Scriptorium Daily
Christians need to move beyond the defensive to develop an offensive strategy. To do this, believers have to have a better understanding of the problem we face. Creationists have often assumed that the creation/evolution debate is fundamentally about harmonizing scientific facts with the Bible, so they have mounted a scientific defense of the Biblical account and a critique of evolutionary theory. In conservative Christian circles this strategy works well, but in the universities it is ignored because of a pervasive naturalistic bias. If naturalism remains the dominant way of thinking in the universities, the failure of current evolutionary theory would simply lead to the development of some naturalistic alternative. The fundamental problem is naturalism.
...
Christians must show others that naturalism is imposing philosophical constraints on academic research. Most people in our nation are not aware that a secular dogma is limiting intellectual inquiry. Such ideological control is foreign to the American story. Of course, if we are to argue in this fashion, our behavior must reflect our claims. Christians must make plain that they do not want to impose their own brand of conformity on the university. We have enough bad experience with censorship in the marketplace of ideas to have no wish to restrict the free exchange of ideas ourselves. Conservative Christians can show their sincere commitment to this principle by showing an open attitude in their own research. We must listen to our critics and engage in a constant evaluation of our own views. If we advance our beliefs in this manner, then creationism will not only be right, it will be heard.
...
Most of all charity should guide interaction with others, even with opponents. Christians must examine the best ideas of naturalists and not their worst. Christians would be unwise to resort to personal attacks. Writings need not lack force, but can battle bad ideas with vigor while treating intellectual foes with charity. Within the church the in fighting must stop. It is intellectual suicide for supporters of an old earth and a young earth to bicker.
The key question for the believer is this: does this scientist or theologian support an open philosophy of science. In other words, will he let the data point to a Creator or is he constrained from doing so based on preconceptions? If he has an open philosophy of science, Christians can afford to be tolerant about the details. Taken as a whole, people will come to the truth. It is not, after all, so hard to find. The heavens proclaim the glory of God, they do not whisper. On the other hand, if they have a closed philosophy of science, nothing about God can come of it, no matter how personally pious they might be. Such a person is fundamentally an enemy of traditional Christian faith. If Christians really believe that God is there, then they must be open to the possibility that He has done something detectable by modern science.
The Good, the True, and the Beautiful are ideals for which a Christian strives. They should form the framework for story telling. The Bible, God’s written word, gives the Christian a sublime story to tell. This story must engage the hearts and imaginations of this coming generation. Christians know the story of an amazing grace shown to the cosmos, and if they sing that story sweetly, even the most wretched culture can be saved.
A Starting Bibliography
Dembski, William. Mere Creation (InterVarsity, 1996)
Harre, Rom. The Philosophies of Science (Oxford, 1985)
Johnson, Phillip. Darwin on Trial (InterVarsity, 1991)
Johnson, Phillip. Reason in the Balance (InterVarsity, 1994)
Johnson, Phillip. Defeating Darwinism (InterVarsity, 1998)
Losee, John. A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Science (Oxford, 1980)
Moreland, J.P. Christianity and the Nature of Science (Baker, 1989)
Moreland, J.P. ed., The Creation Hypothesis (InterVarsity, 1994)
Moreland, J.P. and Reynolds John Mark, ed. Three Views of Creation and Evolution (Zondervan, 1999)
Pearcy, Nancy R. and Thaxton, Charles B. The Soul of Science (Crossway, 1994) (more)
