by Junghyung Kim
In this article I pose two primary questions. (1) How is God’s action in the evolutionary process to be understood with regard to seemingly self-explanatory evolutionary novelties, novelties with no telos inherent within them? (2) How can Christian affirmation of divine action in evolution be reconciled with the massive yet unavoidable evil and suffering . . . → Read More: Naturalistic versus Eschatological Theologies of Evolution
by Walter Makous
Whether the biblical longevities have biological or cultural significance depends on whether they represent actual longevities or are fabricated. As the properties of fabricated numbers differ from those of natural phenomena, this paper examines these properties, particularly in light of those differences. The results show (1) an exponential decline toward contemporary longevities, following approximate . . . → Read More: Biblical Longevities: Empirical Data or Fabricated Numbers?
by Christopher M. Rios
Over the course of the twentieth century the concept of complementarity earned considerable support among evangelical scientists. Leading figures in both the USA and Britain argued that science and theology offered distinct perspectives of the natural world that were reconcilable, if recognized as complementary descriptions rather than mutually exclusive claims. Though not without . . . → Read More: Claiming Complementarity: Twentieth-Century Evangelical Applications of an Idea
by Keith B. Miller
In the Genesis account and elsewhere, Scripture declares God’s love and care for creation, and the glory and praise it returns to him. Yet, the creation that Scripture declares both good and an object of God’s care is a creation in which death and pain are integral, indeed vital, aspects. A number of . . . → Read More: “And God Saw That It Was Good”: Death and Pain in the Created Order
by George L. Murphy
Einstein’s theory of relativity means, among other things, that a modified version of Tycho Brahe’s earth-centered model of the planetary system is, in principle, as good as Copernicus’ sun-centered model. The question of whether the earth or the sun “really” moves is meaningless in this theory. After dealing with challenges to this claim, . . . → Read More: Does the Earth Move?