CONCORDISM
According to the historian Ted Davis, an influential early use of the word “concordism” is found in the writings of Bernard Ramm, the Baptist theologian, in his book The Christian View of Science and Scripture [1954]. Ramm writes with regard to the day-age theory (the idea that the days of Genesis 1 represent long periods of time): “It is called concordism because it seeks a harmony of the geological record and the days of Genesis interpreted as long periods of time briefly summarizing geological history” (p. 145). Ramm labeled such a view “moderate concordism.”
Source: https://biologos.org/articles/the-various-meanings-of-concordism
Analyzing the topic
Sakshi apologetics network is precise to admit that the Bible provides the premise for scientific exploration. Indeed, modern science is contributed more by Christian scientists. Hence, Bible doesn’t claim to teach science but inspires us to explore the creation (Gen. 1:26-18; Romans 1:20, etc.). Divine inspiration and inerrancy of the scripture are associated with its theological message and the use of contemporary understanding of this world which people cannot accuse as erratic just because they are living in the modern age.
Source:
Sakshi Apologetics Network SAN, HINDU CHRISTIAN DEBATE – Puranas or the Holy Bible: Which Is More Scientific – ISKCON Vs. Sakshi.
“Christianity Was Crucial For Science @Tony Aubé #medievalscience #christiantiktok
#tomhollandfan #catholicism,” accessed June 14, 2022,
https://www.tiktok.com/@inspiringphilosophy/video/7085855837000027438?_r=1&u_code=dbh78i57f5ldld&preview_pb=0&language=en&_d=dbh78k636fc0jm&share_item_id=7085855837000027438&source=h5_m×tamp=1655208395&user_id=6810037162366944262&sec_user_id=MS4wLjABAAAAyzAHEcodNkmKG9OrJbuNBndZR4_RYT_SXyUNDQPePhZyjbe30EY5qVRpXjUwvYyl&utm_source=messenger&utm_campaign=client_share&utm_medium=android&share_iid=7100998794603972379&share_link_id=a8ee46c0-2943-41e0-abf7-a8e326dd9706&share_app_id=1233&ugbiz_name=Main.
Where science glorifies God?
Exploring the creation:
Intelligent Design
The Intelligent Design Theory says that intelligent causes are necessary to explain the complex, information-rich structures of biology and that these causes are empirically detectable.
Source: https://www.gotquestions.org/intelligent-design.html
Irreducible complexity: “a single system which is composed of several well-matched interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning.” For example, the human eye is obviously a very useful system. Without the eyeball, the optic nerve, and the visual cortex, a randomly mutated incomplete eye would actually be counterproductive to the survival of a species and would therefore be eliminated through the process of natural selection. An eye is not a useful system unless all its parts are present and functioning properly at the same time.
Specified complexity: The concept that, since specified complex patterns can be found in organisms, some form of guidance must have accounted for their origin. The specified complexity argument states that it is impossible for complex patterns to be developed through random processes. For example, a room filled with 100 monkeys and 100 computers may eventually produce a few words, or maybe even a sentence, but it would never produce a Shakespearean play. And how much more complex is biological life than a Shakespearean play?
The anthropic principle: The world and universe are “fine-tuned” to allow for life on Earth.
Source:
https://www.gotquestions.org/intelligent-design.html
Anthropic principle
It is the Law of Human Existence. It is well known that our existence in this universe depends on numerous cosmological constants and parameters whose numerical values must fall within a very narrow range of values. If even a single variable were off, even slightly, we would not exist. The extreme improbability that so many variables would align so auspiciously in our favor merely by chance has led some scientists and philosophers to propose instead that it was God who providentially engineered the universe to suit our specific needs. This is the Anthropic Principle: that the universe appears to have been fine-tuned for our existence.
Source:
https://www.gotquestions.org/anthropic-principle.html
The unique properties of water. Every known life form depends on water. Thankfully, unlike every other substance known to man, water’s solid form (ice) is less dense than its liquid form. This causes ice to float. If ice did not float, our planet would experience runaway freezing. Other important properties of water include its solvency, cohesiveness, adhesiveness and other thermal properties.
Earth’s atmosphere. If there were too much of just one of the many gases which make up our atmosphere, our planet would suffer a runaway greenhouse effect. On the other hand, if there were not enough of these gases, life on this planet would be devastated by cosmic radiation.
Earth’s reflectivity or “albedo” (the total amount of light reflected off the planet versus the total amount of light absorbed). If Earth’s albedo were much greater than it is now, we would experience runaway freezing. If it were much less than it is, we would experience a runaway greenhouse effect.
Earth’s magnetic field. If it were much weaker, our planet would be devastated by cosmic radiation. If it were much stronger, we would be devastated by severe electromagnetic storms.
Earth’s place in the solar system. If we were much further from the sun, our planet’s water would freeze. If we were much closer, it would boil. This is just one of numerous examples of how our privileged place in the solar system allows for life on Earth.
