Science @ The John Ankerberg Show

Soundness and Cogency

2009-07-11T23:40:00.002-04:00

When arguments are made for one point of view or another, they are presented with various types of logic: deductive, inductive, and sometimes, abductive. For example, one may argue for naturalistic evolution, theistic evolution, young earth creationism, old earth creationism, or a variety of intermediate positions using logical arguments.

Deductive logic and inductive logic both offer supporting evidence (premises) to justify a claim (conclusion). A valid deductive argument produces a conclusion which is certain. A strong inductive argument produces a strongly probable conclusion. Both types of arguments use logic in their argument forms.

In my July 7 post I stated that Dr. John Ankerberg had received a well-written letter from a young earth listener who used “tight logic.” This statement needs some explanation. Deductive logic, applicable to a rather limited number of discussion topics, virtually guarantees validity. Inductive logic is applicable to a greater number of arguments where high probability of a true conclusion is the best we can hope for. The most important factor in our discussions of evolution or creationism is often overlooked: In order for a deductive argument to be considered sound (reliable), or in order for an inductive argument to be considered cogent (convincing), all premises presented to support the argument must be true or acceptable before one can be assured of a true conclusion.

An argument may be tightly logical, but many arguments in evolution/creationism discussions break down because false or unacceptable premises are used. False premises, if accepted, lead to false conclusions. A deductive argument may be logically valid and an inductive argument may be strong, but if the argument is based on false or unacceptable premises, its conclusion cannot be true.

To illustrate, here are three premises upon which young earth conclusions rest: (1) ALL physical death in the animal world was caused by Adam’s sin in the Garden of Eden 6000 years ago. (2) The Bible should be the ONLY source of knowledge with respect to the history of the earth and life on earth, so we should reject any and all science which points to an old earth. (3) Plants are less than living things, even though it appeared that plants “died” when animals consumed them prior to Adam and Eve’s fall into sin. God did not assign “life” to plants in the same manner he assigned life to animals. Acceptance of the truth of each of these premises supports the conclusion that the earth is young. But if these premises are false or unacceptable, the conclusion of a 6000 year old earth is not demonstrated to be true.

Theologian Kenneth Samples in A World of Difference, states “Understanding that the premises of an argument must be true, relevant, adequate, clear, and knowledgeable helps keep a person’s thinking on the right t-r-a-c-k.” Our Creator has endowed us with the ability to think clearly and soundly. It is our responsibility to use our ability to think clearly and soundly in order to evaluate the beliefs we hold. Proper use of that ability is crucial for our effective witness.

Lost in Translation

2009-07-07T23:26:00.002-04:00

One of the most profound difficulties we face in achieving a reasonably complete and accurate picture of historic Genesis events is the problem of interpreting the Bible for the English-speaking population. Dr. John Millam, on the Reasons to Believe website, has written about this problem. He quotes C. S. Lewis expressing the difficulty of bringing a Greek word to life by hunting for it in the Greek lexicon and then substituting an English word for it. Lewis says they “are not reading Greek at all; they are only solving a puzzle.” The same difficulty exists with the ancient Hebrew language.

Dr. John Ankerberg receives many letters from listeners disillusioned with the old earth creationism position of ATRI. One lengthy recent letter decried “perverting plain Genesis scripture to squeeze billions of years into the Bible.” This impassioned letter was well-written with tight logic, imploring Dr. Ankerberg to at least consider the “slightest possibility that the earth was really created just as Moses plainly wrote it: in six ordinary days (with an evening and a morning) about 6000 years ago.” The writer then asks, “If you had no archaeology, no biology, no geology, no cosmology, no scientists, only scripture: how old would the earth appear to be?” We should, according to this letter, use the Bible as our ONLY source of the history of creation, and “throw out” all other sources of information on the earth and its origins. I have heard this stance repeated by many creationists who believe in a young earth.

There are reliable resources available to us in the search for truth concerning earth origins. Not only do we have archaeology, biology, geology, cosmology, and scientists in the 21st century, but we also have linguistic and hermeneutics experts who are able to instruct and caution us regarding nuances and pitfalls of language translation, especially, as Dr. Milam states, when spanning “cultural barriers that separate modern perspective from ancient thought.”

Young earth creationists read and interpret the ancient text as signaling the sun was created on Day 4 after three consecutive 24-hour days. Plants (Gen 1:11) were created on Day 3 before the sun even existed, they must claim. Days measured without the presence of the sun or clocks to measure hours are difficult to imagine. Old earth creationists see the atmosphere clearing sufficiently on Day 4 to make the sun clearly visible, having been created much earlier (Gen. 1:16: asa = made, the Hebrew verb indicating already completed action). Moses, therefore, must have had an “indefinite time period” concept of “day” for the first three days of creation instead of the 24-hour variety later invented by the Babylonians and Egyptians.

Placing confidence in trustworthy, correctly interpreted science is an important pathway on the journey to truth. When an entire body of scientific discovery contradicts young earth views, we must weigh our belief options seriously. Reliable scientific knowledge is never the enemy of truth discovery, either in earth history or in theology.

Scripture Science

2009-07-01T23:11:00.001-04:00

Focus on the Family’s Truth Project is an effective worldview program which presents the scriptural foundation for God’s guidelines for man in a dozen major categories of human experience, including science. There are two lessons on science in The Truth Project’s lineup. Some of the other lesson topics offering plentiful instruction supported by biblical principles are veritology (the concept of truth), philosophy/ethics, anthropology, theology, history, and sociology.

Scriptural allusions to science topics do not consist of a neat collection of “proof texts” for God’s existence. This is not to say there are not plentiful instances of design and fine tuning wonders evident in our cosmos. Even famous atheist Richard Dawkins recognizes possible indicators of design. In 1986, he said, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.” Indicators of supernatural design are difficult to deny.

I have mused about why scripture does not more explicitly support the existence of God and His direct actions from a scientific perspective. There are impressive narratives in the Book of Job which exult in powerful natural processes. Other passages are instructive, such as Solomon’s advice to consider the ant, or devotional, such as Christ’s reminders about growth and splendor of lilies or the Father’s care for sparrows. Scottish theologian Thomas Torrance and astrophysicist Hugh Ross have proposed that scripture encourages use of elements of scientific method such as accurate sequencing of events, proper use of frame of reference, and an organized system of observation and concluding processes. One wonders, however, how inspired authors of scripture would have incorporated today’s advanced science knowledge into their writings.

Concepts of philosophy, theology, and anthropology were well developed when the Bible was written, but science knowledge was in its infancy. Modern approaches to discovery in the world of nature had not been developed, nor would formal “scientific methods” emerge for many centuries after production of the sacred canon. Our modern methods of scientific discovery illuminate scripture references to the natural world. This blog has often made the case that modern science does not contradict scripture. Instead, it expands and clarifies the meaning of scripture and bolsters belief in the agency of the Creator.

When Did Leeuwenhoek Know?

2009-06-27T08:12:00.001-04:00

The well-known phrase “What did he know, and when did he know it?” is an artifact of past courtroom inquiries. As I research scientific discoveries since the beginning of the Scientific Revolution, that phrase frequently comes to mind. Sometimes I am amazed how long ago certain discoveries were made; at other times, how recently.

Our world revealed by the microscope and telescope came more clearly into view with advances in the 17th century. Robert Hooke was a versatile scientist who, among other wide ranging discoveries, experimented with the compound microscope. Perhaps more credit in microscopy, however, should go to Hooke’s contemporary, Dutch textile merchant Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723). Leeuwenhoek’s simple microscopes were superior in many respects.

Considered the father of microbiology, Leeuwenhoek is said to be an “unlikely” scientist. In the first decades of his life he was not formally educated and did not have a scientific background. But his curiosity led him to develop simple one-lens microscopes which have been shown to magnify up to 300 or more times. With them he first viewed and described the wonders of the microscopic world such as living bacteria, green algae (spirogyra), protozoa, animal sperm cells, blood flow in capillaries, and much more. He named many of these tiny organisms “animalcules.” He debunked an idea popular at the time--spontaneous generation, and showed that fertilization and reproduction occurred by the union of sperm and egg.

