For centuries, Christian believers have disagreed on many issues. They include debates on trivial matters such as eating meat, drinking wine, worship style, mode of baptism; theological matters such as women in leadership, views on eschatology, predestination, human freewill; socio-ethical matters such as homosexuality, divorce, war, poverty, engagement in politics; and so on. But one of the most intense conversations that have sparked heated arguments among followers of Jesus is the debate on the Genesis account of how divine creation happened.

While all Christians agree that it was God who created the world and that human beings are created in the image of God, it seems that there are different perspectives on whether the earth is less than 20,000 years old or more than 4 billion years old. Then of course, there is also the dispute on whether God included evolution in the process of creation.

Some Christians believe in the “Young Earth Creationism” view — God actually created the world within six days (consecutive 24-hour periods). Others embrace the “Old Earth Creationism” view (a.k.a. Progressive Creationism) — God actually created the world within long periods of time (billions of years). There are also fellow believers who agree with the “Evolutionary Creationism” view (a.k.a. Theistic Evolution) — God actually created the world and used the process of evolution in His work.

In 1999, the book entitled Three Views on Creation and Evolution was published. Various Christian thinkers representing different views wrote arguments and proposals to questions such as: Can a “young earth” be reconciled with a universe that appears to be billions of years old? Does scientific evidence point to a God who designed the universe and life in all its complexity? Can the process of evolution be harmonized with the biblical story of creation?

This was followed by more books seeking to deepen this fiery conversation such as The Origins Debate: Evangelical Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design (2012) and Four Views on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design (2017). That is why today we have good Christians throughout various opposing camps such as Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis who defends Young Earth Creationism, Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe who argues for Old Earth Creationism, Deborah Haarsma of BioLogos who supports Evolutionary Creationism, and Stephen Meyer of The Discovery Institute who contends for Intelligent Design. 

This goes to show that the creation-evolution debate within the Christian family is a significant topic that deserves exploration. We need to stop demeaning or demonizing fellow Christians who may not agree with our perspectives. The challenge to the global body of Christ is to discern and listen to various Christian voices within the Church, and to humbly and wisely integrate biblical studies with aspects of geology, paleontology, biology, and other relevant domains of scientific inquiry about how our world began.

Healthy Disagreements Among Fellow Believers 

Christians can disagree on significant issues without condemning each other as non-believers or heretics. Certain matters of disputes among fellow believers (Romans 14:1-15:7; 1 Corinthians 10:23-33) are non-essential topics of debate that allow for freedom of conscience and healthy disagreements among believers. The creation-evolution debate is one of such topics.

When Christians disagree, it is helpful that we distinguish between matters that are ‘worth debating on’ and matters that are ‘worth dividing for’.

Topics that are ‘worth debating on’ are matters of disagreements based on different persuasions or interpretations, but they are not worth dividing for. They may be important truths, but they are not essential to Christian salvation. A believer can have full persuasion about a certain belief or value without judging others. Here, Christians can maintain unity on the essentials and allow freedom of interpretation on the non-essentials.

Issues that are ‘worth dividing for’ are matters of disagreements that separate orthodoxy from heresy because they include truths essential to a correct theology of salvation (distinct from heretical teachings). These disputes may require public confrontation and the breaking of fellowship over the purity of the Gospel.

Disagreements about the creation-evolution debate may fall under matters that are ‘worth debating on’ but definitely not on matters that are ‘worth dividing for’. This should not cause division among believers. We can love one another in Christ, and practice unity even when we disagree on our understanding of the Genesis creation story.

We must promote the maxim by Rupertus Meldenius: “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.”

Finite Beings Trying to Understand the Infinite God

You may be wondering why there are many competing theological perspectives within the Christian family. This is because God is huge and we are small. Our human explanations, reasonings, and attempts to totally comprehend God are fallen, limited, and prone to be mistaken.

Seeking truth is similar to the story of the blind men and the elephant, who each described, out of their own disability, what the whole elephant is like. Each was right in his perception of the part he detected. But everyone was wrong in assuming that the part they discovered was all there was to the elephant. 

In doing theology, we may be looking at the same thing and yet see it in many different ways. What we see depends largely on what we are disposed to see; and what is seen is but a corner of the reality that is there.

As finite, fallen, and fallible beings trying hard to grasp a huge universe created by an Infinite Being, we are prone to come up with blurry glimpses of reality. That is why even among fellow Christians, we seem to have incomplete, conflicting perspectives or interpretations on many significant issues. One such debate among believers is about the account of human origins found in the book of Genesis.