Our solar system’s place in the galaxy. Once again, there are numerous examples of this. For instance, if our solar system were too close to the center of our galaxy, or to any of the spiral arms at its edge, or any cluster of stars, for that matter, our planet would be devastated by cosmic radiation.
The color of our sun. If the sun were much redder, on the one hand, or bluer, on the other, photosynthesis would be impeded. Photosynthesis is a natural biochemical process crucial to life on Earth.
The Earth: The axial tilt of the earth ensures not only an optimal temperature, but that the temperature will be normalized over the surface of the planet. If the rotational period of the earth were longer, the difference in temperature between night and day would be too drastic; if shorter, atmospheric wind would be too fast. If the Earth's gravity were stronger, the atmosphere would retain too much ammonia and methane; if weaker, it would lose too much water. The "shininess," or albedo, of the Earth's atmosphere is also vital. If the earth reflected too much sunlight, the surface temperature would cool, and extensive glaciers would form; if it retained too much sunlight, the atmosphere would fall into a greenhouse effect.
The Oceans: The moon is just the right distance away from the earth to affect the tides. If the moon were farther, the stagnant water wouldn't be able to support plant life; if closer, the tides would cover too much of the land. Underwater earthquakes occur in just the right amount to disperse the nutrients lying on the seabed without destroying too much of the ocean life. The salinity of the ocean is also a key characteristic; if the ocean wasn't salty, ice would form more easily, reflecting heat back out into space and keeping the planet in a permanent ice age.
Water Cycle: The Earth is situated at just the right distance from the sun to ensure that water can exist as solid, liquid, and vapor. Any closer, the water would boil, possibly creating a greenhouse effect that would heat the temperature on the surface like that of Venus. Any farther, the water would freeze, making plant life all but impossible. The rate of precipitation is also finely tuned. A greater rate would erode away the arable soil needed by plants; a lesser rate would prevent water from reaching those plants, and prevent nutrients from eroding into the ocean where sea life depend on them.
The Solar System: If our sun were redder or bluer, plants would not be able to use sunlight for photosynthesis. The sun's magnetic field is perfectly aligned to protect us from cosmic rays, yet not generate too high of an x-ray flux. Even the positions and sizes of the gas giants are imperative. If they were closer or larger, they would catastrophically affect Earth's orbit around the sun; if they were smaller or farther away, they wouldn't cause as many comets and asteroids to detour away from the interior of the solar system.
For further study:
https://www.compellingtruth.org/anthropic-principle.html
https://apologeticspress.org/the-anthropic-principle-the-universe-is-designed-for-us-5619/
https://reasons.org/explore/publications/facts-for-faith/anthropic-principle-a-precise-plan-for-humanity
What do we need to understand?
Scientific studies can help us to explore the world and it helps us to observe the glory of God
The scientific exploration shows us how God has designed the universe from micro to macro level stuffs with careful properties
The complexity, fine tuning and designs indeed point to something intelligent agent beyond our comprehension
Scripture helps us understand the nature and the nature in turn helps us to better interpret the scripture. Hence, in early church history, the historical teaching was there exist book of nature and book of scripture. Source: https://youtube.com/shorts/xl_EbBM7Kr8?si=LCTF8bdj0jNAujGF
A careful scientific study and conclusion indeed gives testimony and witnesses the intelligent mind of supernatural creator whom we call ‘GOD’
A final say…
Learn Religions is at the bottom line while they state that Scientific errors, statements that conflict with facts about reality we have learned through scientific investigation, can be found throughout the Bible because the biblical texts were written at times when human knowledge about our world was quite limited. We can't blame ancient writers for knowing less than we do now, but we can blame people alive now for preferring the errors of ancient writers over the reliable knowledge developed today.
Source:
Cline, Austin. "Scientific and Historical Errors in the Bible." Learn Religions.
https://www.learnreligions.com/scientific-historical-errors-mistakes-in-bible-248627 (accessed June 7, 2022).
Question just to rethink
Why would God even teach science to the ancient people that aren’t yet fully concluded even in this modern time? The scripture indeed describes the reality of the immediate contemporary cultural context and is hence trustworthy.
The Bottom line…
1) An open mind is needed to examine both areas
2) There can be error in interpretation of either areas
3) We should let both areas walk along its journey and get updated with what they are offering
4) The Bible shouldn’t be abolished for what it doesn’t even intend to convey – Dr. Mike Heiser
5) The science shouldn’t be rejected, hated or boycotted unless we make sure the scripture is really aligning in the same phase
6) We should be thankful to science as it indeed reveals God’s glory
Further resources:
Biologos
Reasons to believe/Hugh Ross
Ben Stanhope You Tube channel
Michael Heiser
John Walton
John Lennox
William Craig
Ken Ham/Answers in Genesis
Inspiring Philosophy
https://www.bibleandscience.com
https://eternal-productions.org/101science.html.
Dan Kimball, How (Not) to read the Bible
Joshua Swamidas
David Snoke, Biblical Case for the Old Earth
Stephen Meyer, Intelligent Design
.png)
0 Comments