For creationists only: how much science do you deny, and why?

Question

Clearly, all creationists deny that the biological theory of evolution is valid. (That's what the definition of creationist is-as I use it anyway). I am only wondering how much of them go further to deny the physical sciences as well. Some accept the geological age of the earth (in the billions of year) and the cosmological age of the universe (also in the billions of years), such as the Jehova's Witnesses. Others reject these time scales, despite the fact that they have nothing to do with biological evolution, because of a literal interpretation of biblical chronology.

If you are a creationist, do you only deny evolution, or anything in science that contradicts your sense of scriptural chronology? Do you believe that every event in the Bible (like the flood) literally happened?

Also, is there any reason why you feel evolution contradicts your faith, besides a literal interpretation of the Genesis narrative?

Apparently, according to a couple of the answers that I got so far, either I wasn't clear on the question, or people are not reading the subtitle(in which case I'm wasting my time writing this) If you are a creationist, do you agree or disagree with the chronology of the earth and universe?

Answer 1

I do not think that we have a clear picture of what happened here on Earth from either popular view. Doubtless there were dinosaurs and such things before the time of man. And clearly those that tend to support the Theory of Evolution have dissallowed the Bible as a source for any sort of truth. I think that both those sides may have it wrong.

But you asked for a Creationist answer, and I am here to give you mine.

I happen to believe in the Gap Theory of Genesis 1:1 - 1:2. With that, the Earth can be as old as anyone says through science. I do not think that it answers all questions-- the assumption that all things aged relative to how they age today being a presumption-- so how old is it really? That is the question that I have on this subject, in the scheme of things I find that it is a trivial subject at best on the scale of importance.

"If you are a creationist, do you only deny evolution, or anything in science that contradicts your sense of scriptural chronology?"
I am not exactly denying evolution, I just don't believe in it. lol

I have seen ceratin things in the Plant and Animal Kingdoms that don't add up to Evolution. Also, there isn't any proof that Evolution is true. I have noticed that the 'scientists' that act as if Evolution is fact presume throughout their articles that Evolution is total truth. I do not believe that that is scientific. It might make a good headline, but it is not a good article, the presumption is apparent with the words, " We think", "Possibly", "It might have been", etc. To me, none of those things they say about what follows are facts, they are guesses. That is not scientific fact.

What then are the articles about? The guesses about what they found-- some fossil, some dead creature that no long is alive. Those articles are about the presumptions a 'scientist' might guess about something.

I haven't found anything in science that contradicts the Bible. If things are taken out of context, people find all kinds of things, I've seen much of this on the internet. Even the word 'unicorn' is brought up, proving a lack of scholarship from the start.

"Do you believe that every event in the Bible (like the flood) literally happened? "
No. I believe that every event in the Bible either happened, is happening, or will happen; depending on the event.

"Also, is there any reason why you feel evolution contradicts your faith, besides a literal interpretation of the Genesis narrative?"
No.

EDIT:
"If you are a creationist, do you agree or disagree with the chronology of the earth and universe?"
Which one? That has been evolving ever since I can remember, and I'm 46 years old. Really, do you expect to point to only one Chronology that is the 'Final Reckoning' any time soon? I find it difficult to believe in any of them now that it has changed so often.

Answer 2

In truth, I am a creationist. Yes, I believe in a God that created us. I also believe that there is more to it than just the creation. If you look at the way things work, scientifically, I would have to say that God was an INCREDIBLE engineer. There is a song by a guy named Carman from a good way back called "There is a God" that has a lot of scientific facts quoted in it. I will post some of those lyrics here:


The size, position and angle of the earth is a scientific phenomenon to see. A few degrees closer to the sun we'd disintegrate, a few degrees furter we'd freeze. The axis of the earth is titled at a perfect 23 degree angle and it's no mistake that it is. This allows equal global distribution to the rays of the sun making it possible for the food chain to exist.
Or take for example the combination of nitrogen and oxygen in the atmosphere we breathe every day. It just happens to be the exact mix that life needs to prosper, it doesn't happen on any other planet that way. (referring to our solar system)
You see, the Bible says the invisible things of God are seen through His creation, to believe this is not unfair. If there's a design, there's a designer, if there's a plan, there's a planner and if there's a miracle, there is a God.
The Scripture says the heavens declare the glory of God and the skies proclaim the work of His hands. If we allow our minds to drink in all the truth that surrounds the truth that just surrounds us, creation itself with help us understand.
Did you know the moon controls the tides, it's the maid that cleans the oceans. Even the waves don't crash the shores in vain. The tides drag impurities to the depths of the sea, it's nature's constant recycling chain.