Leeuwenhoek is an interesting example of an ordinary non-scientist whose scientific interest and perseverance provided personal enjoyment and a permanent legacy. He wrote many letters describing his extraordinary discoveries, especially to the Royal Society of London, but did not otherwise publish his findings. He also kept secret his method of producing the tiny spheres of glass which became the high powered lenses for his simple microscopes. He thought that by revealing his manufacturing secrets the scientific community would quickly forget his role in innovative microscope technology.

He made many references to the wonders of God’s great and small creatures. Leeuwenhoek spoke reverently that his discoveries bespoke the wonders of creation and the Creator and expressed, in his Dutch Reformed Calvinist faith, a high view of scripture and salvation in Christ. He was part of a large contingent of famous early scientists such as Robert Boyle who believed natural laws were originated by God and that our discovery of them works both to the glory of God and the benefit of man.

There is a strange irony evident in the observation that many early scientists had no difficulty crediting God with creative authorship in the world of nature. As marvelous as were the early discoveries such as Leeuwenhoek’s, the extended discoveries in the world of biology and in most other fields of science, especially in the last 50 years outdistance them exponentially. This highlights a strange phenomenon in the world of modern science. Many scientists express disdain for propositions of design in the physical and biological world. They hide securely behind their insistence that pure science seeks to propose only naturalistic explanations for observed phenomena.

Early scientists such as Leeuwenhoek and Boyle had no problem recognizing and celebrating the apparent work of the Creator in the world of nature. This occurred hundreds of years before many scientists demanded that all scientific propositions be framed in naturalistic terms. The question is not whether a proposal meets the parameters of “science” as defined by our contemporary scientists. Rather, we should be concerned whether proposals that supernatural input is evident, which in some cases may exceed purely natural events, pass the “smell test” of logic, reason, and rationality.

The Stuff of Life

2009-06-22T12:01:00.002-04:00

Readers old enough to have studied biology before 1960 now realize that the course emphasis has changed. We recall a term for the “living substance” of the cell: protoplasm. The concept originated in the 19th century. Compared with the knowledge of cells available today, 1950s knowledge could be considered the dark ages of biology.

Back then, high school and college biology courses were mainly studies in anatomy and basic physiology. But beginning about 1960, life science was highlighted differently. The catch-all term protoplasm has become the dinosaur of studies in biology. In 1868, T. H. Huxley described protoplasm as “the physical basis of life,” a basic homogenous stuff made of protein. The 20th century brought discovery of enzyme catalysis and more knowledge of complexity, but the deepest knowledge of cell function has occurred in the last sixty years. Fazale Rana, in The Cell’s Design, states, “The ever increasing understanding of the cell’s chemistry has revolutionized our daily lives. Biochemistry drives many of the technological advances in biomedicine, agriculture, and even industry.”

The quantum leap in knowledge of molecular genetics in the same time frame--discovery of DNA as the material of information storage and heredity, and RNA as processing director--greatly strengthened recognition of the appearance of design. To illustrate this knowledge leap, consider the fact that most children, about half-way through their first decade of life, learn how to operate a bicycle. The skill seems to arrive suddenly and intuitively. Years later he may learn about the physics of energy, forces, motion, friction, and mechanical advantage. His knowledge expands exponentially. The joy of learning the operational skill is marvelously enriched by discovery of the underlying physical laws which make bike riding possible. Likewise, our knowledge of the complex coding system of DNA in just one cell’s nucleus helps us appreciate “the physical basis of life,” Huxley’s dimly visualized dream.

Recently our local pregnancy center sponsored a “Walk for the Unborn.” The goal of such ministries is not solely to counsel and promote respect for life, important as that is. The larger aim for these events is the awareness of the real tragedy of abortion, the destruction of embryos and fetuses possessing FULL personhood. The foundational concepts promoted by such ministries are far more profound in light of our knowledge gains in the last six decades. We must cite once more the majestic passage in Psalm 139 by King David. Is this passage poetic, or presciently scientific? In the light of our expanding knowledge base, it is both.

“For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you, because I am fearfully and wonderfully made: your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be” Psalm 139:13-16 (NIV).

Nature's Symmetry

2009-06-17T15:15:00.002-04:00

We referred to the laws of nature in a previous post, somewhat lightly, as “rules of the game.” These laws, or rules, have their basis in a more fundamental, but less familiar concept called “symmetry.” Nature’s symmetry may be described with terms such as balance, predictability, regularity, invariance, and repeatability. When we refer to nature’s symmetry, therefore, we are referring to nature’s coherent orderliness. Symmetry implies conservation laws.

Our recent post on the law of conservation of mass reminds us of a corollary--the law of conservation of energy. Albert Einstein connected mass and energy, and scientists now also refer to the law of conservation of mass/energy. The term energy sometimes refers to a fossil fuel product such as oil or gas. We refer to the “energy crisis” as a situation where supply and demand for these products are not in balance, causing shortages and price inflation.

The textbook definition of energy is different. Energy is the capacity or ability to do work. When work is done, a push or pull force moves an object. No work is done unless an object is moved, regardless of how much force is applied.

Energy takes many forms. Kinetic energy is energy present due to the motion of an object. A moving object can accomplish work, because it may move some other object. Potential energy takes two forms--gravitational potential energy and chemical potential energy. A large boulder hanging on a cliff has much potential energy due to its position: it could do a lot of “work” (destructive damage in this case) if it fell. A gallon of gasoline has chemical potential energy: burned in an automobile it could move your vehicle 20 miles. There are other types of energy capable of accomplishing work, such as electromagnetic energy (light or infrared waves), sound energy (voices or music), and heat energy (molecules in motion).

Each day of our lives, energy changes form many times during the course of our activities. If we start our car, the burning of fuel--chemical energy--is converted ultimately to motion of the car, heat of the engine, and sound of the motor. As the vehicle travels along, it transfers motion to the air. The swirling air, in turn, causes the leaves and grass to wave in the breeze, creating a gentle rustling sound. Where did the engine’s heat go? It is still in the air, but now widely diffused. All the other forms of energy are also present in a different form, perhaps as a very slightly higher air temperature. No energy is lost; rather, it has merely changed form. It may be less useful now because it is more diffused, but the total quantity of energy still exists. Einstein saw the relationship between mass and energy. We say the total mass/energy of any isolated system is conserved no matter what other changes occur.

As we recognize the coherent orderliness, the symmetry of nature’s laws, we might also logically and rationally deduce the existence of the Author of the symmetry which governs our universe. Scientists are discovering more and more about the macro- and micro-functioning of our universe. They acknowledge that nature’s symmetry is more and more apparent with each new discovery.

Physical and Spiritual Laws

2009-06-09T16:12:00.002-04:00

Not surprisingly, theories and laws of science do not rise to the level of curiosity and fascination for most people who are content to defer to experts in the field. They are satisfied to endorse the bus company advertising slogan of “Leave the driving to us.” At a basic level, however, they are able to understand that every human activity in the physical realm must obey the set of laws which govern matter. The purpose of this blog is to promote understanding of the laws of matter’s governance and their connection with matters of faith. We could call it “consumer education.” An informed consumer will have an enhanced level of “product enjoyment” based on knowledge.

There are numerous examples. Builders of homes and skyscrapers know the principles of physics which, applied to their constructions, provide functionality such as load-bearing stability. Musicians know the physics of sound production. They subjectively understand what is consonant or dissonant, and its physical basis as well. On the level of human interaction, similar principles apply. Skilled teachers know the complex characteristics of their students, and appropriate strategies for achieving successful learning. Familiarity with characteristics and operational rules, therefore, is a prerequisite for the design of a successful final product.

Highly educated people in any field of learning study in detail the theory and philosophy which undergird the knowledge and value of their academic specialty. But what about the people who are not scholars? Consumers of today’s products are becoming increasingly adept at end-stage applications, but more ignorant of nature’s constants, physical laws, and theories which sparked initial discoveries and now sustain ongoing improvement and refinement. I’ve noted and admired the speed with which most members of our younger generation intuitively comprehend the operational logic of even the newest, most complex technological marvels. New products are proliferating at a breakneck rate, and in our culture there is little need to know anything but applied skills.

