Homework For Thursday 8 th March (in this order) Read page 62 of the purple book and answer the questions Read page 65 of the purple book and answer the questions Read page 56 in the purple book and answer the questions

Things creationists believe Over to you...

“It is a pity that the term 'creation science' was ever invented. Creationism is not a branch of science, and never can be. Creation is a matter of faith” Dr Alan Hayward is a Scientist and a Bible believing Christian. He argues that belief in God as creator is a matter of faith, not one of science.

There are 3 main approaches to understanding the Bible: - 1. Literal 2. Symbolic 3. Combination of the above

Symbolic Liberal Christians take a different view. They insist that there is truth in Genesis but it needs to be interpreted in a more sophisticated way (like an allegory)‏

Symbolic Liberal Christians argue that the Bible was written by the hands of men – therefore it is not inerrant (without error)‏

Symbolic They would also argue that the Bible was written thousands of years ago. It was never intended to be a scientific account of the world,. It is not a scientific text book!

Symbolic Liberal Christians accept the view that Science and Religion have different aims. Science: How? Religion: Why?

There are 3 main approaches to understanding the Bible: - 1. Literal 2. Symbolic 3. Combination of the above

Combination Of course, many Christians fall into the third camp. They believe that Genesis is divinely inspired and inerrant but should be interpreted as an allegory

Combination Adam = Man ( אָדָם ) (Ā ḏ ām) Eve = living one ( חַוָּה ) ( Ḥ awwā)

Combination Perhaps the 6 days of creation represent different eras? They don't need to be 24 hour days. 2 Peter 3:8 “But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” Psalm 90:4 “For a thousand years in your sight are but as yesterday when it is past, or as a watch in the night.”

Combination Perhaps the 6 days of creation represent different eras? They don't need to be 24 hour days. This is supported by the fact that the sun doesn't exists until the fourth day

Combination This view accommodates both modern science and Biblical inerrancy Christians who believe in the symbolic approach often speak of Intelligent Design

There are 3 main approaches to understanding the Bible: - 1. Literal 2. Symbolic 3. Combination of the above

Strengths of Literalism Requires only faith – no need to grapple with complicated science

Strengths of Literalism Requires only faith – no need to grapple with complicated science The Bible retains its absolute authority as being utterly reliable. This means that they defend the faith effectively.

Strengths of Literalism Requires only faith – no need to grapple with complicated science The Bible retains its absolute authority as being utterly reliable. This means that they defend the faith effectively. It seems like the most straight-forward reading of Genesis

Limitations of Literalism It doesn't give respect to modern science – as it presumes everything is false unless it agrees with the Bible. They believe in things like: -  Archbishop Ussher in 1660 who dated the origin of man to 4004BC (young earth theory)  The world was created in six 24 hour days etc It is too simplistic. Are Christians really required to sacrifice their intelligence to be followers of Jesus?

Limitations of Literalism It doesn't allow room for allegory, deeper truths or mystery in the Bible There is generally accepted evidence that goes against the ‘Young Earth’ theory  Tree ring record back 8,200 years  Radio Carbon Dating shows fossils that are millions of years old

Strengths of the Symbolic Allows you to understand things in the Bible in a modern context

Strengths of the Symbolic Allows you to understand things in the Bible in a modern context Allows you to use your God given intelligence to analyse and interpret a complex source

Strengths of the Symbolic Allows you to understand things in the Bible in a modern context Allows you to use your God given intelligence to analyse and interpret a complex source This view allows for an accepting relationship between science and Christianity, and may as a result be taken more seriously

Limitations of the Symbolic How do we know what is meant to be symbolic and what is literal? There is a danger that we pick and choose – which isn't really 'faith’

Limitations of the Symbolic How do we know what is meant to be symbolic and what is literal? There is a danger that we pick and choose – which isn't really 'faith' It may be the start of a slippery slope to losing belief in the entire Bible

Limitations of the Symbolic How do we know what is meant to be symbolic and what is literal? There is a danger that we pick and choose – which isn't really 'faith' It may be the start of a slippery slope to losing belief in the entire Bible Over dependence on science may tempt you to give up your faith altogether.

So, Did Darwin Kill God? As you watch this clip, make notes about Conor Cunningham’s reasons why he believes Darwinism did not kill God. For example: 1. What is his interpretation of Genesis? 2. Why does he dislike creationism and intelligent design? 3. Why does he dislike Richard Dawkins’ brand of Darwinism? 4. Do you find his argument convincing? Why/why not?

U U