What do you think?
Rate this book
Mapping the Origins Debate: Six Models of the Beginning of Everything
Midwest Publishing Awards Show Honorable Mention
The debate over evolution and creation has raged for decades and shows no signs of letting up. Many promote one view as the only reasonable solution. But what are the main viewpoints, and just why do they disagree? In the midst of an increasingly intense dispute, Gerald Rau answers the important questions with level-headed clarity and evenhanded analysis.
Rau lays out six models of origins, ranging from naturalistic evolution to young-earth creation. He shows how each model presupposes an underlying philosophy that adherents take on faith. With the sensitivity of a seasoned educator, Rau demonstrates how each model assesses the scientific evidence in relation to four different kinds of the universe, life, species and humans. In an age of specialists, Rau sees the big picture. Mapping the Origins Debate cuts through the cacophony and the complexity to provide a lucid and charitable contribution to the conversation.
The debate over evolution and creation has raged for decades and shows no signs of letting up. Many promote one view as the only reasonable solution. But what are the main viewpoints, and just why do they disagree? In the midst of an increasingly intense dispute, Gerald Rau answers the important questions with level-headed clarity and evenhanded analysis.
Rau lays out six models of origins, ranging from naturalistic evolution to young-earth creation. He shows how each model presupposes an underlying philosophy that adherents take on faith. With the sensitivity of a seasoned educator, Rau demonstrates how each model assesses the scientific evidence in relation to four different kinds of the universe, life, species and humans. In an age of specialists, Rau sees the big picture. Mapping the Origins Debate cuts through the cacophony and the complexity to provide a lucid and charitable contribution to the conversation.
341 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 10, 2012
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews
April 25, 2014
Perhaps I'm stating the obvious but most discussions of origins seem to generate far more heat than light. They preach to the choir of those who agree, fail to engage those with whom they disagree on their own terms and perpetuate the unfortunate notion that Christianity and science are at war with each other. This book is a notable exception to that trend in that it is intended to promote understanding and conversation rather than more controversy.
Gerald Rau takes a novel approach in this book. Rather than taking a side, he lays out six different models that may be found in the current discussions. This itself is important because most of the coverage of this issue assumes two very diametrically opposed options: naturalistic evolution, that there is no god and the universe and all life arose simply through physical causation, and young earth creationism, which treats Genesis 1 as a literal account of how God created the world in six literal days, a world that is approximately 10,000 years old.
Rau identifies four other models and their proponents:
Non-Teleological Evolution: There is a deity but once the universe was created, it developed and evolved apart from any intention of God. This would be Ian Barbour's position.
Planned Evolution: This assumes a deity who created the universe so perfectly that it evolved according to God's plan without further intervention. Francis Collins and the Biologos folk would hold this.
Directed Evolution: This assumes a deity who creates the universe and intervenes to direct natural processes. Michael Behe and Loren Haarsma would hold to this model.
Old Earth Creationism: This would take a day-age approach to reading Genesis that assumes God's creative work in each of these "long days" in which at least the major body plans of living creatures were created separately and did not evolve. Hugh Ross would be a representative of this group.
What Rau then does is shows how each of these models treats four major aspects of origins. His observation is that throughout, all six models are dealing with the same evidence but their interpretation of this evidence is shaped by differing fundamental presuppositions that account for the differences in the models. The four major areas Rau surveys are the origin of the universe, the origin of life, the origin of species, and the origins of humans.
Rau observes that there are difficulties every model has with the evidence as well as varying explanations of both the evidence and the difficulties. For example, the anthropic principle, that observes the existence of 26 constants that allow for the existence of organic life, including human beings poses difficulties for the idea of a randomly arising universe of naturalistic evolution, although proponents would argue that in a multiverse with infinite universes, at least one would satisfy these requirements. Similarly, the commonalities of genetic material across species and the relatively small genetic difference between humans and apes pose questions for those who would argue against some form of evolution, explained by the use of "common design".
Rau contends that rather than the currently polarized camps around these models, what might be more helpful is recognizing that it might be possible for each to learn from the others, that each has insights that may be useful in explaining some evidence and that this could be more fruitful than our present debates.
His conclusion however goes to the heart of the differences that exist, which are differing definitions of science, and fundamental disagreements about the existence of a God and whether such a God is involved with the physical world and how. My question as I consider this is whether these deepest differences can either be over come or held in abeyance to realize the kind of interchange between proponents of the different models that Rau hopes for.
If that kind of engagement is ever to occur, the work Gerald Rau has done lays excellent groundwork for such interchange. And for those trying to understand the different positions in the origins debate, Rau gives us an excellent "map" of the landscape.
Gerald Rau takes a novel approach in this book. Rather than taking a side, he lays out six different models that may be found in the current discussions. This itself is important because most of the coverage of this issue assumes two very diametrically opposed options: naturalistic evolution, that there is no god and the universe and all life arose simply through physical causation, and young earth creationism, which treats Genesis 1 as a literal account of how God created the world in six literal days, a world that is approximately 10,000 years old.
Rau identifies four other models and their proponents:
Non-Teleological Evolution: There is a deity but once the universe was created, it developed and evolved apart from any intention of God. This would be Ian Barbour's position.
Planned Evolution: This assumes a deity who created the universe so perfectly that it evolved according to God's plan without further intervention. Francis Collins and the Biologos folk would hold this.
Directed Evolution: This assumes a deity who creates the universe and intervenes to direct natural processes. Michael Behe and Loren Haarsma would hold to this model.
Old Earth Creationism: This would take a day-age approach to reading Genesis that assumes God's creative work in each of these "long days" in which at least the major body plans of living creatures were created separately and did not evolve. Hugh Ross would be a representative of this group.
What Rau then does is shows how each of these models treats four major aspects of origins. His observation is that throughout, all six models are dealing with the same evidence but their interpretation of this evidence is shaped by differing fundamental presuppositions that account for the differences in the models. The four major areas Rau surveys are the origin of the universe, the origin of life, the origin of species, and the origins of humans.