This ought to humble us and realize that we are limited beings and that we do not always get it right.  Even the Apostle Paul speaks about the limits of human knowing. He described that the human attempt to understand reality is partial, vague, and imperfect, like we are “seeing through a dim glass” (1 Corinthians 13:12).

We grow in knowledge by learning together from our mistakes, our sharing of insights, exchange of ideas, conscientious reflection, dialogue, debate, and deliberation.  Hence, because of our limitations and imperfections, we need each other in a cooperative endeavor to figure out the world and to search for truth.

We can partly understand who God is. But certain things about Him remain a “mystery.” Some things are simply beyond our capacity as humans to fully grasp.

Three Christian Views on Creation and Evolution

God has two books — the ‘book of God’s Word’ (Scripture) and the ‘book of God’s World’ (Nature). Both of these books contain truths that can lead human beings to knowledge of God. This implies that all ‘revealed truths’ 𑁋 about our world, about our humanity, and about our Maker 𑁋 they all belong to God. In other words, “all truth is God’s truth” whether these truths were discovered by astronomers, physicists, biologists, philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, or theologians. Both believers and non-believers uncover God’s truth revealed through nature as they study our planet (e.g., law of gravity, atoms, heliocentric universe, round earth, human genome, etc.). We can see this principle in Romans 1:18-21 and Psalms 19:1-6.

Although Christians today have intense debates about the complicated love-hate relationship between creation and evolution, there are several important truths that all Christians agree on regardless of their views. With regard to the ‘creation-evolution debate’, these are basic non-negotiable beliefs that are common to all believers:

• God created and sustains everything. Creation itself provides unmistakable evidence of God’s handiwork.
• Human beings are created in the image of God and are thus unique among God’s creatures.
• Christians should approach the claims of science with both interest and discernment, confident that all truth is God’s truth.
• Everything in creation finds its source, goal, and meaning in Jesus Christ, in whom the whole of creation will one day achieve redemption and renewal. All things will be united in Him, things in heaven and things on earth.

While these convictions unite all Christians, there are still many issues about the theory of evolution, the story of creation, and the age of the earth that divides us today. But as time goes by, and as technology and knowledge increase, our understanding of how the world works also becomes more clarified. For the meantime, while we wait for more evidence, let the discussions and debate about these matters continue within the Christian family. 

The following article is partly adapted from Jeffrey Koperski, “Creationism” in Science, Religion, and Society: History, Culture, and Controversy, Gary Laderman and Arri Eisen, eds. (Armonk, NY: Sharpe Reference, 2006).

1. YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISM (YEC)¹

God actually created the world within six days (consecutive 24-hour periods). The Genesis story is a literal and historical description of how divine creation happened.

The core teaching of Young Earth Creationism (YEC) is that the book of Genesis should be taken as a literal account of the prehistory and early history of the earth. The creation week is taken at face value: consecutive 24-hour periods adding up to six calendar days. Allowing for gaps in Old Testament genealogies, this means that the universe was created between 10,000 and 20,000 years ago. YECs also hold that geological data, including the fossil record, should be understood in light of the worldwide flood depicted in the account of Noah and the ark.

YEC was the majority view among Jews, Christians, and Muslims from ancient times until the nineteenth century. With little scientific evidence to contradict a young earth view, Scripture and tradition were the only sources available on the origin question. A dramatic change began around 1800. As geology matured into a distinct science, unexpected data began to emerge, including extinct volcanoes in central France and a consistent order among fossils in the geological strata. Scientists began to argue that geological explanations should appeal only to observed processes which they hypothesized to have been at work at the same rate and strength for millions of years

By the middle of the century, an old-earth view had taken hold. In 1852 it is estimated that one-half of all the Christians had come to believe that Genesis did not need to be interpreted in a young-earth creation view.

By the early twentieth century YEC had fallen into a minority position having few visible supporters among Christian leaders. The young earth view was adopted by some fundamentalist groups by World War II, but it was catapulted into the broader Christian community by seminary professor John Whitcomb Jr. and professor of civil engineering Henry Morris through the publication of The Genesis Flood (1961). YEC has since become a popular view among evangelical Christians and has been incorporated into the doctrinal statements of a number of churches, seminaries, and independent ministries.

