- Overturning Sumptions 23/01/2021
- Whole-cost denialism – wilful blindness or myth? 21/01/2021
- Lockdown – a nationwide prospective study (update 2) 20/01/2021
- How Christ released Prometheus (but not like Adam did) 18/01/2021
- Why lockdown even matters 14/01/2021
Category Archives: Theology of nature
David Snoke’s presentation at last week’s Christian Scientific Society webinar added a useful thought to my treatment of animal suffering in God’s Good Earth. This question plays a large part in the kind of theodicy tangles that Evolutionary theologies tend to get into, deep time being held to build up an immense “debt” of suffering for God to requite, and evolution itself (apparently) being grounded on senseless and wasteful suffering.
I’m just re-posting a reminder that I’m giving a presentation on my first book, God’s Good Earth Earth: the case for an unfallen creation at a Christian Scientific Society Webinar thos Saturday, 24th October, on natural evil. It’s in the morning, in the US, or the afternoon in Europe. If you’re an Australian reader, you’ll have to set your alarm clock. Speakers are Stuart Burgess from UK, and Fuz Rana, Scott Minnich and David Snoke from America, and the general tone of the others’ abstracts seems to be on “design” good or bad. It’s free, though they ask for a donation in the region of $20 for the logistics (not … Continue reading
Readers may be interested that I’m giving a presentation on my first book, God’s Good Earth Earth: the case for an unfallen creation at a Christian Scientific Society Webinar on 20th October, on natural evil. There’s a cast of thousands (or to be exact Stuart Burgess, Fuz Rana, Scott Minnich and David Snoke), and the general tone of the others’ abstracts seems to be on “design” good or bad. My own aim is to reiterate my book’s arguments from Scripture, historical theology and nature itself to argue that Christianity teaches a still-good natural creation, but to propose what that means for a theology of nature that affects the worldview we … Continue reading
Using an electronic copy kindly sent my new Hump commenter MartinV, I’ve been looking at a recent book by John Schneider, The Darwinian Problem of Evil (it’s not released in UK until the end of the month). I won’t do a review, but from the comprehensive Introduction I found it to be a summary of the kind of theodical problems and novel theological solutions against which I reacted at BioLogos several years ago. Although the new book postdates my own God’s Good Earth, I’d see mine as a response to his, rather than the reverse (and indeed, Schneider does not interact with my work).
Well, I guess that a large proportion of my readers around the world will be locked in against the Coronavirus pandemic, in one way or another. A friend in Sri Lanka is facing enforced curfews, and there are massive queues for food when they are lifted, which rather defeats the object.
One of the theological problems I had with an old earth a decade ago is less commonly remarked than some others: if mankind was created to rule and subdue the earth, as Genesis 1 teaches, how did it manage without him for over four billion years?
In Britain, at least, a common position of many ordinary Evangelical Christians (until they start reading American books, anyway!) is, “I don’t see why God couldn’t have created through evolution.” The rub is that they usually have little idea of what evolutionary theory says: what they mean is that species might well change over long periods of times, under the creative direction of God, as an alternative to each being created de novo.
Creation “groaning” for 13bn years? My retrospective review of this aspect of the last ten years of my research is timely, it seems. For reviewing Joshua Swamidass’s Genealogical Adam and Eve YECs Robert Carter and John Sanford mention Josh’s citing of my book God’s Good Earth, in relation to the subject of death before the Fall.
It was what I fielded about the biblical acceptability of an old earth view that got me “censored” in the original series of articles for a Christian magazine in 2008 (see previous column) that put me on to the science-faith trail.
I thought it would be worth spending a few posts looking back on what has turned out to be a fruitful “research programme” on scientific and biblical origins over the last ten years for me, to see what problems have been resolved, and which, if any, remain unanswered.