Rau observes that there are difficulties every model has with the evidence as well as varying explanations of both the evidence and the difficulties. For example, the anthropic principle, that observes the existence of 26 constants that allow for the existence of organic life, including human beings poses difficulties for the idea of a randomly arising universe of naturalistic evolution, although proponents would argue that in a multiverse with infinite universes, at least one would satisfy these requirements. Similarly, the commonalities of genetic material across species and the relatively small genetic difference between humans and apes pose questions for those who would argue against some form of evolution, explained by the use of "common design".
Rau contends that rather than the currently polarized camps around these models, what might be more helpful is recognizing that it might be possible for each to learn from the others, that each has insights that may be useful in explaining some evidence and that this could be more fruitful than our present debates.
His conclusion however goes to the heart of the differences that exist, which are differing definitions of science, and fundamental disagreements about the existence of a God and whether such a God is involved with the physical world and how. My question as I consider this is whether these deepest differences can either be over come or held in abeyance to realize the kind of interchange between proponents of the different models that Rau hopes for.
If that kind of engagement is ever to occur, the work Gerald Rau has done lays excellent groundwork for such interchange. And for those trying to understand the different positions in the origins debate, Rau gives us an excellent "map" of the landscape.
August 4, 2020
মহাবিশ্ব, প্রাণ ও প্রজাতির উৎপত্তি নিয়ে ৬ ঘরানার চিন্তাধারার সাবলিল বর্ণনা কেউ পড়তে চাইলে প্রফেসর জেরাল্ডের ম্যাপিং দ্য অরিজিনস ডিবেট পড়তে পারে। লেখক কারো পক্ষ না নিয়ে জাস্ট ৬ পরিমণ্ডলের মানুষের চিন্তাধারা বলে গেছেন। শক্তিশালী ও দূর্বল দিক দেখিয়েছেন। অন্টোলজি ইস্যুতে সাইন্টিফিক ইন্টারপ্রিটেশানের ভ্যারিয়েশান কেন হচ্ছে, বিজ্ঞান আসলে কী ইত্যাদি জানার জন্য খুবই উপকারী ভূমিকা মূলক বই। যারা বিজ্ঞান ধর্ম আন্তঃসম্পর্ক ইস্যুকে দাওয়াহ-এর ফোকাস বানাতে চায়, তাদের জন্য এটা মাস্ট রিড।
July 21, 2020
Breakdown of the Origins Options
Gerald Rau provides an extremely helpful toolkit in this book. He identifies the philosophical and scientific options available when it comes to the origin of the cosmos, life, and human beings. He demonstrates that every scientific model tests on philosophical assumptions, and so sorting out even what counts as "scientific" is not a simple task.
Practically, Rau provides an encompassing framework for locating the various positions on these important matters. He explains as well the scientific basis for and issues surrounding these three categories of origins. While I currently find myself in the evolutionary creationist camp, Rau has caused me to be open to listening to those in the other camps. I have lots left to learn.
It's worth mentioning that Rau provides appendices full of tables that visually break down the various origin views on specific questions. These can serve as a valuable tool for understanding and teaching. This book would be appropriate for those trying to understand the current origins options, and might serve well in a college course on science and religion.
Gerald Rau provides an extremely helpful toolkit in this book. He identifies the philosophical and scientific options available when it comes to the origin of the cosmos, life, and human beings. He demonstrates that every scientific model tests on philosophical assumptions, and so sorting out even what counts as "scientific" is not a simple task.
Practically, Rau provides an encompassing framework for locating the various positions on these important matters. He explains as well the scientific basis for and issues surrounding these three categories of origins. While I currently find myself in the evolutionary creationist camp, Rau has caused me to be open to listening to those in the other camps. I have lots left to learn.
It's worth mentioning that Rau provides appendices full of tables that visually break down the various origin views on specific questions. These can serve as a valuable tool for understanding and teaching. This book would be appropriate for those trying to understand the current origins options, and might serve well in a college course on science and religion.
October 11, 2023
Terrible cover, great overview
March 19, 2015
According to Rau, there are six basic positions in regard to the relationship of science and theism in the origins debate. He maps these, but is careful to clarify that each will have nuanced positions from within them which could make the number of positions innumerable. He discusses each position fairly, and objectively, never completely tipping his hand to his own position. He argues for validity and difficulty with each position, causing damage to the way that people often try to caricature their opponents.
Rau's analysis is insightful, his information fluid and appropriate, and his objectivity admirable. In regard to the origins debate, this book makes a great primer and solid place to start for anyone trying to be fair to all positions.
Rau's analysis is insightful, his information fluid and appropriate, and his objectivity admirable. In regard to the origins debate, this book makes a great primer and solid place to start for anyone trying to be fair to all positions.
June 17, 2017
This book was helpful for me in that most often the only two options presented seem to be that of Darwinism and Young Earth Creationism - there seems to be little presented in between. As one who falls in between it was refreshing to read a well thought out survey of the various positions. The author did a good job of attempting objectivity in describing each position, though I would guess he hails from the ID/OEC camp. There are two reasons I gave it 4 rather than 5 stars: first, the book will not be accessible to those with scant scientific knowledge. I have a BA and am a Registered Nurse who excelled in Biology in college. This gave me some legs in treading through this volume. I am concerned that someone with less scientific study than I, or someone who does not find the sciences a strength will really struggle to trudge through much of this book, as it is dense with biology, astronomy, and even delves into mathematics and statistics. That said, for one who has an intro into these subjects - while it may be challenging - the work to apprehend this subject is worth the time and effort. Secondly, and I think this is true with any book on this subject, this book is intended to educate and promote understanding yet someone with the degree of understanding required to understand the book I think would already have formed a solid position on the topic discussed. The problem is that Origins and Evolution are a deeply complicated and challenging matter. To write an intro to it in a way that does justice to the subject without depleting the subject into incoherent vacuous misrepresentations is as difficult as writing an intro the subject of Predestination or the Freedom of the Will. This is the deep end of the scientific and theological pool. Many tread here not realizing how deep of water they are encountering, but because of overly simplistic Sunday School material they are duped into thinking they have something close to a reasonable grasp on the subject - and they do not. This book truly is an introduction, but as an introduction a college degree is yet required to really digest it and apprehend the intentions behind it. I do not fault the author for this, but having that aim as a premise seems a bit naive. That said, the last chapter wherein the author promotes civility and respect between those of various opinions is, I believe, important. As Christians who so happily divide over this issue, we ought to exercise caution and take his admonitions seriously to ensure we exhibit the mind of Christ in our debating this matter and not only take heart to carefully articulate our position and concerns, but hear others with equal passion and patience.