Even our church leaders and church members may place too much emphasis on satisfying easy consumerism. A legitimate concern for pastors in our churches is how parishioners may achieve ownership of the theological “rules of the game”--the rules defining belief and behavior. Scripture has significant references to topics we would call scientific in our day, such as advice to study the heavens (the cosmos) and the orderliness of our universe. The Book of Job, in its fascinating insights, proclaims, “He establishes order in the heights of heaven” (Job 25:2 NIV).

Consider the connection between lack of knowledge of God-authored physical constants and laws, and lack of knowledge of God-authored spiritual constants or spiritual laws. Ignorance of or disobedience to physical laws could result in bodily injury or death in situations related to laws of gravitation or laws of motion. Likewise, ignorance, disregard, or disobedience in the spiritual realm results in spiritual disfigurement or death. Imagine the disastrous confusion in societies where the principles of the ten commandments are unknown or dishonored. Consider Moses’ end-of-life instruction to his people about keeping the laws of God: “This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live” (Deut. 30:19 NIV).

If we lack certainty about cause and effect in either sphere, and if we are uncertain that both spheres are authored and connected by God the Creator, we reduce our prospects for success in either sphere.

Changeless Physical Laws

2009-06-03T16:02:00.003-04:00

Our recent posts on physical constants take me back several decades in my teaching career. One summer, after returning from a trip to the western states, I discovered the district science chairman had lined up a workshop for science teachers in my region. A course called “Introductory Physical Science” had just been developed for use as an 8th or 9th grade offering. Its goals and concepts were lofty and ahead of the curve in science education. Lawrence S. Lerner, science author and textbook critic, offered this appraisal of the IPS course in 1999: “The authors of Introductory Physical Science show the student how science is done, and they teach the student to think like a scientist. Their strategy…is to take the student through a series of experiments and analyses that amount to an abridged account of the development of chemistry and physics from the mid-1700s to 1900 or so.” From my experience, I agree that the IPS course helped students “think like a scientist.”

The experiments were carefully structured and sequenced to accomplish that goal. An offensively odorous introductory experiment on the destructive distillation of wood successfully captured the interest not only of our class members, but also everyone else at our end of the building. Then the students, in pairs, launched into a series of five varied experiments. Those activities purposed to demonstrate that, regardless of other apparent and significant changes occurring, the mass of matter in the isolated chemical system at each table was completely conserved. The changes involved dissolving a solid in a liquid, freezing and melting, generating a gas by adding a solid to a liquid, and two spectacular chemical change experiments in which new compounds were formed: a bright yellow solid precipitate formed by mixing two clear solutions, and another reaction generating intense heat, a red-hot glow, and production of an obviously new substance when two powdered solids were mixed and heated.

Beyond much doubt, we discovered that mass was completely conserved. We carefully measured the masses of the systems before and after. We accumulated results from as many as fifty pairs of experimenting students for each of five different types of chemical events. The blackboards were filled with experimental data, student-crafted bar graphs displayed our derived results, and we discussed possible errors and what our results could mean--all of this contributed to a sense of student satisfaction that they were actually discovering for themselves the important principles which would trigger further questions and experiments. After the complete year of IPS, students possessed an experimental justification for concluding that matter is composed of particles. This concept was only imagined by ancient thinkers, and only proven convincingly by scientists in the last two or three centuries.

In our recent posts we have spoken how precisely the masses of some of these particles have been determined in the last few decades. Masses of the proton, neutron, and electron are known to one or two parts per million. Experiments such as those carried out by IPS students (as well as high-tech science laboratories) have shown that the mass of everyday matter is invariant; it is conserved. The conservation of matter is now a scientific law based on plentiful observations of the way our universe operates under every conceivable circumstance.

It would seem that if the Creator of Heaven and Earth caused matter to operate according to what we might call absolutes, we might also devote some thought to the Creator’s absolutes in the moral realm: “I the Lord do not change” (Mal. 3:6 NIV). There is a rational connection between the operation of our physical world and the operation of behavioral moral absolutes. In this relativistic post-modern culture, we must contemplate this harmony in the physical and moral spheres.

Scriptural Prescience

2009-05-30T14:23:00.002-04:00

Theologian, author, and publisher Kenneth N. Taylor is well known for producing The Living Bible, a paraphrase/translation. The first installment, Living Letters, appeared in 1962. While comparing different translations of Hebrews 11:3, I referred to Ken Taylor’s translation of that verse: “By faith – by believing God – we know that the world and the stars – in fact, all things – were made at God’s command; and that they were all made from things that can’t be seen.” Taylor’s footnote for that verse says, “Perhaps the reference is to atoms, electrons, etc.” This footnote was really an eye-catcher for me. Did the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews possess scientific insights to match his inspired theological truth? Perhaps he did. If so, he wrote without benefit of any scientific knowledge of atoms, atom structure, or characteristics of atomic particles. Those discoveries would wait seventeen centuries.

We’ve stated that “physical constants” in the created world of matter are analogous to operational rules of athletic games, for example. We might also cite adherence to the rules of music, architecture, language, and a host of other human activities, as necessary for successful, pleasing outcomes. Knowledge of most of the physical constants is beyond the comprehension or interest of the non-scientist. Let’s reference just three familiar fundamental physical constants we may recall from high school chemistry: The masses of the electron, proton, and neutron have been determined with incredible precision and with a negligible error bar. Each of these masses is a fundamental physical constant, one of dozens of physical constants. Our very existence depends on their precision. But unlike athletics, music, or language, where sloppy adherence to the rules would merely result in a poorly played game or an inferior product, different values for the physical constants would result in no game or product at all. In other words, our universe as we know it would not even exist.

Masses of the proton and neutron, components of the atom’s nucleus, are almost identical. The proton has 99.87% of the neutron’s mass, but this small difference is extremely significant. If the neutron were slightly heavier or lighter, our cosmos would be chaotic and life would not exist. The proton is 1836 times more massive than the electron. If this mass ratio were minutely higher or lower, insufficient chemical bonding would preclude the possibility of the array of molecules and compounds necessary for an orderly cosmos or the existence of life.

Physicist Max Planck (1858-1947), originator of quantum theory, was a believer in God, although perhaps not a personal God. His brilliance and familiarity with the many physical constants far more esoteric than those discussed above enabled him to propose new groundbreaking theories. Planck’s musings in a 1937 speech come from a scientist daily immersed in the coherent world of nature: “According to everything taught by the exact sciences about the immense realm of nature in which our tiny planet plays an insignificant role, a certain order prevails – one independent of the human mind. Yet, in so far as we are able to ascertain through our senses, this order can be formulated in terms of purposeful activity. There is evidence of an intelligent order of the universe.” This is a noteworthy observation from a scientist of Planck's stature.

Physical Constants

2009-05-23T15:04:00.002-04:00

Our last post mentioned “physical constants” as analogues to football’s “rules of the game.” Encyclopedia Britannica defines physical constants as fundamental, invariant quantities observed in nature. Let’s amplify this idea to help us appreciate our physical world. Even young children understand the necessity of rules to govern mundane activities, from mealtime to playtime to bedtime. They learn to understand the connection between rules and the orderliness and enjoyment of their lives. When they challenge the rules and “push the envelope,” they discover the unhappy results, although often their nature still feeds on the challenge.

For most people who do not perceive science as a subject of high priority, physical constants would not contribute to light banter or conversation starters over a cup of coffee. It’s easy to understand that such conversations would generate unease in many people, if not actual fear. In our post-modern life experience, it is easy to observe our surroundings unthinkingly and see air, plants, animals, and stars as simply matter to sustain and entertain us. Our everyday society is not oriented to explain such esoteric concepts as invariant light speed, the charge or mass of an electron, or the fine structure constant. We are more oriented toward utility than discovery. We feel more enlightened by discovering how to operate a machine than by discovering how the machine operates.