The YEC interpretation is straightforward: Genesis should be taken as a simple, historical record without metaphor or symbolism. The length of each day (yom) is the same as the length of any other day found elsewhere in the Bible. YECs believe the flood in the account of Noah (Genesis 6-9) was a worldwide event. Allowing for a reinterpretation of Genesis with an old earth undermines the biblical framework. A less-than-literal interpretation of Genesis is thus taken to be a slippery slope toward a loss of biblical authority and a retreat to a naturalistic worldview.

Flood Geology

Modern YEC is not merely a set of religious doctrines about the Old Testament. Most creationists believe that their views will be vindicated by science, or at least would be if science could be freed from its philosophical commitment to naturalism. In order to counter scientific claims that the earth is over 4 billion years old, most YECs advocate a biblical flood geology. Instead of the millions of years required to create fossil fuels such as coal, flood geologists claim that they were formed within a year under the tremendous pressure of the floodwaters during Noah’s time. As for the consistency of fossils found at certain layers of the strata (rather than a given kind of fossil being found at all levels), flood geologists have three main answers: (1) if a creature lived on the ocean floor, it tended to be covered first, (2) denser creatures tended to sink and be buried faster than lighter creatures, and (3) larger, mobile creatures could escape the rising flood waters and were buried last.

Today many YECs see the debate as a strict dilemma: either one is a Christian upholding the truth of the Scriptures or one has fallen under the sway of atheistic naturalism. They believe that, since the Bible are without error and teach that the earth is less than 20,000 years old, any evidence that science might present to the contrary must be wrong.

The Appearance of Age

As we have seen, YECs argue that many scientific explanations requiring extreme age can be accounted for in terms of a recent creation. But what about, say, the starlight from distant galaxies? Such light would have taken millions of years to reach Earth, yet early civilizations saw the same constellations as we do. How could distant stars be seen if the universe is less than 20,000 years old? To answer this objection and a number of others like it, all YECs to some degree or other employ the notion that a recent creation must have the “appearance of age”. For example, Adam and Eve were created as fully grown adults. And since they needed food, many plants were likewise created whole. Thus, a recent creation requires that some things appear to have age at the instant they were brought into being. This provides a way to explain starlight: both the stars and the light en route from those stars were part of the initial creation. Scientists wrongly infer that the light has been traveling for millions of years since, again, they begin from naturalistic presuppositions rather than the truth of revelation.

Appealing to the appearance of age becomes the final line of defense against any seemingly incontrovertible evidence for an old earth. If such data cannot be accounted for in terms of flood geology, changes in the laws of nature, etc., YEC creationists then claim that things merely look extremely old from a naturalistic point of view. Stars, radioactive isotopes, continental plates, coral reefs, and the like merely have the appearance of age when in fact they were initially created much the way they are.

Critics object that this makes God into a deceiver: He has created a universe that falsely implies an ancient origin. YECs reply that there can be no deception if God explicitly tells us that the earth is young, which He has done in Genesis. The most familiar form of YEC is known as “creation science” or “scientific creationism.”

2. OLD EARTH CREATIONISM / PROGRESSIVE CREATIONISM (PC)²

God actually created the world within long periods of time. The Genesis story is a symbolic, metaphorical, or poetic description on how divine creation happened.

Although today the word “creationism” connotes a literal reading of Genesis, this was not always the case. Progressive Creationism (PC) or “old earth” creationism holds that while God made the universe and continues to act within it, the days of Genesis 1 are not literal, consecutive 24-hour periods. The six days of creation instead are thought to refer to an unspecified length of time. Most PCs believe that God directly created life as well as human beings. But since no age of the universe can be inferred from the text, they accept the findings of modern cosmology and geology. Most hold that Noah’s flood was a local phenomenon, and not a global event.

PC affirms that God created the universe, the earth, and all life on earth but it denies the teaching of evolution. In this way PC is similar to YEC. However, its most significant difference is that PCs believe God created the universe over billions of years rather than in six 24-hour periods.

Unlike the YECs, PCs do not contest the enormous body of evidence showing that the earth and the universe are billions of years old, and that complex, macroscopic life forms have been on this planet for hundreds of millions of years. PCs read Genesis in light of that evidence, accepting that mainstream scientific conclusions are indeed very well founded and do not contradict the Bible.