June 2, 2013
Gerald Rau, former adjunct professor of biology at both Wheaton College and Trinity Christian College in Illinois, has an extensive education with degrees in plant breeding, biology, science education and more. Given his master's degree in science education with a focus on the philosophy of science and his concerns as an educator at American School in Taichung, Taiwan, who was trying to develop a science curriculum (12-13), Rau strikes me as both qualified and competent to write on this controversial subject.
SUMMARY
In this book Rau draws together mainstream competing models of origins under six distinct categories and presents a thoughtful look at the ways in which these models are divided, the fundamental issues which divide them, and how (or whether) they each address the relevant data for the origins of the universe, life, species, and humans. He does this by exploring what the data are, how each model interprets the data (if at all), and what difference that makes.
THE TARGET AUDIENCE
The title of the book itself should indicate rather clearly who the intended audience is: anyone interested in the origins debate who wants to responsibly understand the different views, from the curious layman to the church pastor and so on. Whether you have an uncompromising young-earth creation view or a neo-Darwinian evolutionary one--or more likely somewhere in between--you will find this book to be an educational benefit and a valuable addition to your library. It provides the reader with a practically objective look at the different models of origins, what their operating presuppositions are, why that is important, and how they each compare to one another when it comes to the relevant data. In my opinion, the first two chapters alone are worth the price of the entire book.
A BRIEF REVIEW OF ITS CONTENTS
In the first chapter Rau set out what is foundational to the whole debate and to every question belonging to it, highlighting the importance of acknowledging the lens through which we see and interpret the data as evidence in the first place. Even though we all have access to the same evidence, he wrote, "the presuppositions implicit in a person's philosophy determine the perspective from which he or she views the data," which will inherently produce an explanation of the data consistent with that perspective (20). He also laid out what the four essential questions on origins are that must be addressed and why.
The second chapter was where Rau laid the groundwork for the evaluation he wanted to present, from explaining the difference between hypothesis, theory, and law--and how these terms are abused and obscured by rhetoric in the debate--to describing the spectrum of models which he organized into six different views on origins: naturalistic evolution (NE), non-teleological evolution (NTE), planned evolution (PE), directed evolution (DE), old-earth creation (OEC), and young-earth creation (YEC). Yes, he addressed intelligent design (52-56) and explained its relationship to his spectrum. And in case you were wondering, NE is atheistic, NTE is deistic, and PE and DE are theistic.
Chapters 3 to 6 were comprised of each model addressing the four essential questions about origins: the universe (57-81), life (82-100), species (101-128), and mankind (129-152). In every chapter, the empirical data was discussed at length but in accessible terms, and then each of the six models were compared and evaluated with respect to how they interpret and address the data. For example, regarding the origin of the universe Rau discussed the four views which argue that it had a beginning long ago (NTE, PE, DE, and OEC), one which argues that it only appears to have had a beginning long ago (NE), and one which argues that it had a beginning that only appears to have been long ago (YEC). There are far more details than a review is warranted in discussing so I highly recommend acquiring this book and exploring how your origins model compares against the others in light of the empirical data that requires explanation.
In chapter 7 Rau concentrated on "where each model has made contributions to science that others need to take seriously and where each has weaknesses that need to be addressed," recognizing that "no model has put the whole puzzle together yet" (153). He did this by drawing the six models together into four broad interpretations of the scientific data: neo-Darwinian and non-Darwinian evolution models, and young-earth and old-earth creation models. And I rather enjoyed this little caveat: "There will be things in this chapter you will disagree with. Unless you have no position at all, this is guaranteed, because I will point out what I consider the strengths and weaknesses of each model, and no one likes to admit that their model has problems" (155). Incidentally, one of the hidden secrets in this book was the confession that advocates of a young-earth creation have made important contributions to science, which hardly anyone seems prepared to admit but Rau honestly sets forth (161-162).
In chapter eight Rau wanted to finally bring the discussion to a close "by showing how the definition of science itself is at the heart of the debate and likewise dictated by our philosophical presuppositions," which raises a fundamental question of whose definition of science we use and why that one should be used (176). He engaged this question by looking at how science is defined today, how that definition has tended to illegitimately preclude all views other than naturalistic evolution, and why that is an indefensible failure. And he closes by looking at how the origins debate is itself a matter of the heart, and encourages a sympathetic approach between Christians who differ over how God created the world that we all inhabit together. "There is a war going on, but it is not a war between science and religion. Rather, it is a war about what science is, a war that is philosophical more than religious" (189).
PERSONAL REFLECTION
Overall I really enjoyed this book. Even though I was already familiar with a majority of the ideas represented by the different models Rau looked at, due to my own personal journey from a young-earth creation view, there were still a lot of things I learned that I had not known before. For example, the young-earth creation idea of the universe expanding out of a white hole, which was proposed to explain how the stars could be billions of years old but the earth only thousands of years old (79, 222), that idea did not exist in any of the literature I had back when I held the young-earth view. And now, of course, I want to go and familiarize myself with that idea. So kudos to you, Mr. Rau.