At the most fundamental level, we now understand that no matter could exist or interact and no energy could do its work without obeying the constraints of a multitude of physical constants. For example, light travels through space at an invariable speed. The electron has a fixed charge and a fixed mass. For sports enthusiasts, the parallel would be a tacit awareness that enjoyment of their favorite spectator sporting event would be impossible without the players’ strict adherence to the game’s rules. In other human experiences, the same rule-adherence principles prevail, whether we are enjoying the chef’s culinary specialty, our favorite musician’s performance, or even inspecting the result of the annual spring cleanup of our home’s landscaping. In either the physical realm of matter/energy interactions or in human activities, the pairing of events with operational rules governing those events is a given.

Contemplate: could we enjoy the meal, the music, or the landscape manicure without being aware of the operational rules governing their preparation? At some level, yes, we could. But how much more enjoyable and satisfying is it when the “consumer” understands the guidelines needed and used in preparation of the final product?

To acknowledge God as the Master Creator is to acknowledge both His creation of matter and His creation of the physical constants--the cosmos’s rules of operation. The world’s most brilliant scientists have shared with us their discoveries of dozens of physical constants. As I learn more about them, I will share the discoveries with my readers, trying to achieve a level of enhanced comprehension and appreciation. The writer of The Book of Job gives clues that he may have had a high level of awareness (Job 37:14-15 The Message): "Have you noticed all this? Stop in your tracks! Take in God’s miracle-wonders! Do you have any idea how God does it all?"

Rules of the Game

2009-05-17T10:55:00.000-04:00

Over the years my enjoyment of the game of football has been increasing. This game offers a level of complexity which I had not recognized in my earlier years. The offensive and defensive options are fascinating because they are nearly limitless. But football and other sports would not be possible without a strict set of rules. The National Football League rulebook extends well over 100 pages and close to 100,000 words. Just imagine what football would be like without adherence to the rules of the game!

In the universe we call home, all matter and energy and the behavior of every physical system must play by “the rules.” What are these rules? Scientists develop descriptive scientific laws based on “physical constants.” The behavior of matter under all conditions must adhere to the constraints of these physical constants. Most people do not or would not care to study a list of these physical constants or their mathematical quantifiers. They would say these constants are boring and esoteric, and for people who are not scientists, perhaps they would be correct. After I downloaded the NFL rulebook, I realized that spending an afternoon buried in the nuances of football rule technicalities would be tedious, at best. But then, I do enjoy watching the nuances of the football game.

What spiritual lessons could we learn without making the science boring and tedious? Is there a way our science educators could make science more fascinating, perhaps by presenting the physical constants as “rules of the game” to our sports-loving young people? Could pastors and church education leaders, on occasion, bolster the science/faith connection by connecting even mundane activities with a little reverent awe for the rules governing them? In my opinion, the answer is an enthusiastic “Yes.” Many years ago a relative posed this question to me: Who is the author of the physical laws which govern this universe? At that time I had not thought very deeply about that challenge. Since then, I have become more thoughtful and appreciative of what scientists call the laws of nature which depend on a well-defined set of physical constants.

When God created this universe, He also created the physical constants on which all natural laws depend. It appears these rules of the game have been divinely masterminded just as surely as football’s rules of the game have been set in place by the masterminds of the game of football. Without rules and strict adherence to the rules, both the natural world and the game of football would be chaos. In future posts we will take a closer look at more physical constants--the rules of the game.

Spurgeon's Science

2009-05-13T09:17:00.002-04:00

Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892), the 19th century “Prince of Preachers,” is said to have preached to ten million people, delivered 3600 sermons, and produced 49 volumes of theological commentary. He frequently delivered his messages to audiences of 10,000 or more without even the benefit of electrical sound amplification. Lately I have examined his commentary volumes on Psalms. This “Treasury of David” consumes four inches of shelf space. It consists of overviews of each Psalm, expansive comments verse by verse, and a collection of “explanatory notes and quaint sayings” collected by Spurgeon from the writings of dozens of other commentators of his day. My thoughts run along these lines: How could one man, in a lifetime of 57 years, have been so productive?

In researching his writings on Psalms 19 and 29--the subject of our 5/5/09 post--I encountered several of Spurgeon’s statements which are far ahead of their time with respect to their insights regarding the relationship of science and scripture. Spurgeon’s introductory remarks on Psalm 19 follow: “We may rest assured that the true ‘Vestiges of Creation’ will never contradict Genesis, nor will a correct ‘Cosmos’ be found at variance with the narrative of Moses. He is wisest who reads both the world-book and the Word-book as two volumes of the same work, and feels concerning them, ‘My Father wrote them both.’” Opening his exposition of Psalm 29, he further says, “Thus we have God’s works and God’s word joined together: let no man put them asunder by a false idea that theology and science can by any possibility oppose each other.”

Some of my conversations with fellow Christians in the Young Earth camp have uncovered their belief that the special revelation of inspired scripture holds domination over the general revelation of our natural world. Such beliefs overlook many important points far beyond the scope of this brief discussion. These fellow-Christians insist on interpreting the six Genesis creation days as consecutive, 24-hour periods which occurred within the past 6,000 to 10,000 years. They claim their view of scripture, along with their interpretation of “yom” (day) in Genesis 1-2, predominates over the findings of good scientific research which reliably indicates that the earth and the cosmos are of great antiquity.

Several well-known scientists/theologians have endorsed the idea, implicitly or explicitly, that the general revelation of nature is tantamount to the 67th book of the Bible. Mistakenly, these scholars have been accused of “adding to” the Bible. God has provided many sources of truth, biblical and extra-biblical. We must not reject any of those sources because they contradict our interpretation of the biblical revelation. Rather, we must strive to eliminate wrong interpretations in both special and general revelation. The former includes scripture hermeneutics; the latter embraces interpretations of the scientific data. This is an ongoing process, enabled by our God-gifted abilities. Charles Spurgeon’s statements should not be seen as “inspired,” in the same way scripture is inspired. They may, however, be viewed as wise statements worthy of serious thought.

Knowledge: True Belief

2009-05-10T08:23:00.002-04:00

One of the most fundamental and controversial topics of our day relates to how we may have knowledge that God exists. Did He create the cosmos we observe? Did He originate the laws which govern it? This blog presents scientific evidence as support for these beliefs. In my last post I made a strong case for the evidential approach based on the voice of God expressed in nature. I proposed that God speaks to us through the natural order as though with a voice and that the voice is intelligible to human observers.

The same evidential approach is used by theologians to strengthen belief in the authenticity and truth of scriptures and the events they describe. Archeological and literary documentation is eagerly sought from extra-biblical sources to affirm the accuracy of scripture. Evidentialists seek to confirm Genesis creation events and creation time scales by citing supporting scientific evidence for their explanations. Such evidence may fall short of proof beyond any doubt, but all agree that the standard of absolute proof for historical events is impossible. We may only claim that the preponderance of evidence leads us to a reasonable conclusion.

Achievement of true beliefs (knowledge) in the field of Christian apologetics is not a simple matter. There are other systems of epistemology which follow different paths to the acquisition of knowledge. One is called “reformed epistemology” which posits that belief in God is “properly basic.” That means humans may innately and intuitively hold a belief in God’s existence which needs no support from previous beliefs. Alvin Plantinga, a well-known Christian philosopher, defends such a belief as entirely rational, and has developed other convincing arguments that there are good reasons to accept theism as true. Another similar approach is presuppositionalism, which states that we cannot achieve a true belief about reality without first acknowledging the existence of God and the truth of the Bible. In our quest for knowledge, presuppositional apologists claim autonomous human reasoning from evidence is subject to error and unable to lead us to true beliefs.

So what are we to think? Is there a role for “properly basic” beliefs? I’ll answer by asking if our innate, intuitive sense of the reality of the Creator is valid. I think it is. Is there a role for presupposition? If we humbly acknowledge some deficiencies in our reasoning power and possible weaknesses in our evidence, we might agree that some conclusions, on occasion, may be subject to revision. In this “Science/Faith Connection” blog we will continue to adhere primarily to the counsel of I Thes. 5:21 (NIV): “Test everything. Hold onto the good.” Testing involves acquiring and evaluating evidence. In the 21st century, there has never been a better time to gather and evaluate evidence in order to acquire knowledge.

