Reading this book is reminiscent to taking a college course. I learned something new on almost every page. The author describes this book as “a map to help high school or college students find their way through hotly disputed territory, to guide their journey from the one-sided and greatly oversimplified arguments…to the depth of scientific, theological and philosophical literature that exists” (13).
It could have been titled, “An overview of just about all the relevant scientific information as it relates to the controversy over the origin of the (1) universe, (2) life, (3) species and (4) humans.” The six following interpretive camps are compared in their interpretations, inferences and philosophical presuppositions:
- Naturalistic Evolutionists
- Nonteleological Evolutionists
- Planned Evolutionists
- Directed Evolutionists
- Old-Earth Creationists
- Young-Earth Creationists
Since I have almost no previous experience learning in the fields of biology, geology, paleontology, astronomy, genetics, and other similar and inter-related scientific fields, I was helped by this sprawling presentation of the relevant data for the non-professional.
This is the fourth book I’ve read from the following stack, but it should have been the first because of how it lays out the lay-of-the-land so comprehensively and fairly. This book gives the reader an overall grasp of the scientific information currently in play. One of the values of this book is that the author is able to briefly explain tons of highly-technical information in a simple, careful, straightforward way. As a sort of introductory survey to the science, it is second-to-none.
The author spends 3/4 of the book presenting the relevant scientific evidence and various interpretations of the above six models, showing the logic of each position and how the arguments ultimately rest on the philosophical presuppositions undergirding each model.
As well as describing each possible model, Rau controversially demonstrates how our religious and philosophical presuppositions, rather than the evidence, dictate our preferences. Rau’s insight clarifies why this conversation is so difficult. It is impossible to do science without a foundation of underlying philosophical presupossitions. In his words, “In most cases our philosophy determines choice of model rather than the opposite” (37) and “what we see depends on what we expect to see” (127).
I appreciated Rau’s willingness to highlight how each camp uses scientific data in particular ways based on philosophical motivations. This level of analysis is difficult to find and further highlights the inter-disciplinary character of the debate. At the root of the origins debate is the question of WHICH presuppositions and WHICH principles, should guide scientific inquiry in our generation, “…a debate that cannot be settled based on the empirical evidence” (189).
Rau’s goal was to be as neutral as he could in the presentation of the material and to avoid unfair characterizations and polarizing language. After all, “the question of origins is a puzzle, and it is clear that no model has put the whole puzzle together yet. Moreover, no model even has all the pieces of the puzzle in hand” (153).
But, that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to piece it all together! For someone who needed to see which pieces are on the table, and begin to get a sense of what each piece looks like, this book is gold!
Questions & Hope 