Reasons to Believe has been blessed to have a network of volunteers that extends our work of evangelizing among skeptics and of equipping fellow believers. This includes a group of writers who volunteer their time and talent to compose articles for RTB science blog, Today’s New Reason to Believe (TNRTB). Guest writers Dr. Hugh Henry and Daniel Dyke took time to talk with Reasons about how they work as a team to bring science and theology together in their articles on Genesis.
What drew you to RTB and how did you get involved with the ministry?
HH & DD: RTB’s respect for both Scripture and modern science attracted us. According to the Barna Institute, bright young Christians often leave the faith because many evangelical churches treat the young-earth view as a litmus test of faith. RTB helps combat this problem.
What motivated you to start writing for Today’s New Reason to Believe?
HH & DD: We have two primary objectives: to show consistency between the Bible and science in general and in particular to show that young-earth creation is not the only way to interpret Genesis 1.
What are your favorite topics and how do you choose what to
HH & DD: We write with a cross-disciplinary mix of science, Hebrew linguistics, and theology. This is not consistent with the objectives of most publications—and it’s not even typical of TNRTB articles. Nevertheless, it is consistent with the RTB mission, and we are happy we can work together with RTB in this way.
How do you work together to produce articles?
HH & DD: Hugh is a scientist interested in the Bible and theology, and Dan is an Old Testament scholar interested in science. We generally talk and think similarly—which makes the relationship work. As we prepare articles, Hugh provides the scientific rigor, and Dan, the biblical/linguistic rigor. We wordsmith ad nauseam to make sure we write with scientific and theological accuracy.
What do you hope to accomplish through your writing?
HH & DD: By exploring and verifying consistency between Scripture and science, we hope to help people appreciate the Bible as God’s truth. We also hope to provide young Christians with a faithful alternative to young-earth creationism. We expect to expand our work to include analysis of other scriptural difficulties, including Noah’s flood.