Faith Well Grounded

I've been musing on my blog posts of late, and it's fairly obvious through interaction and comments (thanks to e-dogg for his interaction) that I've been on a tangent that misrepresents my original intent in many of my posts. My posts on scientific matters pretty much began here. It was a comparison of the faith inherent in both science and apologetics/Christianity. Those that followed were interested in pointing out the faith involved with science.

Space rocks...

I'm often asked if I'm a creationist. And I'm always surprized by the question. I'll clarify. If you are talking to a Christian, you are talking to a creationist. Every Christian should believe that God created everything.

But the term "creationist" seems to have been exclusively attached to "recent-creationists", or "young-Earth-creationists". There is the possibility that God created the Universe eons ago, and then created Adam intact as a mature human. It's not just a question of evolution vs. a young Earth.

I've been blogging on the faith inherent in science. This is the equivalent to intellectual suicide in the eyes of some. It's called an error of equivocation. But I must strongly disagree. There are literal parallels between the faith of the theologian and the faith of many in the scientific community. A look at some of their statements reveals the fact.

I’m linking to an article by Philip Johnson that highlights this fact. Of immediate interest to my subject matter, Johnson comments/quotes:

This is the next installment dealing with the double-standards between science and theism-- specifically the faith allowed in the former as opposed to the latter.

I was over at "Stand to Reason" today (the link is on my blog roll), and they have a very well-written response to the NewsWeek discussion hosting Rick Warren and Sam Harris. Melinda points out many specific instances where Mr. Harris misrepresents Christianity in his evaluation of it. Now, we all know how easy it is to beat up on the "straw man", and in my opinion the need to build such a straw man is an indication of a weak position.

OK, I know I said that part three of the discussion on the double-standard between science and theology was next-- and I promise the blog concerning the Big Bang Theory is forthcoming. But I'm knee-deep in a very interesting read on all of these related subjects and I just wanted to jot down a stray point or two.

Quantum Electrodynamics.

This is part two of Higgs Boson and its Relevance to Christian Apologetics. A very brief summary of the standard scientific model is as follows:

There are many potential Christian Apologists out there who just choose to keep their mouths shut. In some cases, I think this is a good thing. No argument is actually better than a poor argument. But I think there are many out there who are more than capable of making great cases for God, but they choose not to. They feel that they are not equipped to. They don’t have all of the answers, and have been convinced that they therefore have nothing of value to add to meaningful discussion.

It shouldn't be amazing to any of us who have come into a relationship with God that all roads lead back to love with Him. When asked the greatest of commandments, Jesus listed the first two: Love God and love your neighbor. By implications of His other teachings, "neighbor" meant everyone-- even your most bitter enemy. And if you live up to the first two, the rest naturally come easier.

Boy, am I hestitant to put this entry in the "Science" category. It just proves that I need to create some more categories. But, since it loosely falls under Biblical Archaeology, I'll let this one slide.