For what the book was intended to do, I would have to say that Rau succeeded--including his effort at maintaining an objective tone in his presentation and language. Although I am not sure he has contributed anything substantive toward convincing the warring parties to lay down their arms and engage in open dialogue, he specifically anticipated that failure but nevertheless gave his readers a wealth of insight toward understanding why each side holds the view they do and the presuppositional commitments which give rise to it, enabling us to exercise a measure of sympathetic comprehension. "On these questions rest the eternal debate that has been with us for centuries and will continue to be for the rest of the history of humankind, in varying guises, the debate about how we got here, and thus our relation to the Creator and the rest of creation" (189).
SUMMARY
In this book Rau draws together mainstream competing models of origins under six distinct categories and presents a thoughtful look at the ways in which these models are divided, the fundamental issues which divide them, and how (or whether) they each address the relevant data for the origins of the universe, life, species, and humans. He does this by exploring what the data are, how each model interprets the data (if at all), and what difference that makes.
THE TARGET AUDIENCE
The title of the book itself should indicate rather clearly who the intended audience is: anyone interested in the origins debate who wants to responsibly understand the different views, from the curious layman to the church pastor and so on. Whether you have an uncompromising young-earth creation view or a neo-Darwinian evolutionary one--or more likely somewhere in between--you will find this book to be an educational benefit and a valuable addition to your library. It provides the reader with a practically objective look at the different models of origins, what their operating presuppositions are, why that is important, and how they each compare to one another when it comes to the relevant data. In my opinion, the first two chapters alone are worth the price of the entire book.
A BRIEF REVIEW OF ITS CONTENTS
In the first chapter Rau set out what is foundational to the whole debate and to every question belonging to it, highlighting the importance of acknowledging the lens through which we see and interpret the data as evidence in the first place. Even though we all have access to the same evidence, he wrote, "the presuppositions implicit in a person's philosophy determine the perspective from which he or she views the data," which will inherently produce an explanation of the data consistent with that perspective (20). He also laid out what the four essential questions on origins are that must be addressed and why.
The second chapter was where Rau laid the groundwork for the evaluation he wanted to present, from explaining the difference between hypothesis, theory, and law--and how these terms are abused and obscured by rhetoric in the debate--to describing the spectrum of models which he organized into six different views on origins: naturalistic evolution (NE), non-teleological evolution (NTE), planned evolution (PE), directed evolution (DE), old-earth creation (OEC), and young-earth creation (YEC). Yes, he addressed intelligent design (52-56) and explained its relationship to his spectrum. And in case you were wondering, NE is atheistic, NTE is deistic, and PE and DE are theistic.
Chapters 3 to 6 were comprised of each model addressing the four essential questions about origins: the universe (57-81), life (82-100), species (101-128), and mankind (129-152). In every chapter, the empirical data was discussed at length but in accessible terms, and then each of the six models were compared and evaluated with respect to how they interpret and address the data. For example, regarding the origin of the universe Rau discussed the four views which argue that it had a beginning long ago (NTE, PE, DE, and OEC), one which argues that it only appears to have had a beginning long ago (NE), and one which argues that it had a beginning that only appears to have been long ago (YEC). There are far more details than a review is warranted in discussing so I highly recommend acquiring this book and exploring how your origins model compares against the others in light of the empirical data that requires explanation.
In chapter 7 Rau concentrated on "where each model has made contributions to science that others need to take seriously and where each has weaknesses that need to be addressed," recognizing that "no model has put the whole puzzle together yet" (153). He did this by drawing the six models together into four broad interpretations of the scientific data: neo-Darwinian and non-Darwinian evolution models, and young-earth and old-earth creation models. And I rather enjoyed this little caveat: "There will be things in this chapter you will disagree with. Unless you have no position at all, this is guaranteed, because I will point out what I consider the strengths and weaknesses of each model, and no one likes to admit that their model has problems" (155). Incidentally, one of the hidden secrets in this book was the confession that advocates of a young-earth creation have made important contributions to science, which hardly anyone seems prepared to admit but Rau honestly sets forth (161-162).
In chapter eight Rau wanted to finally bring the discussion to a close "by showing how the definition of science itself is at the heart of the debate and likewise dictated by our philosophical presuppositions," which raises a fundamental question of whose definition of science we use and why that one should be used (176). He engaged this question by looking at how science is defined today, how that definition has tended to illegitimately preclude all views other than naturalistic evolution, and why that is an indefensible failure. And he closes by looking at how the origins debate is itself a matter of the heart, and encourages a sympathetic approach between Christians who differ over how God created the world that we all inhabit together. "There is a war going on, but it is not a war between science and religion. Rather, it is a war about what science is, a war that is philosophical more than religious" (189).
PERSONAL REFLECTION
Overall I really enjoyed this book. Even though I was already familiar with a majority of the ideas represented by the different models Rau looked at, due to my own personal journey from a young-earth creation view, there were still a lot of things I learned that I had not known before. For example, the young-earth creation idea of the universe expanding out of a white hole, which was proposed to explain how the stars could be billions of years old but the earth only thousands of years old (79, 222), that idea did not exist in any of the literature I had back when I held the young-earth view. And now, of course, I want to go and familiarize myself with that idea. So kudos to you, Mr. Rau.
For what the book was intended to do, I would have to say that Rau succeeded--including his effort at maintaining an objective tone in his presentation and language. Although I am not sure he has contributed anything substantive toward convincing the warring parties to lay down their arms and engage in open dialogue, he specifically anticipated that failure but nevertheless gave his readers a wealth of insight toward understanding why each side holds the view they do and the presuppositional commitments which give rise to it, enabling us to exercise a measure of sympathetic comprehension. "On these questions rest the eternal debate that has been with us for centuries and will continue to be for the rest of the history of humankind, in varying guises, the debate about how we got here, and thus our relation to the Creator and the rest of creation" (189).
February 25, 2013
One constant issue addressed within the scientific and philosophical communities has been the subject of origins. How did we get here? When did we get here? Why are we here? From the man on the street to the published scholar, mankind has been trying to answer these questions and more as it pertains to the origins of life. When it comes to answering these questions you will not doubt find a myriad of answers even within the same belief systems such as atheism and theism. The task of sifting through all of the data and answers can be overwhelming and indeed it is.
