Creation Science Resources
Debate and differing views on the age of the earth and the cosmos are most certainly not a reason for the breaking of fellowship among believers. The mere belief in a 6 day creation event will not save you, nor will having a different [erroneous] belief regarding this issue prohibit one who has believed the Gospel and trusted Christ as Savior from being saved. There is of course only one requirement for salvation, which is to believe the Gospel; to trust Christ as Savior, plus nothing. All of us who have done this have received the irrevocable gift of everlasting life, thus we are forever brothers and sisters in Christ; part of the body of Christ; us in Him and Him in us. We should therefore always be acting toward one another accordingly, whether in agreement or in disagreement. We want to be united in proclaiming the good news of the Gospel. We don’t want to let debates on non-Gospel doctrines, such as this one, break our fellowship and become a stumbling block. This sort of thing gets us spending our energy on fighting amongst ourselves as opposed to fighting the real enemy, and from spreading the Gospel and getting people saved.
That being said, there is a related and quite pervasive stumbling block that is leading many people astray and preventing them from trusting Christ as Savior and receiving the free gift of everlasting life. That stumbling block would be the profoundly un-scientific lie of the worst order, which so many people have been brainwashed into believing; the lie that asserts that atheism and naturalism are unshakable, indisputable, hard and fast pillars of science that have been extensively tested and proven, and therefore rendered as substantiated absolute scientific truths.
I think it would help to address what science really is and what it is not. I hope the following may help to clear up some misconceptions; many of which I had in the past, without even really being aware of it; even while being a Christian and receiving scientific training. We’ll start by pointing out what science is NOT.
Science IS NOT:
Science is not a consensus or majority vote that determines the officially accepted axioms of any given “establishment,” including the scientific “establishment” as a whole, nor of society as a whole. Read your history if you don’t believe or understand this.
Science is not necessarily the opinion of the person with the greatest number of college degrees or the most advanced degrees.
Science is not the opinion of who can come up with the most “clever” or “witty” insults for the opposing point of view or for those who may hold it.
Science is not about who can pose the most emotionally charged objection for the opposing point of view or those who may hold it.
Science is not synonymous with atheism and agnosticism or other supposedly more “enlightened” or “intellectual” positions, no matter how “intellectual” or “enlightened” the speaker or writer may come off as being.
Science is not determined by the most “clever” manipulations and convolutions of large terms and concepts that most laypeople do not readily understand.
Science is not determined by deceptive smoke and mirror techniques involving logical fallacies (invalid debate tactics) such as straw man arguments and false dichotomies.
Science is not the mantra that is most well known and most often repeated, no matter how "profound," sincere and “moral” it may sound.
Science is the search for truth; whatever that truth may be, whether or not it fits the preferred paradigm of any given ideology or establishment. How could any other definition of science that does not hinge on this primary principle have any validity whatsoever? What is science without validity?! The list directly above this consists of manipulation tactics that are often used [excessively and extensively in the case of this topic] to convince people of ideas that the truth does not support (lies); very unscientific at the very root, to say the least.
Apologetics, in the sense of what is being discussed here, refers to addressing and proving the existence of God and the reliability of the Genesis account. Apologetics is by no means the primary mission of this website. However in regards to evangelism and discipleship, it is often very helpful and/or necessary to address to some of the issues that apologetics deals with. A great deal of excellent work, much of it having personally benefited me greatly, has already been done [and continues to be done] in this respect. It is readily and easily accessible. I will therefore continue to direct the resources that I devote to this site toward topics more directly related to the Gospel; the primary mission of this site. I will however share a list of resources on this page that I have found to be informative and helpful. These articles, videos, etc. are done in a way that I believe is scientific; they are looking for the truth (see above). I intend to also periodically update and add to this list, as it is certainly by no means, nor will it likely ever be exhaustive. Some of the entries will be more technical than others, thus some better suited to the lay person than others. Also, if you come across something that is not listed here that you think should be, please email me a link to it at email@example.com. Please include a summary of it and tell me how and why you believe it to be potentially beneficial, in terms of what is being discussed in this article.