Anyway, the song itself is pretty powerful, though I left a great portion of the religious stuff out. I believe that a God that could design and engineer so much, with so much precision, and make it work would not be limited by our viewpoint of time and space. Or at least the time scale we think of as seconds, minutes, days, years, etc. I think a mind with the infinite power to create the universe spoken into existence from a single word would make it self-sustaining. Thus, evolution. Not pure evolution, to say that we came from an accidental mixture of chemicals and dust from the explosion of a meteor or star or comet, (because evolutionists still have not managed to say where that initial star or comet came from in the first place) but the concept of evolutionary adaptation. If the planet and everything on it were not capable of changing and adapting to things that happen to it, it would destroy itself.

While I am a creationist, I do not take the literal road when interpreting scripture. I figure that the writers, (in this case, Moses) may have lacked the ability to acurately convey the precise methodology of how it was done. Also, We are talking about God here. The creator of the universe. And Man. A guy that wrote Genesis about 5000 years ago. Huge understanding gap between the two. It would be like Einstein trying to convey his theory of relativity to a three year old. A daunting task, to say the least, but necessary to use language and concepts that were understandable by Moses and others of his day.

Truthfully, who is to say that creationists and evolutionists are really that far apart. The engineer and scientist that made it all happen could have used whatever methods he chose to create us, and I imagine to Moses, it would only have been describable in terms of magic. Scripture says that Adam was created out of the dust of the earth. The mud. And God breathed life into him. Evolutionists say that initial life was created by a primordial ooze being struck by lightning. Think that if God were trying to tell Moses how it worked, lightning striking the swamp might have been equivocal to God magically making life happen from out of the mud? How much do we understand now that was not understood a single thousand years ago? And how much less did they understand 5000 years ago?

To answer your question: No I do not deny the physical sciences. I am unsure of the age of the earth, since carbon-14 dating is so unreliable (Students at UCLA did a carbon-14 test on a living mollusk and the results stated that it had been dead for 30,000 years) and that is the primary method used to determine the age of the earth, as well as most of the things found geologically, and paleontologically. I do believe that many of the events of the bible took place. In particular reference to the flood, there are stories in most cultures around the world of a "Great Flood" that took place some time back. Some cultures specify that people were sent to the tops of mountains, etc, so yes, I believe in the Great Flood.

Though lengthy, I hope this helps your understanding...

Answer 3

Your question is really long and I don't wanna type a 10 page answer. I'll keep it short

Evolution exists in the fact that people and animals adapt to their surroundings.

Different scriptures in the Bible about creation should be studied in the original Greek and Hebrew. I believe the earth was formed and dinosaurs were created. The ice age happened and then God created a new earth...new types of animals and plants. In this new earth he created mankind. Also if you read Revelations, this earth will be destroyed by fire (lava) and a new third earth will be created. I take the Bible literally and spiritually...but you gotta do some homework. I challenge anyone to pull out all the scriptures on the creation of the earth and study the original texts and see how it all matches.

Answer 4

We dont accept evolutionary theory because it is a part of atheistic philosophy designed to try to explain how we got here without the existence of God. We do not deny other sciences accept those like embrionic stem cell research which will open the door for human embrio harvesting.

The Bible doesnt teach a strict chronology, that is where both some believers and unbelievers are wrong.

Yes we do believe in the things like the flood and there is archeological evidence to backup many of the stories in the Bible. What kind of God would God be if he didnt do miracles?

Evolution is now used as a club to tell believers they are idiots for what they believe. It is referred to as fact in most textbooks Ive read without actually exploring the possiblities of its invalidity. It has become the central narrative to the atheists as to how they came into being and it is all about rejecting God and trying to silence religion.

Answer 5

Clearly, you do not know all creationists. Therefore, your definition of a creationist is flawed. So I wonder, how of a scientist can you possibly be if you just group all creationists into your little stereotype.