While there are many books on the subject of origins it is hard for the average reader to take the time to read them all, let alone understand what they are reading. What would be most beneficial is to have a book that lays each view side by side objectively as possible. With this goal in mind Gerald Rau has written Mapping the Origins Debate: Six Models of the Beginning of Everything by IVP. Rau has degrees in science and theology, was a teacher at Wheaton College and is the founder and chief editor at Professional English International, Inc. in Taiwan where he currently works. Rau has produced a book that is aimed at high school and college age students but can be beneficial for adults as well.
Worldviews Influence Science?
One of the unfortunate things that are wrongly purported within the scientific world is that one’s worldview or philosophical views do not and should not have any bearing on one’s science. But this is to confuse the difference between evidence and interpretation. Naturally the questions arises, “How can we all see the same evidence and yet come to completely different opinions as to its meaning?” Thus, Rau’s thesis enters in:
"Although everyone has access to the same evidence, the presuppositions implicit in a person’s philosophy determine the perspective from which he or she views the data, leading to different logical conclusions about which explanation best fits the evidence." (p. 20)
Evidence is not self-interpreting. If it were, we would simply be observers who all share the same understanding of the evidence. This is not the case and I appreciate that Rau has brought this out in the open. This recognition of underlying philosophical/worldview beliefs which influence our interpretation of the scientific evidence lies at the heart of Rau’s overview and analysis of each of the six models he presents.
The Spectrum of Models
Rau has put together six different models about the origins of the universe: one naturalistic and five supernaturalistic. These six models can be seen as follows:
1. Naturalistic Evolution – This is based on philosophical naturalism which states that everything can be explained naturally without appeal to anything supernatural, that is, outside what is natural.
2. Nonteleological Evolution – This view believes that while a supernatural being got creation started it has no subsequent interaction with it. This is essentially deism. Nonteleology (no teleology) it holds that there is no plan for the universe. After the initial creation act natural forces take over until the end.
3.Planned Evolution – This view believes that God began creation and built into it a plan and the mechanism(s) with which to accomplish that plan. Thus, God does not have to intervene within creation. There are natural explanations for everything since that is how God planned it.
4. Directed Evolution – This view believes God not only created everything with a purpose but continues to interact with his creation throughout time in order to bring about his plans. Here, science and religion are interacting domains of knowledge.
5.Old-Earth Creationism – While agreeing with DE that science and religion are interacting domains of knowledge, they differ in that they believe the Genesis account of creation has scientific value. God has revealed himself through the Bible and creation and both are used to interpret the other. As its name indicates, it believes the earth, and thus creation, is very old and science can help us determine how old.
6. Young-Earth Creationism – This view differs from OEC in that they believe the creation account in Genesis 1 gives detailed explanation of the material creation of everything. They interpret the days of Genesis as literal 24 days as we experience them presently. With a “literal” reading of the biblical creation account coupled with the genealogies they believe the earth is 6-10k years old. In regards to science and religion they are overlapping domains of knowledge in which the Bible comes out on the top over science if science seems to contradict what is believed to be taught in the Bible concerning creation.
Rau furnishes the reader with twelve pages of charts that condense the four chapters presenting each views understanding of the origins of the universe, life, species and humans. Each of these four chapters follows the same pattern: (1) presents the evidence for said origins (i.e. life), (2) then presents how each of the six views interprets the evidence and (3) concludes with answering the question, “What difference does it make as to what model we view the evidence from?” Again, Rau points out how the underlying philosophical/worldview beliefs of each view effect how one interprets the evidence and in turn how that yields different results for the concluding difference each view makes.
What some readers will find both interesting and troubling is that Rau believes there are both positive and negative contributions from all six models he presents. I can agree with this but YEC’ers and naturalists will no doubt have a hard time seeing any positive contributions from the other side. Further, Rau believes that while each model is trying to deal with as much data as possible, none of them has all the pieces to the puzzle on their board to put together.
Conclusion
A book like this is hard to review. It is not a multiple views book with proponents of each view trying to convince the rest of us with their view. It is a book written by a single author who is trying to objectively as possible present each view. Further, Rau is trying to objectively critique each view and give equal critiques of each model without trying to show us his hand by leaning to one view over the others. Rau has tried to present each view fairly and in such a way that anyone who holds to any given view would agree with and recognize it as their view.
I think in the end Rau has reached the goal of his book in terms of presenting the views. What might be hard for some readers is the ability to track with some of the scientific ideas he discusses. A background in science will definitely help to get more from the book. A good grasp of biology would be a must as well as a working knowledge of chemistry and some basic astronomy. What I think Rau has done the best is show how ones philosophical commitments influence how a person interprets the scientific evidence. In each of the four main chapters Rau does a masterful job of weaving these together for the reader. That is the biggest take away from the book and makes it well worth reading.
NOTE: I received this book for free from IVP in exchange for an honest review. I was under no obligation to provide a favorable review and the words and thoughts expressed are my own.
While there are many books on the subject of origins it is hard for the average reader to take the time to read them all, let alone understand what they are reading. What would be most beneficial is to have a book that lays each view side by side objectively as possible. With this goal in mind Gerald Rau has written Mapping the Origins Debate: Six Models of the Beginning of Everything by IVP. Rau has degrees in science and theology, was a teacher at Wheaton College and is the founder and chief editor at Professional English International, Inc. in Taiwan where he currently works. Rau has produced a book that is aimed at high school and college age students but can be beneficial for adults as well.
Worldviews Influence Science?
