The Queen of the Sciences: Reclaiming the Rightful Place of Theology and Creation

Abstract

Historically, theology was viewed as the queen of the sciences. But in recent days this has fallen out of favor, especially due to the unpopularity of the doctrine of creation. Instead, science is viewed as its own autonomous foundation. This article surveys through the issues surrounding creation and argues that a realism of biblical authority and revelation establishes theology and creation as a necessary framework for science. It also will contend that the interpretation of Genesis 1–3 is clear and clearly historical as well as that the doctrine of creation is inextricably linked with the totality of Christian theology. Even more, it will survey God’s plan of redemption and illustrate that creation is the basis and driver of God’s redemptive work. Creation holds the answers to the toughest questions people have about this world and evil. With that, by virtue of divine authority, theology is the queen of the sciences, and within this, the doctrine of creation helps to restore the true value and beauty of science. Therefore, it should be the starting point of the sciences. It is fitting to begin this inaugural issue with a discussion on creation. As Scripture states, creation is “in the beginning” (Gen 1:1). Accordingly, creation begins the entire biblical storyline. It sets the plot and trajectory of God’s entire plan. It undergirds the progression of scriptural revelation and theology. And because it is so foundational, it also formulates one’s worldview. Consequently, the opening chapters of Genesis set one’s perception of the sciences. That is not only because creation constructs the very structure of one’s worldview but also because it has direct bearing upon science itself. The opening chapters of Genesis account for the very origin of the material and phenomena that the sciences observe. For these reasons, theology classically has been known as the “queen of the sciences.” It is the overarching standard of truth and the very framework in which all the sciences are based upon, operate, and 4 the journal of the math3ma institute abide. However, questions and challenges have arisen concerning this passage of Scripture. The theory of evolution has provided an account of origins apart from any notion of Creator or creation. Evolutionists have pointed to numerous observations in support for their assertions [Mey17]. Due to the persuasiveness of these arguments, Christians have considered and even adopted aspects of evolution to varying degrees. On one end of the spectrum, there are some who entirely reject evolutionary accounts of origins and argue for young earth creationism. There are also others on the opposite end who argue for theistic evolution, which contends that God used evolutionary processes to formulate this world [Mey17, pp. 40–43]. And there are people in between these two extremes. Because of such significant controversy, some wonder if creation matters. It seems to be a contentious and unclear issue. Good people disagree. So some may believe that perhaps the Bible does not provide enough information to reach a definitive conclusion, and one should not have a dogmatic view on this. Moreover, people often perceive creation as something which took place so long ago that it has little pertinence upon the present time and upon more weighty doctrines in the Christian faith. For these reasons and more, the temptation is to isolate these passages in Genesis to something that is ambiguous and should not factor heavily in how we understand the world and science. To some, Genesis 1–2 can simply be relegated to a text that can have multiple interpretations. At that point, creation has become a pawn. The goal of this article is to reclaim theology as the queen of the sciences and creation as a key starting point. This article will survey through the doctrine in its scriptural presuppositions, substance, theological stakes, and significance. In doing so, a growing case emerges that the doctrine of creation is not negotiable, secondary, isolated, irrelevant, or a liability. Rather, it carries divine authority and clarity, acts as a cohesive force in Christian theology, and even provides some of the most compelling answers to the most profound questions of life. Creation is not a doctrine to be isolated or set aside; it should not be an afterthought in the pursuit of science. Rather, the truth of creation, by virtue of its character, should be put on center stage. For it not only wields the definitive authority to determine our understanding of the sciences, but also the beauty to show the nobility of the sciences. Creation then is truly part of the queen of the sciences. Scriptural Presuppositions of Creation The entire discussion of creation and the centrality of theology must begin with bibliology. After all, the question of the queen of the sciences all depends upon how one perceives reason versus revelation. In recent history, the advent of modernism has entrenched a skewed view of the nature of Scripture and human understanding in popular thinking. This is all in the name of objectivity [Mor03]. Ironically, what is needed is to recover true objectivity about the queen of the sciences 5 the nature of revelation and the limits of human knowledge. Only then can one understand why theology is the queen of the sciences. Such a framework is philosophically necessary as revelation can alone provide the basis for and the authentication of what science depends upon and assumes. In that way, bibliology is the cornerstone to the response of how creation and theology relate with the sciences. A helpful way to discuss this is to define and think through three categories: special revelation, general revelation, and knowledge. Within each category, we can survey though the source of each type of information, what it covers, how it covers it, and what it accomplishes. Doing so will allow one to put revelation and reason in their proper places.