Although the term “progressive creation” was popularized in 1954 by philosopher/theologian Bernard Ramm, a nonliteral view of early Genesis can be found in ancient sources. Among these are Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria (c. 20 BC-c.50) and historian Flavius Josephus (37-c.95), as well as Christian theologians Origen (c. 185-254) and Augustine of Hippo (354-430). By the early twentieth century, virtually all well-known Christian leaders believed in an old earth: leaders of the Fundamentals movement such as D.L. Moody, conservative theologians Charles Hodge and B.B. Warfield, as well as William Jennings Bryan. Although PC remains strong among theologically conservative scientists and intellectuals, it has declined somewhat in the broader Protestant culture in the wake of YEC’s reemergence in the 1960s. PCs and YECs continue to oppose strict Darwinian evolution, especially in the case of humans.

More Christians have affirmed that a planet which is billions of years old poses no threat to Christian orthodoxy, but rather may be considered plausible and valid interpretations of the biblical text. Some of the famous believers who agree with this include the following: John Ankerberg, Gleason Archer, James Montgomery Boice, Chuck Colson, Paul Copan, William Lane Craig, Norman Geisler, Hank Hannegraff, Jack Hayford, Walter Kaiser, Greg Koukl, C. S. Lewis, Paul Little, J. P. Moreland, Robert Newman, Mark Noll, Francis Schaeffer, Chuck Smith Jr., Lee Strobel, Wayne Grudem, among many others.

PCs believe that the creation account is one of many passages in the Bible that should be taken figuratively. Angels are said to stand at the four corners of the earth (Revelation 7:1), but no one today thinks the earth is flat or square. There are also references to the sun rising (Judges 9:33; Matthew 5:45) and standing still (Joshua 10:13). Taken literally, the sun is pictured as the body in motion within a geocentric universe. For centuries, the Bible was understood to teach that the earth was the center of the universe. Once the Copernican Revolution took hold, exegetes began to question whether the naive interpretation of these texts was required or had simply been assumed all along. Rather than being a capitulation to science, theologians recognized these as new interpretive questions that no one had previously thought to ask.

PCs take a similar approach today when it comes to the creation account and geology. They argue that the traditional interpretation was dominant for so long only because there had been little reason to question the simple reading of Genesis 1. Now there are such reasons, and again sound exegesis shows that the simple interpretation is not the only permissible interpretation.

The Gap Theories

How then should the creation passages be interpreted? There are several approaches. The first are so-called “gap theories.” One of the most popular views at the turn of the nineteenth century held that there is an unspecified gap of time between Gen 1:1 and Gen 1:2. In Gen 1:1, God is said to have “created the heavens and the earth.” One English translation of Gen 1:2 reads “it became without form and void,” implying some sort of catastrophe or possibly divine judgment associated with the fall of Satan. On this “ruin-and-reconstruction” view, Gen 1:3-2:3 is actually a second creation. A more popular gap theory takes the days of creation as actual 24-hour periods separated by an unspecified length of time. On this “intermittent day” approach, God’s intervention on specific days in the course of cosmic history is summarized in Genesis.

One Day is Billions of Years

The most widely held PC interpretation appears to be the “day-age” theory. On this view, each “day” in Genesis 1 refers to an indistinct period of time, in some cases billions of years. In support of this interpretation, PCs point to instances in Scripture where the Hebrew word yom refers to periods (seasons of time) other than 24-hours, e.g., “on that day the Lord will extend his hand . . .” (Isaiah 11:11) and “in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens . . .” (Gen 2:4). Defining the “days” as “long ages” resolves some of the tensions with modern science, but not all. In particular, the days in the Genesis account are out of sequence from a scientific point of view. Plants and trees appear on day three; the sun and moon were created on day four.

Genesis is Not a Science Book

A more recent approach is known as the “literary framework” view, which emphasizes that Genesis 1 is not a scientific or historical description of the timing and mechanisms of creation. The point of the text is that Yahweh, the God of the Israelites, is the Creator of heaven and earth, rather than the Canaanite god Baal. The sun, moon, land, and seas were brought into being by Yahweh. He, not they, should be worshiped. To make this point, the author arranged the six days topically, not chronologically. Events are grouped in two triads of days. The realms of creation are separated in days 1-3. The rulers over those respective realms are created in days 4-6.

Critics complain that the parallel is not as neat as it might appear. For example, fish inhabit the seas (day 3), not merely the waters (day 2). Advocates of this view contend that even if this parallelism fails, the point remains that the purpose of early Genesis is not about strict history or science, but rather to prove Yahweh’s sovereign creation and reign.