God's Voice in Nature

2009-05-05T11:42:00.002-04:00

Two centuries ago, many believed that theology was the “queen of the sciences.” Tacit acceptance of this belief by a substantial segment of the populace began to erode quickly at roughly the time Charles Darwin was boarding The Beagle for South Sea research ventures. Those journeys led him to propose the theory of evolution in 1859. We must be careful not to over-generalize the sentiments of centuries ago, or even the sentiments of today. But the climate of respect for the idea that the world of nature speaks of God and His works is still waning in our secular world.

Majestic Psalm 19 uses terms such as declare, proclaim, and pour forth speech in reference to the heavens. Their voice and words are understood by people of all languages to the ends of the world. Romans 1:20 (NIV) states, “God’s invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made.” It is as if the natural world speaks with words, inviting observers to use reason and logic to help them understand how God has worked, and what His qualities are.

Psalm 29 uses the word voice seven times to describe the reality of God manifest in nature. This Psalm describes a literal raging, thunderous tempest at sea which proceeds inland, shredding great trees and then shaking the surrounding mountains and wilderness. Readers may wonder what is more powerful and impressive. Is it the destructive storm described? Or is it the cause and effect events resulting from the properties of matter? Earth’s atmosphere is composed, innocently enough, of tiny air and water molecules. Obeying natural, physical laws, however, these tiny bits of matter produce the astonishing events described in Psalm 29. How did the matter originate, we might ask? And how did the natural laws which govern those events originate?

Humans have been endowed with considerable creative ability, a tiny reflection of God’s creative ability described in the first chapters of Genesis. When our fellow humans produce a “creation,” whether it be a clothing fashion, a culinary delight, a literary or musical composition, an object of art, a simple craft, or a dwelling, they often sit back when it is finished to contemplate the finished product. In a sense, the product speaks back to the maker, reminding him and other observers how it was designed and built. It also speaks of its own beauty, function, and value.

God contemplated His own works as the creation days progressed. God observed that His works were “very good.” In a sense, the creation spoke back to its Maker of the design characteristics, function, and beauty it possessed. Today the creation also speaks to us, highlighting the work and character of the Maker. Against this background, there are many contemporary arguments about whether the concept of intelligent design is really science. The believing scientists of several hundred years ago who began to revel in the discoveries enabled by scientific method in the early days of the scientific revolution would have been surprised to see how things have changed.

Where the Fault Lies

2009-04-29T09:14:00.005-04:00

The popular expression “Looking at things from 30,000 feet” implies the handicaps of missing the broad perspective. Another way to express the same thought would be “Looking at the big picture…” In the matter of Israel’s geologic features, we must back away from earth even more than 30,000 feet, perhaps by a factor of ten, to see what has transpired over the ages in the area of the Sea of Galilee, the Jordan River, and the Dead Sea.

One of the most extraordinary geological features on Planet Earth runs the length of Israel’s eastern borders. This feature is the northern extension of the Great African Rift Valley. It is also called the Syrian-African rift. The northern section in Israel is called the Dead Sea Transform fault. On satellite photos this feature can be seen running the length of Israel. Over vast geologic time, our earth’s long-term crustal plate movements have resulted in changes barely noticeable over several decades, but enormously significant over the geologic long term. The changes result from slow convection currents in the upper mantle which have moved and reassembled the plates. We might regard this phenomenon as a divine recycling and reformation project.

In Africa and the mid-east, movements of the African plate and the Arabian plate have resulted in a variety of surface manifestations. In the Jordan Valley the plates are grinding past one another. Both are moving northward, but the Arabian plate is moving faster. These plate movements began in the Miocene epoch, several million years ago, and continue today. When the sudden release of enormous stresses in rocks at the plate boundaries causes an infrequent large movement, major earthquakes occur, such as one that struck in 749 AD. In the United States a similar boundary occurs at California’s San Andreas fault. Displacement there ranges from 160 to 350 miles along the horizontal plane. Over extended time frames (millions of years), the yearly movement averages 0.5 cm or less along both faults. At very widely spaced time intervals, great stress-relieving earthquakes have been known to displace plates horizontally up to 10 meters. Scientists fear both fault zones may be due for “the big one.”

In the case of the Dead Sea transform fault, there has been a displacement of 66 miles along the plate boundary. This can be seen clearly in satellite photographs along the boundary. Geologists have used their skills to detail events and time frames along this fault and describe the land’s resulting morphology. The subsidence of the Jordan Valley/Dead Sea area to far below sea level is also related to events along the rift. Displacements along the transform fault can only be explained in terms of time frames of millions of years.

What do we say, then, about the insistence of many people who claim the earth and its features are explained only in terms of a recent creation six to ten thousand years ago? Did God plant hundreds of “appearance of age” features on the earth just to make the earth look very old when it is really very young? Such a proposal does not seem reasonable. Many people in our congregations say it is a matter of doctrinal purity. I must emphatically object and state that truth is at stake, but doctrinal orthodoxy is not. There are many fine Christian theologians and Christian science scholars whose studies reveal the shortcomings of holding our Bible and our beliefs hostage to a young earth way of thinking.

The International Council on Biblical Inerrancy, a distinguished group of evangelical theologians, met in three summit conferences from 1977 to 1986. Their statements on this matter provide an important perspective for those wrestling with these issues:

It is sometimes argued that our exegesis should not be influenced by scientific observations. We believe this view is mistaken. While the Bible clearly gives more specific information about our relationship to God than one can possibly deduce from natural revelation, it does not necessarily follow that our understanding of the physical world, its origin, etc., will also be more clearly deduced from God’s revelation in His word than his revelation in His world. Since both are revelations from God, and therefore, give a unified story, it seems quite permissible to consider all of the evidence (scientific as well as biblical) to be significant to the degree that each revelation can be clearly interpreted.

We affirm that since God is the author of all truth, all truths, biblical and extra-biblical, are consistent and cohere, and that the Bible speaks truth when it touches on matters pertaining to nature, history, or anything else. We further affirm that in some cases extra-biblical data have value for clarifying what scripture teaches, and for prompting correction of faulty interpretations. We deny that extra-biblical views ever disprove the teaching of scripture or hold priority over it.

My personal prayer for the readers of this blog, and for all who have a vision of the triune God as Creator and the source of TRUTH, is that our personal beliefs will be congruent with what is TRUE.

Red-Dead Tunnel

2009-04-21T23:03:00.004-04:00

As a pre-teen in central New York State, I frequently observed a scientific principle at work without being aware that it was, indeed, a scientific principle. The Seneca River flowed through our town, draining water from the beautiful Finger Lakes region farther west. An impressive dam structure deepened and widened the river. At one side of the dam there was a small power plant whose turbines produced electric power. The lock and dam in Baldwinsville provided reliable river navigation and a deeper pool of stored water to supply the power plant. But most important to me at age 12 was the excellent carp fishing below the dam rather than the science lesson it provided: the production of electricity from moving water.

A sidebar discussion during our recent travel through Israel focused on the Red Sea to Dead Sea water tunnel under consideration for many years. Most people are aware of hydroelectric power--the generation of electric power by moving water driving a turbine. It takes advantage of water’s potential energy, its “energy of position.” The elevated water possesses “potential energy.” If we permit the elevated water to flow downhill, its potential energy can be converted to other forms of energy, such as kinetic (motion) energy and finally, to electrical energy. But this is only one of many ways we are able to harness the potential of water to do useful work.

