Make no mistake, there was no discord in Austin over acknowledgement of a supernatural cause.  Here lies the solid ground upon which we construct our worldview.

A few weeks ago I attended a special conference in Austin, Texas entitled:  Vibrant Dance of Faith and Science.  It was one of the best conferences I’ve ever attended, and yet it was also one of the most inconclusive.  The organizers brought together leading scholars and authors to address origins, development of life on earth and the importance of integrating science and faith.  In addition to theologians, invited speakers included the leading proponents of Intelligent Design (ID), Progressive Creation (PC) and Evolutionary Creation (EC).  Was it a useful exchange of ideas and perspectives?  Absolutely!  Was there a general consensus as to the cause of the universe, earth and all life upon it?  Absolutely!  Was there a consensus as to how, and over what time frame, a supernatural power brought the cosmos into being and created life?  Absolutely not!  You see, those who love science are afflicted with an insatiable urge to understand the “mechanisms” of how the universe came to be and how life sprung into being.  While these scientists relish the opportunity to pursue the “how” of creation and vehemently argue one perspective versus another, the fact of the matter is that we will never fully understand the intricacies of “how”.  After all, God’s ways are not our ways.  Unlike us, HE is infinite in HIS knowledge and not constrained by bias, probability and three dimensions.  But, can disharmony among our leading Christian apologists and scientists be useful for those promoting an atheistic agenda?  The answer is yes, but only if we allow it to be a major division among ranks of believers.  Atheists cite disagreements over interpretations of scripture and nature among believers as a sign of weakness, uncertainty, and the basis of falsehoods.  In reality, the evidence for intentional design in creation is so strong that it would require a far greater level of “belief” to embrace atheism rather than theism.  The most effective response is simply to magnify the common acceptance of “the signature of design” while de-emphasizing our differences regarding the process that HE employed.  Many Christian apologists and scientists refuse to acknowledge the merits of alternative perspectives on HIS process of creation.  Failing to highlight the common ground of deliberate creation simply feeds into the rhetoric of atheism and alienates young believers

Keep in mind that where the proverbial rubber meets the road is whether one attributes the universe and all things within it as a natural phenomena or a result of a supernatural cause.  Make no mistake, there was no discord in Austin over acknowledgement of a supernatural cause.  Here lies the solid ground upon which we construct our worldview.

Again, the conference in Austin was outstanding and it reinforced overwhelming evidence that we are not here by chance, but by design.  This evidence alone should suffice in formulating a solid creation based worldview.  But is there more?  God calls us to explore our world that HE has made and to marvel at its beauty, complexities and power, but the more I read and investigate differing perspectives on how HE did it, the more I see knowledge gaps that span into the realm of God and the metaphysical and beyond the empirical capabilities of science.