Another view that should be mentioned is “Intelligent Design Theory”, which cuts across the YEC/PC distinction. Design theorists believe that traces of purpose and intelligence have been discovered in nature, but they are officially neutral with respect to the old earth/young earth controversy. In fact, they are officially neutral with respect to the identity of the creator. Some design theorists are not even theists.

3. EVOLUTIONARY CREATIONISM / THEISTIC EVOLUTION (TE)³

God actually created the world and used the process of evolution in His work. The scientific theory of evolution is compatible with biblical creation.

Theistic Evolutionists (TE) believe that the age of the universe debate has been dominated by a false dilemma: either supernatural interventions were needed to create the earth and its creatures on one hand, or purposeless, cosmic evolution produced everything purely by chance on the other hand. When faced with this choice, conservative Christians naturally see one side as orthodox and the alternative as atheistic. TEs believe there is a middle ground and that their religious views are fully compatible with modern cosmology, geology, and biological evolution.

For Christian believers who belong to the TE camp, Evolutionary Creationism is a position that takes the Bible seriously, upholding God as the creator of all things, and also takes science seriously, understanding that evolution is the best scientific explanation for the diversity of life on earth today.

Some of the famous Christians who seem supportive or open to Evolutionary Creationism are Karl Barth, Billy Graham, C.S. Lewis, John Stott, Francis Collins, Tim Keller, John Walton, Philip Yancey, Scott McKnight, Alister McGrath, Richard Mouw, John Ortberg, and N.T. Wright, among many others.

God Used Evolution to Start Everything

Christians who embrace this view argue that the scientific theory of evolution is compatible with biblical creation. They make a clear distinction between Darwinist evolutionism — which uses evolution to disprove God — and the scientific theory of evolution, which does not necessarily have theological implications. 

The universe has evolved, according to TE, just as science has taught us. The Big Bang, gradual formation of stars and planets, down through the self-organization of complex life and natural selection were God’s chosen means for bringing about the present universe. It’s not as though God were caught off guard; he foresaw the outcome and set the initial conditions in place that were required for this world.

Ancient Writers with Ancient Perspectives

Thus, evolution is not a worldview in opposition to God but a natural mechanism by which God providentially achieves his purposes. God spoke in Scripture in a way that the Jews and Christians would understand at the time, with the available limited scientific explanations of the ancient world.

The books of the Bible were written by many human authors under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, across a span of more than a thousand years, to tell the big, true story of God’s work in the world and with his people. Those authors came from many cultures, wrote in multiple languages, and used several literary genres. In fact, Holy Scripture features an ancient perspective of the structure, operation, and origin of the universe and life (e.g., the earth is flat and immovable, covered with a solid domed structure with the sun moving across the sky).

In other words, the Holy Spirit came down to the level of the ancient biblical writers and employed their understanding of the physical world in order to communicate as effectively as possible life-changing spiritual truths. By using an ancient science in the Bible, God revealed the inerrant message of faith that He created the world, not how He created it.

Differences among TEs tend to hinge on the nature of God’s ongoing guidance of the universe. Most hold some form of non-interventionism, the view that God’s main (and perhaps only) action after the initial creation is a continuous sustaining of the physical universe, rather than episodic interruptions. In other words, God upholds the natural order and the lawlike regularities studied by science, but does not violate the laws of nature. Since God was able to foresee the outcome, there was never a need for direct intervention or special creation within the natural order. Everything required for the present cosmos to evolve with all of its complexity was frontloaded at the initial creation. 

Other TEs believe that God continues to directly act within nature, but only in ways that do not violate the laws of physics. For example, quantum mechanics seems to indicate that nature is fundamentally probabilistic rather than deterministic. That means that some events at the subatomic level are purely matters of chance; the laws of physics do not determine their outcome. If so, then different outcomes are physically possible. Such causal gaps allow God to influence the behavior of the material world without violating its laws. Some TEs believe that God influences the behavior of natural systems via such means — a view which comes very close to PC. The difference has to do with our ability to detect such action. PCs believe that, at least in principle, the acts of God are empirically detectable by finding traces of design, purpose, intelligence. TEs generally reject this: specific acts of God within the causal gaps of nature cannot be detected.

Concluding Thoughts for Reflection

For centuries, one of the most intense conversations that have sparked heated arguments among followers of Jesus is the debate on the Genesis account of how divine creation happened. While all believers are united in the belief that God started the universe through a divine act of creation, there are at least three different Christian views which attempt to wrestle with this topic of creation and evolution.