In closing, I will say this affectionately to those believers of the Gospel who choose to allegorize, de-emphasize, or minimize the reliability of, or discard the Genesis account of Creation: Please review what I wrote directly above; also have a sincere and unhurried look at the resources that I have shared here. More importantly, do a study of Genesis creation passages that also involves looking at other related Scriptures, such as those where Jesus speaks authoritatively of them. There is no need to compromise our infinite and all-knowing God’s Word with the word of very finite and not-so-all-knowing mankind. I would respectfully submit that when you are dismissing and/or not believing God’s creation account, you in essence are invalidating a very important component of the foundation for the basis of the Christian faith for yourself and also for others that you may find yourself witnessing to. Again, I would humbly but strongly encourage you to do some study and prayerfully consider reevaluating your stance on this issue. I would submit that the history of wrongful dismissal of the accuracy of the Genesis account of creation is ultimately the root cause of most, if not all atheism. Atheism is the root cause of countless problems, at all levels, all over our world today. Remember ultimately what truth is (John 14:6). You will see that true science (the genuine search for truth) and the Bible (Truth) line up very nicely.
RNA world is the currently the most widely accepted model of abiogenesis for those advocating for it. This video discusses some of the many problems with RNA world being a plausable model for abiogenesis.
This is where one man without a science Ph.D., defending the creation science position takes on 3 science professors, each with science Ph.D.’s who defend the evolutionary position.
This video discusses probability of a single functional protein being able to assemble by pure blind chance.
In this video, a man with a Ph.D. in synthetic organic chemistry discusses the obstacles that must be overcome for abiogenesis (life coming randomly from nonlife) to occur.
The above link is to the first of a series of 13 videos made by the same synthetic organic chemist as a rebuttal to an atheist scientist who made a video that supposedly refuted the points in the video of his that I posted above, which explains the problems associated with abiogenesis. He addresses the atheist’s arguments one by one in this video series.
“Couldn’t God Have Used Evolution?”
This is an excerpt from an excellent book on this topic that is very reader-friendly, yet very informative for the lay person. This article points out many problems with the theistic evolution view, including those pointed out by one of evolution’s most well-known advocates. I would suggest reading the rest of the book; I believe it is free to read on the site that this link takes you to, perhaps even downloadable.
“Modern Science Refutes Evolutionary Theory”
This is actually a short series of excerpts of more technical articles that demonstrate the progressive deterioration of the human genome; it describes more of a “devolution” then evolution. Links to the full articles are provided as well. If our genome has been deteriorating at the current rate, or even close there-too, there is certainly no way to reconcile our current existence with the idea of millions of years.
Creation Ministries international has done a lot of great work. Here is a video quite suited for the thinking lay person…and anyone else for that matter, that sheds some light on the “extensive evidence” that “supports” the big-bang hypothesis.
Dr. David Berlinski earned a Ph.D. in philosophy, then did post-doctoral work in mathematics and molecular biology. In this video he briefly shares some of his reasoning for his rejection of the Darwinist and Neo-Darwinist paradigms in lay-person friendly terms.
“What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy” Vol 1: Our Created Solar System
This documentary is presented by Spike Psarris. Mr. Psarris is a former engineer for the US Military Space Program. He entered as an atheist and an evolutionist, he left as a Christian and creationist. In the documentary he presents his arguments on why he is convinced that our solar system was deliberately created as opposed to being a product of random chance.
“What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy” Vol 2: Our Created Stars and Galaxies
This documentary is also presented by Spike Psarris. Mr. Psarris is a former engineer for the US Military Space Program. He entered as an atheist and an evolutionist, he left as a Christian and creationist. In the documentary he presents his arguments on why he is convinced that our stars and galaxies were deliberately created as opposed to being a product of random chance.
This documentary is also presented by Spike Psarris. Mr. Psarris is a former engineer for the US Military Space Program. He entered as an atheist and an evolutionist, he left as a Christian and creationist. In the documentary he presents his arguments on why he is convinced that the Biblical account of the creation of the universe is superior to the secular or atheistic account.
A common point of contention regarding the creation of and the age of the earth revolves around the Genesis flood, also referred to as Noah’s flood. This documentary takes a closer look at this issue.