Interpretasieverskille ten opsigte van die natuurwetenskaplike werklikheid – ʼn reformatories-teologiese beoordeling

DTh (Dogmatiek), North-West University, Potchefstroom CampusGod’s name, “I WILL BE WHO I WILL BE” (YHWH), is a revelation, but also a promise of a creative, merciful, indeterminably holy Being who wants to be in an intimate relationship with his creation (Helberg, 2011:14). Humans describe the perceivable logical orderliness and purpose with which God created nature in terms of laws of nature. This forms the rational basis for the natural sciences. As something that is founded in human consciousness, the concept of the “image of God” entails that the human beingis a moral being. Humans are therefore placed in a moral reality with freedom of choice: “but God did say, ‘You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden... ’” (Gen. 3:3, NIV). However, Adam and Eve disavowed God as the source of everything that is good and so doomed all posterity to death. God is life, and denying him is sin and means death. Yet, determining and knowing looks identical to us in God’s “eternal present”. The fact that God knows in his eternal present that humans will sin, does not mean that he determines it. It remains every human being’s choice. Differences in interpretation of the natural scientific realities discussed in this thesis are ultimately determined by people’s interpretation of reality as it has taken shape in their consciousness, and in essence depends on faith, or not, in the almighty God. Although sin has not altered the logical orderliness in nature, it has altered humans’ observation and interpretation. The reality that the human brain describes is removed from that which is observed through the senses because of all the reciprocal connections and neural networks, although these impressions are not completely unrelated to the observations. The reality the brain constructs does not only contain facts, but also the spiritual consequences of physical causes, and faith is defining in this. Neurologically speaking, the more a person thinks about a matter, whether the eternal God or a natural scientific theory, the more the brain constructs the person’s view of the issue at hand as an objective reality. Therefore, what a person believes is neurologically based on the person’s preferences: “It is our preference that decides against Christianity, not arguments” (Nietzsche, 1968:627). Natural scientific questions – such as the question of a carefully designed universe and earth; the principle of life; the extent of the hidden available genetic potential in living cells; human language and human intelligence that developed directly contrary to the second law of thermodynamics, far beyond the evolutionary requirements for survival and efficient use of resources to a consciousness – brings to the fore the question of the purpose, because only a rational Creator can have a purpose. An autonomous mechanism cannot act with purpose. The central theoretical argument of this thesis is that Christ in his role as Creator and Redeemer as revealed to us, confirms this purpose. In this thesis, given all the scientific theories and discoveries, the world and science come to stand before Adam and Eve’s choice in paradise. The ultimate question is: “How do I see myself in relation to God?”. God gave enough evidence in our created reality to convince the willing, but not so much that it forces the unwilling. The impenetrable parts of reality therefore asks for faith in bridging the probabilities, because faith steps in where knowledge ends. Humans were created as moral beings with an adequate measure of choice, and although the balance of probabilities is convincing, persuasion asks for compliance of the will. God has a “deadly” earnestness to show mercy to all, as is evident from Christ’s crucifixion. However, God’s offer of mercy does not make the sinner’s acceptance an inevitability. It is the choice of every human being, although acceptance needs no virtue. Barth (1933:51) says that “the enterprise of setting up the ‘No-God' is avenged by its success... our conduct becomes governed precisely by what we desire”. In God’s great mercy, people’s choices have meaning, our lives have purpose, and no-one has to be damned, because all who confess Jesus as the Christ will be saved.Doctora