold" no gift from creation that would require God's intervention to create, but yet Christians of all stripes believe God has intervened in history. This volume clearly expounds the pro's and con's of various Christian perspectives on creation. While this debate is surely not going to end soon, this book will bring a greater understanding and appreciation of "other viewpoints" to all interested.

Over the past thirty-plus years I have struggled with trying to find a book that honestly dealt with all sides the creation debate. Too many times books are written is such a way as to demean the other viewpoint and especially the person who holds that viewpoint. This is the first book, in my perspective, that attempts an honest examination of three major Christian viewpoints on creation.The book, although written from an obvious bias, allows for honest dialog between the different viewpoints. I thoroughly enjoyed the format: A presentation of a view of creation by an individual who is competent in that standpoint, several critiques of the viewpoint by competent reviewers, and a rebuttal of the critiques by the author of the creation viewpoint. If you are serious about learning and understanding several of the viewpoints on creation without most of the derogatory and belittling rhetoric, then this book is excellent. However, if you are looking for a book that will answer your questions on creation then you will need to read deeper into each of the areas. That information is provided in each of the sections

I found this an excellent investigation into the varying Christian views on the origin of life and the world. The three authors all combine a knowledge and respect of current scientific theory / evidence (the copyright date is 1999, and authors cite several sources printed in the mid- to late-90's) with a knowledge and respect of the Bible's revelation. So often in the Creation/Evolution debate, thinkers arise who either deny the strength of scientific investigation (or who are only familiar with outdated scientific theories that have since been discredited) or who deny that the Bible has an inspired status and is a reliable source on matters of history. Not so here: the authors all possess a commanding respect both for science and the Bible. The one drawback to this book may be its technical nature; it takes some wading for the non-specialist (either in science or theology) to fully digest the evidence and concepts presented. This is only a minor criticism, though; a less technical presentation may have required either the ommission of important evience, or a much longer book. All in all, this book is a fantastic investigation into synthesizing "how the Bible says it happened" with "how science says it happened." What a delight to read!

This book contains three presentations by their proponents of the three main Christian views on origin. Each presentation is followed by an assessment by four commentators (each time the four same). The book does not deal so much with the natural sciences, but rather with the theological and philophical sciences. Nothing new nor difficult, but interesting to reveal the paradigma behind the views, grossly speaking: one specific interpretation of Genesis for Young Earth Creationism, Christian theism for Old Earth creationism, and deism (!) for "Theistic" Evolution, the latter being the most revealing: Van Till does not want to allow for God to intervene in the development of nature, but seems commited to the idea that God winded everything beforehand so as to get the good results, "prior" to t=0: this is remniscent of the clock-world of the deists where God did not have to intervene anymore once he had started the clock. This will be an excellent book for those who want an introduction or overview of the main views among Christians, as well as a reflection.