• Young Earth Creationism believes that God actually created the world within six days (consecutive 24-hour periods). For them, the Genesis story is a literal and historical description of how divine creation happened.
• Old Earth Creationism / Progressive Creationism argue that God actually created the world within long periods of time. For them, the Genesis story is symbolical, metaphorical, or poetic description on how divine creation happened.
• Evolutionary Creationism / Theistic Evolution contends that God actually created the world and used the process of evolution in His work. For them, the scientific theory of evolution is compatible with biblical creation.

It seems that YEC is still the majority view among most conservative Christians, while PC and TE remains a minority view especially for Christians who are more open to reconciling biblical faith with science.

YECs believe they will eventually be vindicated by science. PCs respect YECs for their faithful devotion to Scripture, but they disagree about the interpretive rules one should bring to the creation texts. TEs agree with PCs on this, but then go on to reject divine intervention in nature after the Big Bang. YEC continues to be popular among conservative Christians, but has made little or no headway in the broader culture. PC, at least in the form of intelligent design theory, has a shaky footing in academia, but has yet to produce the scientific results needed to keep it there. TE has the most respect among intellectuals, but has the weakest theological content of the three.

In light of the on-going conversations within the Christian family regarding the creation-evolution debate, it seems appropriate and God-honoring to propose the following recommendations:

• Harmony. We need to stop shaming or demonizing fellow believers who do not agree with our perspectives or opinions on the creation-evolution debate. We must allow space for Christians to hold a range of views, advocate for those views and still feel loved in Christ.
• Humility. None of us have totally figured it out, especially when it comes to the creation-evolution debate. As finite beings we are prone to come up with blurry glimpses of reality. This ought to humble us and realize that we do not always get it right.  We need each other in a cooperative endeavor to figure out the world and to search for truth.
• Honesty. Keep asking the right questions in order to find the right answers, no matter how difficult the conversations become. Honestly examine why you believe what you believe and do not be afraid to engage with rational arguments, critical thinking, and scientific evidence. A faith that went through fire and survived is better than a hand-me-down type of faith that lacks intellectual foundations.
• Holiness. No matter how much we disagree as believers, remember that we must honor Christ with our lives through word and deed. More than clever arguments, it matters how our conversations and debates reflect Christlikeness.

The creation-evolution debate within the Christian family is a significant topic that deserves exploration. The challenge to the global body of Christ is to discern and listen to various Christian voices within the Church, and to humbly and wisely integrate biblical studies with aspects of geology, paleontology, biology, and other relevant domains of scientific inquiry about how our world began.

Serving Christ with you,

The CBCP Pastoral Team

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Sources / Recommended Readings:

• Three Views on Creation and Evolution | John Mark Reynolds, Howard J. Van Till, Paul Nelson, Robert C. Newman, James Porter Moreland
• The Origins Debate: Evangelical Perspectives on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design | Alister McGrath, John Wilson, Richard N. Ostling, Tim Stafford, Nancy Pearcey, Charles Edward White, Howard J. Van Till, Stan Guthrie, Dinesh D’Souza
• Four Views on Creation, Evolution, and Intelligent Design | J.B. Stump, Ken Ham, Hugh Ross, Deborah Haarsma, Stephen C. Meyer
• The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate | John H. Walton
• God and Evolution | Jay W. Richards
• Science and Faith: Friends or Foes? | John Collins
• The Battle of Beginnings: Why Neither Side is Winning the Creation-Evolution Debate | Del Ratzsch
• The Fourth Day: What the Bible and the Heavens are Telling Us about the Creation | Howard Van Till
• I Love Jesus & I Accept Evolution | Denis O. Lamoureux
• How I Changed My Mind About Evolution: Evangelicals Reflect on Faith and Science | Kathryn Applegate, J.B. Stump
• Evolution and Belief: Confessions of a Religious Paleontologist | Robert J. Asher

[1] Jeffrey Koperski, “Creationism” in Science, Religion, and Society: History, Culture, and Controversy, Gary Laderman and Arri Eisen, eds. (Armonk, NY: Sharpe Reference, 2006).

[2] Koperski, “Creationism” in Science, Religion, and Society: History, Culture, and Controversy.

[3] Koperski, “Creationism” in Science, Religion, and Society: History, Culture, and Controversy.

The post How to Navigate Through the Creation-Evolution Debates Within the Christian Family? appeared first on Christian Bible Church of the Philippines.