1. Faith in Science? An Interdisciplinary community discussion
Montgomery Community College
Silver Spring, Maryland
February 21, 2006
12/3/2018

2. Introduction How do we discover and correct errors in our beliefs?
Dr. Duncan McIntosh
Pastor, First Baptist Church,
Silver Spring, MD
12/3/2018

3. My Contribution to the Dialogue
The struggle: Evolution vs. Creationism
What I bring to the table
Personal
Biblical/Theological
Wishes
Conclusion
12/3/2018

4. The Struggle! Co-existence of 2 fields of inquiry About God
About Nature
Conflict since 1632
Renewed in 1859
Intensified in 1925
Politicized in our era
Who are the victims and victors?
12/3/2018

5. What I Bring to the Dialogue
Religious background
Parental background
Pastoral background
Academic background
12/3/2018

6. A Literal Interpretaion of Genesis 1
What is a “literal” interpretation?
Genesis 1:1 – 2:3
A highly structured poem
7 days in 2 sets of 3 + 1
4 actions in each set of 3 days
Moves from “...without form and void” (1:2)
To “...finished and all the hosts of them” (2:1)
Each set of 3 “days” “forms” or “fills” the universe
7 declarations: “it was (very) good” (days 1-6)
Only 1 subject for every verb
Therefore, this poem is about God, not nature
Summed up in Psalm 24:1
The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof;
The world and they that dwell therein..
12/3/2018

7. The Schematic of Genesis 1:1-2:3
DAY FORMING DAY FILLING
1(vs. 3-5) Light* (vs ) Lights*
2 (vs. 6-8) Firmament 5 (vs ) Birds/Fish*
3 (vs. 9-13) Dry land* 6 (vs.24-30) Animals*
Vegetation* Humans
Day 7 (1:31-2:3) Completion/Rest
God saw every thing that he had made**
12/3/2018

8. What This Means Genesis 1 does not teach science
Science does not teach about God
There is conflict when either assumes to do the work of the other
The Bible posits a Creator
Science studies creation
Evolution explains “How?”
Faith affirms “Who?”
12/3/2018

9. I WISH... ...we could affirm the value of theology and science
...we could have more humility about our conclusions in either domain
...we could value cooperation over competition
12/3/2018

10. Conclusions There is a middle ground between
An atheistic scientific naturalism
An anti-scientific religion
“Intelligent design” is a faceless god that honors neither religion nor science
The questions of design and complexity merit investigation and dialogue, not debates and courts
12/3/2018