One of the unfortunate things that are wrongly purported within the scientific world is that one’s worldview or philosophical views do not and should not have any bearing on one’s science. But this is to confuse the difference between evidence and interpretation. Naturally the questions arises, “How can we all see the same evidence and yet come to completely different opinions as to its meaning?” Thus, Rau’s thesis enters in:
"Although everyone has access to the same evidence, the presuppositions implicit in a person’s philosophy determine the perspective from which he or she views the data, leading to different logical conclusions about which explanation best fits the evidence." (p. 20)
Evidence is not self-interpreting. If it were, we would simply be observers who all share the same understanding of the evidence. This is not the case and I appreciate that Rau has brought this out in the open. This recognition of underlying philosophical/worldview beliefs which influence our interpretation of the scientific evidence lies at the heart of Rau’s overview and analysis of each of the six models he presents.
The Spectrum of Models
Rau has put together six different models about the origins of the universe: one naturalistic and five supernaturalistic. These six models can be seen as follows:
1. Naturalistic Evolution – This is based on philosophical naturalism which states that everything can be explained naturally without appeal to anything supernatural, that is, outside what is natural.
2. Nonteleological Evolution – This view believes that while a supernatural being got creation started it has no subsequent interaction with it. This is essentially deism. Nonteleology (no teleology) it holds that there is no plan for the universe. After the initial creation act natural forces take over until the end.
3.Planned Evolution – This view believes that God began creation and built into it a plan and the mechanism(s) with which to accomplish that plan. Thus, God does not have to intervene within creation. There are natural explanations for everything since that is how God planned it.
4. Directed Evolution – This view believes God not only created everything with a purpose but continues to interact with his creation throughout time in order to bring about his plans. Here, science and religion are interacting domains of knowledge.
5.Old-Earth Creationism – While agreeing with DE that science and religion are interacting domains of knowledge, they differ in that they believe the Genesis account of creation has scientific value. God has revealed himself through the Bible and creation and both are used to interpret the other. As its name indicates, it believes the earth, and thus creation, is very old and science can help us determine how old.
6. Young-Earth Creationism – This view differs from OEC in that they believe the creation account in Genesis 1 gives detailed explanation of the material creation of everything. They interpret the days of Genesis as literal 24 days as we experience them presently. With a “literal” reading of the biblical creation account coupled with the genealogies they believe the earth is 6-10k years old. In regards to science and religion they are overlapping domains of knowledge in which the Bible comes out on the top over science if science seems to contradict what is believed to be taught in the Bible concerning creation.
Rau furnishes the reader with twelve pages of charts that condense the four chapters presenting each views understanding of the origins of the universe, life, species and humans. Each of these four chapters follows the same pattern: (1) presents the evidence for said origins (i.e. life), (2) then presents how each of the six views interprets the evidence and (3) concludes with answering the question, “What difference does it make as to what model we view the evidence from?” Again, Rau points out how the underlying philosophical/worldview beliefs of each view effect how one interprets the evidence and in turn how that yields different results for the concluding difference each view makes.
What some readers will find both interesting and troubling is that Rau believes there are both positive and negative contributions from all six models he presents. I can agree with this but YEC’ers and naturalists will no doubt have a hard time seeing any positive contributions from the other side. Further, Rau believes that while each model is trying to deal with as much data as possible, none of them has all the pieces to the puzzle on their board to put together.
Conclusion
A book like this is hard to review. It is not a multiple views book with proponents of each view trying to convince the rest of us with their view. It is a book written by a single author who is trying to objectively as possible present each view. Further, Rau is trying to objectively critique each view and give equal critiques of each model without trying to show us his hand by leaning to one view over the others. Rau has tried to present each view fairly and in such a way that anyone who holds to any given view would agree with and recognize it as their view.
I think in the end Rau has reached the goal of his book in terms of presenting the views. What might be hard for some readers is the ability to track with some of the scientific ideas he discusses. A background in science will definitely help to get more from the book. A good grasp of biology would be a must as well as a working knowledge of chemistry and some basic astronomy. What I think Rau has done the best is show how ones philosophical commitments influence how a person interprets the scientific evidence. In each of the four main chapters Rau does a masterful job of weaving these together for the reader. That is the biggest take away from the book and makes it well worth reading.
NOTE: I received this book for free from IVP in exchange for an honest review. I was under no obligation to provide a favorable review and the words and thoughts expressed are my own.
Read
August 23, 2022Confession: I hate this topic. Or at least I hate this topic in debate among Christians and between Christians and atheists/agnostics. It seems painfully obvious that the average person has no idea what they are talking about, because the disciplines at play in this subject are specified and technical. Like, do most of us really understand red shift? Probably not. Over time I went from a Ken Hamm fan (high school) to being an agnostic on this issue. I believe that God created the world, but I make no claims to understand the mechanics of his creation acts. That is, if he used an evolutionary process, great! If not, great!
Now to the book, which does a good job of doing exactly what it claims to do: map. Rau doesn't really make a claim for any given position (though it's clear he does not believe in Naturalistic Evolution or Nonteleological Evolution and probably not Young Earth Creation), so if you're expecting solid evidence for a certain position, don't read this book. But he does survey the relevant evidence (in astronomy, genetics, paleontology, etc) and offers a summary of how each camp might respond to or interpret the evidence.
The real strength of the book is that it acts as a kind of undercover philosophy of science text. Rau does a very good job of sneaking in how philosophical issues determine our approach to data and how the various camps are mostly divided by a priori philosophical or theological commitments.
No real cons for this one. It's an intro text, so you may want to dig into some of the specialized topics after reading Rau. Alvin Plantinga is helpful on the philosophy in his book "Where the Conflict Really Lies."
Now to the book, which does a good job of doing exactly what it claims to do: map. Rau doesn't really make a claim for any given position (though it's clear he does not believe in Naturalistic Evolution or Nonteleological Evolution and probably not Young Earth Creation), so if you're expecting solid evidence for a certain position, don't read this book. But he does survey the relevant evidence (in astronomy, genetics, paleontology, etc) and offers a summary of how each camp might respond to or interpret the evidence.
The real strength of the book is that it acts as a kind of undercover philosophy of science text. Rau does a very good job of sneaking in how philosophical issues determine our approach to data and how the various camps are mostly divided by a priori philosophical or theological commitments.
