Question the science, not the Bible
“What strikes one immediately upon reading such a statement is the low estimate of the Bible which it entails. Whenever ‘science’ and the Bible are in conflict, it is always the Bible that, in one manner or another, must give way. We are not told that ‘science’ should correct its answers in light of Scripture. Always it is the other way around. Yet this is really surprising, for the answers which scientists have provided have frequently changed with the passing of time. The ‘authoritative’ answers of pre-Copernican scientists are no longer acceptable; nor, for that matter, are many of the views of twenty-five years ago.” 1
- Take Genesis 1 as written, rather than crave secular respectability—OT Professor Todd Beall
- Christians should believe six-day creation regardless of “academic respectability”—Doug Wilson
- “The treason of the intellectuals”—R.C.Sproul
- Fidelity to God—J.P. Moreland
- Creation Compromises: Framework Hypothesis, Gap Theory, Progressive Creation, Theistic Evolution
- ISCAST, CASE and New College: It’s time to return to the Word of God!
- Young, E.J., Days of Genesis, Westminster Theological Journal 25(1):1–34, 1963; quote on p. 11. Return to text.
We support belief in an intelligent designer—the God of the Bible. This site was also ‘intelligently designed’. But rather than six days, it’s taken thousands of days. Help us design more information for this site. Support this site