The proposal to build a tunnel between the Red Sea and the Dead Sea would solve several serious problems, such as the ongoing excess evaporation of Dead Sea water. It would utilize the “energy of position” of Red Sea water--420 meters above Dead Sea elevation. In earlier years the project was seen primarily as a possible power-generating scheme. Currently, scientists see desalination of sea water as an even more desirable outcome. Most people do not realize that ordinary water has great potential for accomplishing useful tasks such as desalination of seawater and energy production in a more environmentally-friendly way. How would it work? In osmosis, a term we may remember from high school biology, water tends to flow naturally across a semi-permeable membrane into a solution with a higher concentration of dissolved substances. “Reverse osmosis,” making use of pressure applied to the high concentration solution (seawater), reverses the direction of flow through the membrane and produces fresh water for agricultural and other uses. Under various controlled circumstances, “salinity gradient power” could also produce renewable energy without harmful emissions. Research continues to show promising potential for such processes in the future.

One might ask if knowledge of such details connects in any way with our faith. God is the author of natural laws and orderly physical processes which suffuse our everyday experience. I submit that knowledge of these laws and processes, together with discovery of the means to apply them, are vibrant faith strengtheners. Ponder Isaiah 41:18 (NIV) in the light of the Red-Dead Tunnel: “I will make rivers flow on barren heights, and springs within the valleys. I will turn the desert into pools of water, and the parched ground into springs.” The events described could illustrate a transcendent miracle, events beyond the laws of physics. Or, we could exult in the many wonderful and startling manifestations of natural laws which govern our activities on even the most ordinary days of our lives.

Climate Control

2009-04-16T23:22:00.003-04:00

What are the benefits of visiting or living at the lowest spot on earth? The arid Dead Sea, 420 meters below sea level, is predictably warmer and much drier than regions just a few dozen miles to the north or west. The extremely low humidity helped preserve the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran in near perfect condition for almost 2000 years. They were discovered accidentally in 1947 by Bedouin goatherds. While in Jerusalem we examined, at arm’s length, the Great Isaiah Scroll. Our hearts filled with wonder and reverence. Twenty-four Isaiah manuscripts have been found. This is a complete copy of the startling 66-chapter messianic prophecy, housed at the Jerusalem’s Shrine of the Book museum.

The Dead Sea area has undergone substantial climatic fluctuations throughout ancient geologic history. However, it appears that the consistent dry conditions prevalent since the Dead Sea Scrolls were written and stored, have provided 21st century man with proof that our current English-language Bibles preserve inspired scripture virtually unchanged from close to the time they were written. Qumran copies of Dead Sea scriptures contain at least parts of every Old Testament book except Esther. They date from two centuries before Christ. The prophet Isaiah lived in the 8th century BC.

Let’s leap from the authenticity of scripture to some of the health benefits of the Dead Sea environment in the 21st century. Earth’s air blanket at sea level presses on each square inch of surface with 14.7 lb. of pressure. This pressure acts in every direction--downward, sideways, and upward. At 420 meters below sea level the air is 5% more dense than just a few miles away in the Judean hills. This means there is 5% more oxygen present, along with other gases in air. The additional oxygen has proved helpful for certain skin ailments such as psoriasis. These increased oxygen concentrations are also beneficial in filtering out sunburn-causing medium-wavelength ultraviolet (UVB) while permitting passage of beneficial long wave-length ultraviolet (UVA). Resort visitors, therefore, need not concern themselves so much with sunburn. Instead, they may focus on how to procure the best therapeutic Dead Sea mineral mud.

Even Herod the Great, who ruled Judea from 40 BC to about the time of Christ’s birth, used Dead Sea springs late in his life in an attempt to alleviate his serious health problems. The Roman Senate installed Herod, an Idumean descendent of Esau, as "King of the Jews" in 40 BC. He built the magnificent fortress of Masada on a flat-topped mesa located on the eastern shores of the Dead Sea. It served as a luxurious vacation getaway and military stronghold for Herod. After Herod’s death it became a refuge for Jews who rebelled against the oppression of the Romans. This World Heritage Site has been preserved by the same dry climate responsible for the preservation of the Dead Sea Scrolls. A scroll containing the “dry bones” passage in Ezekiel 37 was found in its ruins, probably hidden away by Jewish refugees in one of their synagogues after they recaptured Masada.

The Ezekiel passage states the dry bones will be restored with tendons, flesh, and skin (Ezekiel 37:6). Prophecy scholars think this portion of scripture prophecy is being fulfilled in modern times with the restoration of Israel as a nation. The history of Israel and Bible prophecies dealing with unfolding world events centered on this small country spring to life with a real-time visit as surely as Ezekiel's dry bones.

Mineral and Energy Riches

2009-04-11T09:30:00.004-04:00

Those who search for mineral and energy wealth in Israel sometimes quote Bible passages such as Genesis 49:25, where Jacob, at the end of his life, prophetically envisioned “blessings of the deep that lies below,” or Deuteronomy 33:19, where Moses, also approaching his death, pronounced that the Chosen would “feast on the abundance of the seas, on treasures hidden in the sand.” Are these references metaphorical? Or are they literal?

In the last several months two huge natural gas discoveries off the coast of Israel are being enthusiastically heralded. Noble Energy, Inc. has drilled two wells thirty miles off Israel’s coast which have resources estimated at five trillion cubic feet. Energy-dependent Israel may even become an energy exporter when production begins, perhaps as early as 2012. Oil exploration in northern Israel and in the Dead Sea area has so far been a disappointment, but the oil geologists are not giving up the search.

The wealth extracted from the Dead Sea is already a reality. Potash, from potassium compounds dissolved in the water, is a vital component of fertilizer for plant nutrition. Dissolved compounds in the water also yield commercial bromine and magnesium metal, as well as other products. This body of water is an endorheic basin. That means water drainage enters the basin, but does not flow out of the basin at any point. Water can only leave by evaporation. This is easy to grasp when we remember that it is 1377 feet below sea level. Fresh water from the Jordan River is the main water supply, but since the 1930s, loss by evaporation has exceeded the inflow. In recent decades the Dead Sea has apparently been evaporating faster because Jordan River water flow at its mouth is a mere fraction of former times. It is used for irrigation long before it flows into the Dead Sea.

To understand why the Dead Sea contains ten times the dissolved material of the ocean, we might remember that even “pure” water from our tap will leave a small residue of minerals if we evaporate all the water out of a pan. In the case of Jordan River water draining from the mountainous areas of northern Israel, many chemical substances become dissolved in it as groundwater seeps through the soil and rocks. Chemically speaking, there is hardly such a thing as “pure” water. Small amounts of dissolved minerals entering the Dead Sea remain behind while only the water evaporates in future months or years. The mineral content of the Dead Sea has accumulated in this way and increased over many thousands of years.

In recent years a booming market in cosmetic Dead Sea minerals substances has become the fascination of beauty- and health-conscious people. I became fascinated by the scientific evidence for the benefits of Dead Sea mineral products. The mineral mud is particularly famous. My web search turned up primarily commercial websites touting their products and the benefits claimed. There are 50 modern cosmetic plants offering attractively-presented, authentic Dead Sea mineral products. Any one of them will cheerfully accept your order.

Science by the Seas

2009-04-08T23:03:00.004-04:00

Two major water bodies in Israel, the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea, have the lowest elevations of any water bodies on earth. Lake Tiberias, another name for the Sea of Galilee, is 685 feet below sea level, while the Dead Sea doubles that negative elevation at -1377 feet. Galilee is a vibrant fresh water body, teeming with tilapia, sometimes called “St. Peter’s fish” by local residents. Dining on this treat for lunch overlooking the Sea of Galilee, and later sailing on an enlarged version of a “Jesus boat” while viewing Capernaum and the Mount of Beatitudes, ranks as uniquely memorable. As the sun dropped toward the horizon, many of the members of our tour group danced on the deck to the tune of the Hebrew folk song "Hava Nagila," a song of celebration meaning “Let us rejoice.”