No real cons for this one. It's an intro text, so you may want to dig into some of the specialized topics after reading Rau. Alvin Plantinga is helpful on the philosophy in his book "Where the Conflict Really Lies."
September 15, 2021
Mapping the Origins Debate is a high-level look at six different models (essentially worldviews) that Rau proposes represent the major positions people hold regarding the origins of life, humanity, and the universe. His detailed examples and rational, calm tone made this pretty easy to read, although some parts were a little technical (I am not a scientist at all). I appreciated how hard he tried to present the pros and cons of each model in as objective a manner as he could, while repeating over and over that every scientific experiment, theory, and piece of "evidence" comes from someone with a particular philosophy and the interpretation (the way it is presented to the public) is therefore inherently biased. My main takeaway from reading this is a deeper understanding of how complex the question of origins really is, how difficult (really, impossible) it is to understand enough of every area of study involved to come to an adequate conclusion, and how crucial it is to approach this discussion with an open mind and a spirit of trying to understand and appreciate the "other side." I agree with Rau's main conclusion: each individual's answer to the question of origins really comes down to their presuppositions about God, which science alone cannot dictate.
May 24, 2017
A bit dull, but overall a really good overview of the origins debate. After reading this book, simplistic answers to the issue of the Bible and origins will be easily spotted.
August 23, 2024
Quick, easy read. Although I enjoyed the science, I wish Rau spent a little more time laying out the understanding of each model regarding the evidence he presented. Overall, great book!
January 25, 2014
In an era of extreme, vitriolic rhetoric, when someone offers calm, straightforward fairness, it is like a cool, refreshing breeze on a hot, muggy day. That is what Gerald Rau provides in "Mapping the Origins Debate" on the very contentious issue of evolution and creation. He offers a model not only of clarity in thought but of civility in presentation.
He carefully maps out four different "origin" questions: the beginning of the universe, of life, of species and of humans. He then works very hard to present objectively six different models for answering these questions--ranging from Naturalistic Evolution (which believes in nothing supernatural) to Young-Earth Creationism (which believes in six 24-hour days of creation), with four other Christian options in between. Remarkably, Rau is able to present all six without deriding or degrading any.
He emphasizes that all six have the same range of evidence to draw on. And they all agree on the evidence. They do, however, clearly disagree as to which evidence is most compelling, which is insignificant, and how it should all be interpreted. One example will be instructive.
Consider the genetic similarity or dissimilarity of humans and chimpanzees. Many textbooks say their DNA are 98.5 percent similar. But there are different ways of counting what is identical and what is not. So scientists' estimates range now from 95 percent to 99.4 percent similar. But if you look at not just what is in a gene but how a gene functions or expresses itself, the dissimilarity rises. In one chromosome, only 17 percent of functional genes produce identical proteins in the two species. Whether one chooses to emphasize the 98.5 percent or the 17 percent makes all the difference.
Rau goes on to note that if one nucleotide changes, "causing a change in one amino acid, we could say that 1/300 of the DNA changed (only 0.3%), or 1/100 of the amino acids changed (1%), or that 1/1 (100%) of the proteins changed. Take your pick--all are true. And although the actual numbers may change or be disputed, the principle still holds: which figures a person quotes will reflect what they want their readers to conclude." (p. 140)
All sides do this. Rarely do we hear of anyone carefully acknowledging contrary data and taking the time to deal with it respectfully. Rau's candor about all this is entirely refreshing.
There is much more, but I also appreciate his wonderful discussion on the nature of science and how what definition we start with affects the conclusions we end up with. And because there is no single, objective definition of science, the philosophical starting point of each view is crucial.
And where does Rau end up? What conclusion does he draw? Other than saying that he himself is a Christian, he doesn't tell us. Does he favor one option more than another? I can't tell. If you can, let me know.
He carefully maps out four different "origin" questions: the beginning of the universe, of life, of species and of humans. He then works very hard to present objectively six different models for answering these questions--ranging from Naturalistic Evolution (which believes in nothing supernatural) to Young-Earth Creationism (which believes in six 24-hour days of creation), with four other Christian options in between. Remarkably, Rau is able to present all six without deriding or degrading any.
He emphasizes that all six have the same range of evidence to draw on. And they all agree on the evidence. They do, however, clearly disagree as to which evidence is most compelling, which is insignificant, and how it should all be interpreted. One example will be instructive.
Consider the genetic similarity or dissimilarity of humans and chimpanzees. Many textbooks say their DNA are 98.5 percent similar. But there are different ways of counting what is identical and what is not. So scientists' estimates range now from 95 percent to 99.4 percent similar. But if you look at not just what is in a gene but how a gene functions or expresses itself, the dissimilarity rises. In one chromosome, only 17 percent of functional genes produce identical proteins in the two species. Whether one chooses to emphasize the 98.5 percent or the 17 percent makes all the difference.
Rau goes on to note that if one nucleotide changes, "causing a change in one amino acid, we could say that 1/300 of the DNA changed (only 0.3%), or 1/100 of the amino acids changed (1%), or that 1/1 (100%) of the proteins changed. Take your pick--all are true. And although the actual numbers may change or be disputed, the principle still holds: which figures a person quotes will reflect what they want their readers to conclude." (p. 140)
All sides do this. Rarely do we hear of anyone carefully acknowledging contrary data and taking the time to deal with it respectfully. Rau's candor about all this is entirely refreshing.
There is much more, but I also appreciate his wonderful discussion on the nature of science and how what definition we start with affects the conclusions we end up with. And because there is no single, objective definition of science, the philosophical starting point of each view is crucial.
And where does Rau end up? What conclusion does he draw? Other than saying that he himself is a Christian, he doesn't tell us. Does he favor one option more than another? I can't tell. If you can, let me know.
June 17, 2013
The book is a very structured discussion of the origins debate. Gerald Rau lays the necessary foundation (science, presuppositions & logic), then presents six models of origins (Naturalistic Evolution,) and four origins (of the universe, life, species, and humans). For each origin, he discusses the evidence and how each model interprets the evidence. He then finishes with a summary and conclusions.
