Worldview Formation and Theistic Science
[T]he Christian
worldview has a wide variety of arguments in its favor. Suppose someone is convinced that
Christianity is true for some of the reasons offered in this and other
apologetic works. That person
could be rational in rejecting the general theory of evolution for reasons
outside science, even if evolution is rationally justified when science is
considered alone (and this is itself questionable). The rationality of a
worldview is a multifaceted affair, involving scientific, historical, and
philosophical considerations.
It is difficult to see why science should be singled out for the role of
dictator in worldview assessment, since worldviews are broad paradigms which
must take into account all the facets of life… Science is an important part of
worldview assessment, but it is only one part.[1]
In its broadest sense,
theistic science is rooted in the
idea that Christians ought to consult all they know or have reason to believe
in forming and testing hypotheses, in explaining things in science, and in
evaluating the plausibility of various scientific hypotheses, and among the
things they should consult are propositions of theology.[2]
Relationship
between Doctrines
The above diagram is attempting to show something of the
relationship between various doctrines associated with creation, humanity, and
the age of the earth.
The doctrine of creation—the fact that God has created
without yet specifying an answer to the “how” question—is of crucial
importance. To affirm creation is
to deny all forms of naturalism; it is to recognize that God is the
Creator.
The doctrine of the historicity of Adam and Eve is of
importance due to its connections with so many other doctrines in the
Scriptures (i.e., sin, the goodness of God, inerrancy, unity of the human race,
etc.).
The age of the earth is farther out on the diagram. It does not hold as central a place in
the doctrinal hierarchy. One could
change one’s view on this topic and it would require some recalibration of
other beliefs to bring consistency but the re-working of the overall doctrinal
system would not be as extensive as changing one’s view on Adam and Eve or on
the notion of God as Creator.
Also, as one moves out from the center of the diagram the
fullest and clearest biblical material is in the center with less as one moves
to the outer edge. In other words,
there is more biblical data on God as Creator than on the age of the earth.