On the last full day in the Holy Land, our group members experienced the picturesque Dead Sea. Its warm, crystal clear waters are entirely lifeless, owing to its tremendous quantities of dissolved potassium, sodium, magnesium, and calcium salts. The sea is 8.6 times saltier than the oceans. As a result, its density is 1.24 times higher than fresh water. Therefore, bathing in the Dead Sea is entirely different from bathing in Galilee. This results from a scientific principle described thousands of years ago by Archimedes, a brilliant Greek scientist and mathematician from Syracuse, Sicily: When a body is immersed in water, the buoyant force equals the weight of the displaced liquid. That means if we were to gradually walk deeper into a fresh water lake such as the Sea of Galilee, we would notice a gradual increase in buoyant force acting in an upward direction. That gradual increase is related to the greater amount of water being displaced by our body. As soon as our body displaces one cubic foot of water, we would feel “lighter” by 62.4 pounds--the weight of one cubic foot of water: Downward-acting gravity is opposed by upward-acting buoyant force. Fast forward to our Dead Sea bathing experience: one cubic foot of Dead Sea water weighs about 77.3 pounds. Therefore, we noticed more upward-acting buoyant force. We floated easily with about one-fourth of our bodies out of the water.

Some of my former students were prone to thinking that their science teacher perceived everything in terms of science. I needed to remind them that other concerns occupied my thoughts now and then. So, at the risk of being too scientific, I must confess I had two thoughts related to the Dead Sea and Galilee. Baptism by immersion would have been next to impossible for John the Baptist had he used the “Salt Sea” for a baptismal venue. Its waters are painful and injurious to the eyes, and total immersion would have been difficult. Second, the ride on the “Jesus Boat” may have been dangerously unstable in waters of such elevated density. For many reasons, one hardly ever spots a vessel on the Dead Sea.

Bible references to the “Salt Sea” are found in four Old Testament books. They describe war campaigns or boundary locations. Holy Land travel is of great value, not only to observe the incredible geographical and political diversity and achievements of the modern State of Israel, but also to bring to life the thousands of places, people, and events of Bible times.

Water-wise Israel

2009-04-05T09:09:00.001-04:00

Our March Israel visit helped focus our attention on water. We sailed on the Sea of Galilee. We swam in the Dead Sea. But we also became aware of how creatively Israel is managing its scarce water supply to sustain its status as an agricultural giant, even as a country sixty percent arid or semi-arid.

Water rights and water availability dominated many events in the lives of the biblical Hebrew patriarchs. Famines were generally caused by droughts. Abraham experienced a famine shortly after obeying God’s directive to “go to the land I will show you” (Genesis 12:10 NIV). For relief he journeyed to Egypt for a while. A generation later, (Genesis 26) his son Isaac also went south to the land of the Philistine King Abimelech for the same reason. Even after the famine was over and Isaac had become very wealthy, there were still struggles between Isaac’s servants and the herdsmen of Gerar over vital water wells.

Israel’s current water use practices have made the country virtually self-sustaining in food production. Moreover, it exports a large quantity of its agricultural products. Israel was the originator of water-saving drip irrigation systems decades ago. This technology is over 70% efficient, compared with only 40% efficiency for open irrigation spray systems. Recently they have created ultra-low flow computerized irrigation to deliver water directly to plant root zones with practically no loss of water. The country’s agriculture now produces twelve times the 1948 level when it returned to the status of nationhood for the first time in almost 2000 years.

The water recycling rate is 75%, six times larger than any other country. In spite of a growing population, water use is not increasing. There are 270 water technology companies in Israel. The world looks to this tiny nation for guidance in the area of water usage.

As we traveled the countryside we observed thousands of crop acres covered with plastic, netting, or glass. Conventional covered crops raised in soil have extended growing seasons, lowered ultra-violet ray damage, reduced pest damage, and higher quality. Even more advanced applications are known as CEA (Controlled Environment Agriculture). This includes hydroponics--raising vegetables in nutrient-rich water without soil. This method saves water, uses renewable energy, reduces pollution, and increases yields by 10 to 20 times.

Scripture tells us that Israel will “bud and blossom and fill all the world with fruit” (Isaiah 27:6), and “The desert and the parched land will be glad; the wilderness will rejoice and blossom. Like the crocus, it will burst into bloom; it will rejoice greatly and shout for joy” (Isaiah 35:1-2). Perhaps these are prophetic references to a millennial restoration. If so, the current “blossoming” is merely a preliminary warm-up.

The Miracle of Israel

2009-04-01T13:47:00.001-04:00

Still enjoying the glow of memories from our travels in Israel and Jordan, it is time for retrospection. For many years my brother guided groups of Holy Land travelers as a ministry adjunct. We did not participate in any of those tours. They were offered during my prime early spring classroom teaching time. Looking back, however, perhaps a more diligent effort to gain leave time would have been in order. My brother had told me there was lots of science to blend with the faith-affirming consequences of walking where Jesus walked. He was right.

Let’s talk about three g’s for starters: Israel’s geography, geomorphology, and geology. The progression of g’s takes us from knowledge of locations and physical features of the land and the people living there, to a more detailed description of visible surface features, and finally to the more basic science of geology--what ancient and ongoing forces have birthed and molded complex features such as Israel’s mountains, deserts, valleys, rivers, and seas? There is enough knowledge to be acquired in these areas to necessitate several lifetimes of detailed study.

In technology research and agricultural innovation Israel is a world leader. Discussions of applied science in areas such as the future of the Dead Sea dominated several of our bus tour discussions. Under serious consideration is a plan to transport water from either the Red Sea or the Mediterranean to the Dead Sea. This unique water body is 1377 feet below sea level and is rapidly evaporating. Gravity would accomplish the task. We’ll discuss the many potential benefits of such a plan in another post. Israel’s thriving agriculture was a joy to behold. Innovations and advancements by Israel’s agricultural technologists have also become a model for the world.

Visits to dozens of archaeological sites (archaeologists are scientists), together with the prophetic scriptural expertise of Dr. Jimmy DeYoung made the many locations we visited spring to life in ways we could not have imagined. These sites bespeak biblical events of long ago as well as events yet to come.

Israel has been reconstituted as a nation in only the past sixty years after two millennia. The existence of the city of Jerusalem, having been conquered thirty-six times in the past three millennia, and even the nation of Israel itself, is a divine miracle beyond human explanation. I must report to my readers that both Israel and Jerusalem are alive and well.

Holy Land Travel

2009-03-01T17:00:00.005-05:00

During March, your science blogger travels on tour to Israel. This is a "first" for my wife and me. Dr. Jimmy DeYoung, frequent guest on The John Ankerberg Show, is the tour host. There will not be any new blog posts during the month of March.

I have placed all past posts into the categories below. You may wish to refer to past topics. The dated index below should help. All of the posts are archived and can be located easily by date. Your comments are always welcome. An email link is found on every archived post.

APOLOGETICS USING SCIENCE:
2009: 2/26, 2/6, 2/5, 1/14, 1/7 2008: 10/20 2007: 11/27, 11/7, 10/24, 10/18, 10/4, 8/31, 8/27

DESIGN and ORDER in NATURE:
2008: 8/22, 1/7 2007: 12/10, 12/4, 11/20, 11/15, 11/14, 11/9

EARTH'S PHYSICAL PROCESSES:
2008: 12/21, 12/9, 12/6, 9/18, 9/4, 8/1, 7/19, 7/17, 7/4, 5/20, 5/18 2007: 12/10, 12/4, 1/7

EARTH'S BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES:
2008: 12/15, 8/8, 5/27, 1/24, 1/18, 1/15, 1/11

ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS:
2009: 1/21 2008: 7/10, 7/2, 6/26, 6/20, 6/16, 6/13, 6/10, 6/3, 5/29

EVOLUTION:
2009: 2/12 2008: 8/14, 4/19, 4/8, 4/5, 3/30, 3/27, 3/25, 3/18, 3/13, 3/10, 3/4, 2/28, 2/24, 2/19, 2/14, 2/11, 2/8, 2/4, 1/29 2007: 9/6

HISTORY/PHILOSOPHY of SCIENCE:
2009: 2/22 2008: 12/26, 11/30, 10/6, 9/23, 9/11, 9/6, 9/3, 7/25, 4/26, 4/13, 2/26, 1/4 2007: 12/30, 12/23, 12/19, 12/11, 11/15, 11/14, 10/29, 10/15, 10/9, 10/2, 9/29, 9/24, 9/21

NATURAL THEOLOGY:
2009: 1/17, 1/2 2008: 11/21, 11/17, 11/1, 10/17, 10/10, 8/27

WONDER and GLORY of NATURE:
2009: 1/30 2008: 11/11, 11/7, 11/2, 10/28, 10/25, 9/30, 5/9, 5/5, 5/1, 3/7 2007: 11/2

Truth and Belief

2009-02-26T16:55:00.002-05:00

Several years ago my wife and I were privileged to lead Focus on the Family’s worldview lesson series The Truth Project. In lesson 1 the participants were asked, “Do you really believe that what you believe is really real?” Did you count the times r-e-a-l appeared in this question? Returning to the title of Focus’s workshop series, consider the keyword: truth. The concept of truth seems underused and misunderstood in today’s postmodern society.