His models are six discrete units along a gradient from no supernatural involvement (Naturalistic Evolution) to increasing degrees of supernatural involvement (Nonteleological Evolution, Planned Evolution, Directed Evolution, Old-Earth Creationism) to “the view that God not only exists but has supernaturally revealed both his method and timing of creation in the first chapters of the Bible (Young-Earth Creationism).
Gerald Rau makes the case that although Intelligent Design Movement arguments are not scientific, meaning empirically based, does not mean that the arguments themselves are invalid.
The author suggests that the definition of science itself is at the heart of the debate. He raises and briefly answers four questions about science: (1) Is empirical knowledge inherently superior to other knowledge? (2) Is there a universal definition of science? (3) Would it be theoretically possible for science to detect supernatural intervention? and (4) To what degree can either our definition of science or our definition of science be objective? He then briefly discusses each question.
Rau’s book includes an appendix containing a wonderfully complete and detailed 12-page table of the six models relative to the four origins, including a list of the prominent proponents of each model. The book also includes a 14-page Glossary, a 9-page Bibliography, 5 pages of indices, and numerous interesting and informative footnotes (and no Endnotes: this publisher gets it right).
Gerald Rau introduces a number of interesting new insights, even for someone who has done a fair amount of reading on this topic. He helps the reader to understand the debate, rather than arguing for any particular position. He is about as unbiased as possible. He does a good job of concisely presenting the issues, the models, and the arguments for and against each model. I can recommend this book for anyone interested in this topic.
His models are six discrete units along a gradient from no supernatural involvement (Naturalistic Evolution) to increasing degrees of supernatural involvement (Nonteleological Evolution, Planned Evolution, Directed Evolution, Old-Earth Creationism) to “the view that God not only exists but has supernaturally revealed both his method and timing of creation in the first chapters of the Bible (Young-Earth Creationism).
Gerald Rau makes the case that although Intelligent Design Movement arguments are not scientific, meaning empirically based, does not mean that the arguments themselves are invalid.
The author suggests that the definition of science itself is at the heart of the debate. He raises and briefly answers four questions about science: (1) Is empirical knowledge inherently superior to other knowledge? (2) Is there a universal definition of science? (3) Would it be theoretically possible for science to detect supernatural intervention? and (4) To what degree can either our definition of science or our definition of science be objective? He then briefly discusses each question.
Rau’s book includes an appendix containing a wonderfully complete and detailed 12-page table of the six models relative to the four origins, including a list of the prominent proponents of each model. The book also includes a 14-page Glossary, a 9-page Bibliography, 5 pages of indices, and numerous interesting and informative footnotes (and no Endnotes: this publisher gets it right).
Gerald Rau introduces a number of interesting new insights, even for someone who has done a fair amount of reading on this topic. He helps the reader to understand the debate, rather than arguing for any particular position. He is about as unbiased as possible. He does a good job of concisely presenting the issues, the models, and the arguments for and against each model. I can recommend this book for anyone interested in this topic.
January 17, 2017
This book will make the non-scientific layperson wish he or she had paid more attention in biology class, and in particular to the lessons on genetics. It is a bit technical in may places. It’s also full of footnotes that are worth reading on their own as Rau documents his arguments carefully and refers the reader to other works for more detailed treatments of some subjects.
I had hoped for more help on how to frame the philosophical and theological questions raised by the origins debate, such as what happens to Biblical authority when Genesis 1 and 2 and the flood story are treated as something other than historical accounts.
The final chapter is worth the price of admission, although it is puzzling that Rau introduces the metaphor of war to describe the conflicts among the adherents six models only in the final chapter. Why there? Why introduce it at all in a book that is intended to encourage readers to consider and evaluate all six models with equal openness and honesty.
This book needs to be read slowly, maybe with some biology and genetics references handy, and reading the footnotes is not a waste.
I had hoped for more help on how to frame the philosophical and theological questions raised by the origins debate, such as what happens to Biblical authority when Genesis 1 and 2 and the flood story are treated as something other than historical accounts.
The final chapter is worth the price of admission, although it is puzzling that Rau introduces the metaphor of war to describe the conflicts among the adherents six models only in the final chapter. Why there? Why introduce it at all in a book that is intended to encourage readers to consider and evaluate all six models with equal openness and honesty.
This book needs to be read slowly, maybe with some biology and genetics references handy, and reading the footnotes is not a waste.
January 19, 2015
The epitome of an attempt to cover a wide array of topics that are in themselves extremely complex, which leads the text to suffer from a lack of adequate treatment to each topic. As a reader, you emerge from the text with little more than possible ideas or topics to research. Given the painful lack of citations leading to unsupported claims, and what often appears to be a subtle lack of objectivity in a scientific evidence oriented text, one can't help but wonder if the little information provided is not tainted with a selective information bias and/or lack of understanding on his behalf.
While I find the book wanting, I would commend the author on his demarcation of 6 generalized different types of world views. Appendix 1 is and excellent reference for people looking for a basic comparative look on the 6 views.
While I find the book wanting, I would commend the author on his demarcation of 6 generalized different types of world views. Appendix 1 is and excellent reference for people looking for a basic comparative look on the 6 views.
May 24, 2014
Possibly the most helpful book I've read on the origins debate, because Rau doesn't advocate a particular position and is about as close to objective as you can get in a book of this sort. A little technical in places but not overly so. As a non-scientist I followed the arguments without any trouble. I don't think I've changed my position as a result but do have a new appreciation of some of the other interpretations. Recommended for all Christians, maybe those entrenched against the 'enemy' in particular!
May 16, 2013
My full review is posted here: http://sciencereasonfaith.com/review-...
May 19, 2020
Helpful for a bird's eye view over what is being debated and what positions are held regarding origins.
July 10, 2016
Handy bibliography and Rau works hard to be a removed describer of the six major positions in the origins debate. I would go back to this text again.
Displaying 1 - 20 of 20 reviews