Ian McNaughton from AIG comments on the value of faith and the Bible when discussing orgins
There are three popular proofs for God. Together they form a strong case of His existence:
3. Christ Jesus
Creation is what we see and experience through our five senses and thus we are without excuse if we reject God. Conscience is a God given sense of right and wrong that calls on each of us to do what is right at all times. Christ Jesus came into the world through the incarnation to live and die so that the justice and wrath of God on sinners as law breakers would be satisfied in his work of atonement on the cross.
Creationists when arguing about God and creation, take as their starting point, the proposition that God exists and speaks to humanity through the Bible as well as thorough creation around us. The Bible, for instance does not go out of its way to try to prove God exists but simply accepts it. Creationists also accept that because man is made in God's image all Adam's posterity possess an innate sense of God (i.e. an inborn sense) which cannot be honestly denied. So in the origins debate we sometimes appeal to this inborn capacity to reason with our opponents. Our consciences are a witness to God's existence and to refuse this as valid proof is to refuse to stand in the debate with the Bible in our hands. It is very important that that ground is not given up. One either starts with belief in God or not. The atheist comes to the debate with his presupposition that there is no God. To deny the creationist his ground is to give the atheist an unjust advantage.
Evidential Apologetics is also useful in the Origins Debate as it enhances the depth of argument but the science contribution can only assist the testimony of the Word of God as it relies on evidence that may change and/or be superseded by new laws of Physics, Biology etc. It cannot, nor does it, have the authority of the infallible Word of God.
As Christians it should be the Bible and not what scientists say that is most important when considering our origins. Science cannot become a substitute for faith.The opinions expressed in this article are not necessarily those held by Cross Rhythms. Any expressed views were accurate at the time of publishing but may or may not reflect the views of the individuals concerned at a later date.
View all articles by Ian McNaughton