A web search of truth will lead you to a discussion of truth theory. One finds there are over a dozen categories of truth. Which truth is the one Christians traditionally endorse? Which truth did Christ reference when He said “I am the way and the truth and the life” or “For this cause came I into the world, to testify to the truth” (John 14:6, John 18:37 NIV)? The Truth Project clearly refers to a category called correspondence truth: a statement corresponding to objective, external reality, or corresponding to the actual state of affairs. Other types of truth are coherence, constructionist, and consensus truth, to mention several of many.

The lively disagreements people often experience are more related to their personal beliefs than to objective truth. Let’s envision truth and belief as circles. The circles of truth and belief may partially overlap. The common area of the two circles is sometimes called knowledge, as classically understood. Individuals and groups sometimes have difficulty acknowledging that their beliefs may not be true. Christians must constantly put their beliefs to the test to establish and affirm whether their beliefs are really true.

Scientific discoveries since mid-20th century have clarified not only details of creation events, earth time scales, and the causes of earth's geologic features, but also have revealed previously unknown facts in physical, biological, and earth sciences. These discoveries have powered life-enriching advances in medicine and technology. Acquiring true beliefs in science or theology is not simply a matter of picking and choosing as we do at a buffet table. Belief testing is a principle advocated in scripture. We must be sure our beliefs overlap with the truth to produce knowledge.

Crisis of Consensus Science

2009-02-22T23:08:00.003-05:00

The term wisdom is used more frequently in the book of I Corinthians than in any other New Testament book. The contrast between man’s wisdom and God’s is drawn frequently. The NIV translation calls man’s wisdom “the wisdom of this world” (1:20) and “the wisdom of this age” (2:6). Eugene Peterson, in The Message Translation, refers to turning conventional wisdom on its head (1:19), and human wisdom being “tinny” and “impotent” (1:25); another of his paraphrases predicts that the fashionable wisdom of high-priced experts will be out-of-date in a year or so (2:6). The Apostle Paul could have been speaking of a phenomenon of the 20th and 21st centuries--the human wisdom known as “consensus science.”

“And the consensus is…” How many times have we been relieved that a consensus was reached in a lively group discussion of some weighty issue where a decision was needed? Perhaps not everyone was in agreement, but at least we were reassured that the democratic principle of majority rule was applied. The terms “democratic” and “consensus” ring reassuring and inspiring. When the conclusions of science professionals, however, boil down to “consensus science,” sometimes they are driven by profit motives, politics, or personal agendas. At other times their conclusions may be worldview-driven.

For this post I will mention only two of many possible examples. First, global warming has been pronounced factual, and this pronouncement comes replete with heroic, prescribed solutions. There is a “consensus,” we are told, notwithstanding the existence of an ever-expanding army of scientists and laypersons who point to errors and deficiencies in data collecting and mathematical models, and uncertainties in causation and prescribed remedies. Nevertheless, we are told we need to act before it is too late! Naturalistic evolution has also been pronounced factual, settled beyond question. They claim evolution is a conceptual pillar upon which rests the entire field of bioscience. There is increasing skepticism in some quarters of the scientific community about the truth of evolution, even as its supporters grow ever more strident. People who have legitimate doubts or questions are accused of being reactionaries, having devious motives, being out of the mainstream, or worse. Proponents of these relentlessly promoted paradigms do not tolerate opposing views.

The late Michael Crichton gave an eloquent speech questioning global warming in 2003. He stated, “I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled… Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world… If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.”

The unfair treatment of those who question consensus science results in a breakdown of confidence in science and scientists by many people in the church. There is some very good science which calls attention to the genius of our Creator. But even this good science sometimes becomes suspect. Our effort to secure truth is thereby derailed. Perhaps even our blog theme—the Science/Faith connection--suffers a credibility crisis in the shadow of this phenomenon. Science topics are infrequently used in our church settings. Christians should realize that “pure” science suffers the same challenges as “pure” doctrine, “pure” truth, and “pure” motivation. Scientists are equally as vulnerable to the human element as any other group, including church leaders and laypersons. My 11/30/08 post, Human Element in Science, began to explore this idea. Bad science can mislead and disappoint. Good science helps us achieve the wisdom of truth and the reality of God’s role in the natural world--past and present.

Responses to Listeners (3)

2009-02-17T10:06:00.000-05:00

Many listeners were enlightened by the recent programs featuring astrophysicist/theologian Dr. Hugh Ross. One recent letter to the John Ankerberg Show expressed the essence of concerns from other listeners. The writer was saddened by the interpretations of Dr. Ross concerning Genesis 1 and 2, including the length of the creation days. He only expected this kind of approach from “liberals” and “deniers of the faith.” He wondered what Christians believed about creation events “before science,” and felt the program guest distorted the simple meaning of the scriptures.

Our complete response follows:

Thank you for your letter and your interest in the topics being presented on our recent programs. Many of us understand your questions because, like you, we were once taught a different interpretation of the Genesis account than we now hold. Sometimes we justify our beliefs by saying “This is what I was taught.” Scripture encourages us to study and to prove what is true, praying for God’s wisdom before coming to conclusions.

You use the expressions “liberal” and “denier of the faith.” I must characterize the position of ATRI as being far from liberal, and I must state that we affirm orthodox Christian beliefs and are not deniers of the faith. A study of our ministry’s many available resources would confirm this. The most straightforward readings of English translations of Scripture do not convey variations of meaning in the original Hebrew. Readings of those translations do not, for example, acknowledge that there are several “literal” interpretations of Hebrew yom (day). A thorough study of scripture, interpretive helps and commentaries by our side, may help us understand difficult passages. But we must never stop learning, studying, and discovering.

The findings of science are a great blessing rather than a threat to our faith. As a science teacher, I have been brought closer to the Creator by becoming aware of God’s work revealed and clarified by science. Your question “What did all Christians do before science?” is a good one. Before 1950, we were not aware of DNA as the fundamental genetic material. Before the 1960s we had not broken the genetic code of life. The 1960s also brought us vibrant confirmation of the CMBR (cosmic microwave background radiation), the leftover radiation from the Big Bang, present wherever we look in the universe. Satellite technology in the last twenty years has affirmed this creation event and the age of the universe with great precision. Also in the 1960s, plate tectonics was affirmed, revealing how the earth has been prepared by our Creator for life today. In the last fifty years, science has provided ultrasound and genetic confirmation of the truth of Psalm 139:13 (NIV), God’s hand in creating the total personhood of the pre-born: “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb.” Science has revealed these truths. We are thankful for these scientific discoveries and rejoice that our knowledge of the natural world is now more complete.

Hundreds of discoveries in cosmology and advances in technology are testimony to our Creator’s wisdom and love for humanity. He designed a world of order and beauty for the benefit of mankind. New discoveries about the origin, age, and fine tuning of the universe enable us to reconstruct earth history as never before dreamed possible. Such evidence did not exist a short 50 years ago. Dr. Hugh Ross’s programs on The John Ankerberg Show on design in the universe and God’s creative events are not an occasion for ridicule. Rather, they are an opportunity to give God the glory. These discoveries magnify God rather than diminish Him.

Thank you for listening to our programs, and for writing to us at The John Ankerberg Show.