Does science make the Creator superfluous?
No. The sentence "God created the world" is not an outmoded scientific statement. We are dealing here with a theological statement, therefore a statement about the divine meaning (theos = God, logos = meaning) and origin of things.
The creation account is not a scientific model for explaining the beginning of the world. "God created the world" is a theological statement that is concerned with the relation of the world to God. God willed the world; he sustains it and will perfect it. Being created is a lasting quality in things and an fundamental truth about them.
Can someone accept the theory of evolution and still believe in the Creator?
Yes. Although it is a different kind of knowledge, faith is open to the findings and hypotheses of the sciences.
Theology has no scientific competence, and natural science has no theological competence. Natural science cannot dogmatically rule out the possibility that there are purposeful processes in creation; conversely, faith cannot define specifically how these processes take place in the course of nature's development. A Christian can accept the theory of evolution as a helpful explanatory model, provided he does not fall into the heresy of evolutionism, which views man as the random product of biological processes. Evolution presupposes the existence of something that can develop. The theory says nothing about where this "something" came from. Furthermore, questions about the being, essence, dignity, mission, meaning, and wherefore of the world and man cannot be answered in biological terms. Just as "evolutionism" oversteps a boundary on the one side, so does creationism on the other. Creationists naively take biblical data literally (for example, to calculate the earth's age, they cite the six days of work in Genesis 1). (YOUCAT questions 41-42)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment