geocreationism.com

From the first page of Chapter 1, I can see that I might end up repeating myself if I do not set some ground rules for how I review this book.  Consider the second paragraph (emphasis added):

In the origins debate, the evidence leads to one of two conclusions: evolution or creation.  These two basic views are completely at odds and admit no middle ground.  On the one hand, evolution relies on pure random chance as the agent by which matter and energy, over time, are assembled into living systems with all their mind-boggling complexity.  The evolutionary process, we are told, requires billions and billions of years.  Creation, by contrast, relies on the “mechanism” of an outside intelligence which we define as the Creator, the One who made from nothing a universe exhibiting order and design. Vast stretches of time are not need for creation.

In this one paragraph, Tom DeRosa illustrates the precise reason why there is no (not almost no, but no) constructive discourse between the major scientific bodies and major theological bodies in our country, relegating all constructive discourse to the fringe:

1. “the evidence leads to one of two conclusions: evolution or creation” - Actually, the evidence leads to many more than two conclusions.  These are simply the extremes.
2. “completely at odds” - It is the people that are at odds.
3. “admit no middle ground” - It is Young Earth Creationists and atheists who admit no middle ground.
4. “evolution relies on pure random chance as the agent” - This is one theory.  I have advanced another.
5. “Creation, by contrast, relies on the “mechanism” of an outside intelligence which we define as the Creator” - It is not the only such theory.

For the record, I do not consider Darwinian Evolution or Young Earth Creationism to be viable theories.  The truth lies somewhere in between, in the middle ground that DeRosa outright denies.  Now, I would prefer not to harp on the fact that DeRosa has effectively ruled out any discussion of truly viable theories, and so here are some ground rules I will attempt to follow.

Definition of Evolution

For a Christian, Evolution can mean several things.  One view casts God as the first initial cause.  Basically, God created the universe, wound it up, and stepped back, relegating Himself to the role of helpless onlooker.  Many deists hold this view, but few Christians do.  I will lump this view under the atheistic view of Darwinian Evolution, because the only difference between this and what atheists believe is that atheists think the universe wound itself up.

A more popular view is Theistic Evolution.  The difference between this and Darwinian Evolution is that in Theistic Evolution, God didn’t just start the universe, He started every wave of Evolution as well.  However, like Darwinian Evolution, this simple formulation relegates God to onlooker most of the time.  Sure, He steps in on occasion, but most of the time He is uninvolved.  If He walked away in between waves, it would make no difference, and so does not fare much better than Darwinian Evolution, theologically speaking.  Of course, there other flavors of Theistic Evolution that prescribe varying amounts of involvement on God’s part, and so what an individual believes may or may not have these same problems.

The view that I prefer is that while accidents and mutations do occur within a species, and God is aware of them, He is not indifferent.  Much like our own Christian walks, God intertwines Himself with what happens, creating a tapestry that combines the randomness scientists see within nature with the intent and design that Christians see in it.  Both are seen because both are there to see, and both are necessary.  But, this is not because God is slave to the process.  On the contrary, the process is slave to Him.  Evolution would occur with our without the randomness, as long as God remains involved; remove God however, and the randomness would not be enough.

Now, before I go on, I must clarify that I understand Evolution is more than just randomness and mutations.  There is also the natural variation that occurs within an isolated population, and such variation within two isolated regions can result over time in separate species that may or may not be able to interbreed.  Therefore, I do believe that Natural Selection exists.  However, to me it is a natural result of conditions; it is not a force.

The reasons I went through this explanation are as follows.  First, I want it understood that DeRosa is arguing against Darwinian Evolution.  His arguments will apply to various flavors of Theistic Evolution, but not the flavor of Theistic Evolution that I subscribe to.  Second, the flavor of Theistic Evolution I subscribe to, when combined with the Geocreationist view of Genesis 1, which I have extensively documented on this blog, meets most (if not all) of the requires that I expect DeRosa to argue for.

Ground Rules

Because I believe DeRosa’s opening paragraphs exclude discussion of any viable form of Theistic Evolution…

1. I will weigh DeRosa’s anti-Evolution arguments as they pertain to Darwinian Evolution, separately from a (for lack of a better term) Geocreationist Theistic Evolution.
2. I will be weighing DeRosa’s pro-Creationist arguments as they pertain to Creationist theories in general, and specifically Geocreationist Theistic Evolution.
3. I am knowingly excluding all other specific Creationist and Evolutionary theories, though I realize there are other theories that are worthy of discussion.

Building a Bridge

By limiting my scope as described above, I hope to show where DeRosa and I are in agreement.  I suspect that I have rejected Darwinian Evolution for many of the reasons in his book, and I suspect that I have adopted my stance on Geocreationist Theistic Evolution for many of the reasons he believes in a Young Earth. 

In conclusion, a bridge between Christians is sorely needed here, and rather than increase the chasm more through this review, I am hoping that perhaps a more constructive approach might help start building that bridge.

This entry was posted on Tuesday, January 1st, 2008 at 11:07 pm and is filed under Creationism, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Creation Theories, Book Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.