Here's the deal. God is timeless. In other words, time has no meaning to His as it does to us for all things are present to God. His terms of 6 days does not, nor is it implied to coincide with our 24 hours make a day time frame. In one place in the Bible, it states that a day to God is like 1000 years to us. I contend that this statement is more of a metaphorical expression to indicate that we cannot fathom how God determines time. That a day to God is just way more than we can even imagine in our lifetime.

So, what does that all mean in context to your question?

It means that for centuries religion and science have been at odds with each other when in reality they ought to be working together. You see, religion and science have different purposes and one cannot be substituted for the other. That would be like trying to compare math and history. They both have their function and both are quite necessary.

You see, religion describes what God did, and more importantly, why He did it. The purpose of science to give us some limited explanation on how it was done.

We will never be able to fully comprehend all that God has done and how He does is while in this life. I don't believe that evolution occurred exactly the way that evolutionists attempt to thrust it down our throats as fact. There are flaws parts of the theory that honest scientists will admit they just cannot support with scientific evidence at this point. The facts used to support the theory are really more like disjointed dots that when the dots are connected, they seem to support the theory but a lot of times there is no support for connecting some of the dots.

Even Darwin rejected many of his theories at the end of his life.

No, I believe that the creation story as given in the Bible is correct. But the time frame and all of the events that lead up to Adam and Eve being in the Garden of Eden could use a lot more explanation than what we are given from a scientific point of view. From a religious point of view, we have all that we need in order to understand the underlying principles being put forth.

Answer 6

I don't deny anything, rather simply state that evolution (specifically speciation) is an unproven theory and barely a theory at that as it is untestable and ultimately unknowable. It is arrogant and disingenuous to claim it as fact or valid or anything else of the sort.

As I see it, science and the bible (if properly understood) work in close concert and rarely contradict. Rather, science is the process by which the world came into being and God is the driving force behind it. It is inconceivable that God would create a universe without rules and processes that define it. Physics, chemistry, biology, etc are the embodiment of those rules and processes.

Answer 7

Macro-evolution & creation are stuck in the theoretical state becasue NEITHER can be proven scientifically. Neither, can go through the scientific process.

Micro-evolution is both scientifically provable & biblical.

I am a Creationist & I love science.

Edit 1-
And actually do not believe that science contradicts the Bible at all.
Philosophical or political science may contradict the Bible however.

Answer 8

I love science. It's very interesting. I'm studying biology, A&P and will take micro bio.
I don't deny that evolution takes place. Our pinky's became shorter, etc.
I think that Genesis is a story of creation. It doesnt mean that there is no God.
Though there is a geologist that claims that there is no way the earth is billions of years old, and that it is quite young. Regardless, Since no one can prove that humans evolved from apes, and no one can prove that we didn't. Its going to be an ongoing arguement to seperate those who believe in God and do not. It doesnt mean that I deny science because I believe in God. I just don't assume that my small 10% usage of my brain can fathom everything in the universe. But I believe that God can and created everything perfectly for his purpose.

Answer 9

Jehovah's Witnesses pointedly note that they are *NOT* "Creationists", because they believe that the physical universe (including the earth) seem to be millions or billions of years old.

Unsurprisingly, Jehovah's Witnesses reject godless "evolution", because they believe in God and they are always willing to defend that belief. By contrast, Witnesses generally refuse to argue about the possibility of God-directed "evolution", although officially they believe the bible to teach that God created animals "according to their kind" (which is not to say this is precisely comparable to the now-standard genetic nomenclature of "Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, Species"). Interestingly, the biblical word used to describe the created "kinds" is the same word used to describe the "kinds" which Noah preserved in the ark.

(Genesis 1:21) God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind.

(Genesis 6:13-20) God said to Noah: “...Make for yourself an ark... And as for me, here I am bringing the deluge of waters upon the earth... Everything that is in the earth will expire. ...Of the flying creatures according to their kinds and of the domestic animals according to their kinds, of all moving animals of the ground according to their kinds, two of each will go in there to you to preserve them alive.

Answer 10

billions of years on earth I dont believe, man come from monkeys nope...other sciences I do not deny or reject, oh and even science has over the last couple years come to a factual basis that the flood did occur and its been researched studied and proven fact..