The Creation Explanation
"Where were you
when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding."
Our first father, Adam, in the Garden of Eden was, in a sense, the first scientist. That is, under the personal daily tutelage of God he pioneered the human study of God's creation by putting into practice the initial steps in scientific research. These were observation, classification and naming. When he named the animals, he no doubt examined them intently and probably developed some basic system of classification, so that the names he gave them would have a rational basis. But having daily sweet fellowship with his Creator, Adam could also ask questions and get authoritative answers. This marvelous school of science continued until the day when Adam sinned and was cut off from intimate fellowship with God by his sin and guilt before the Holy One. Since that time and especially in the Western World during the past four centuries, the scientific enterprise has advanced. Modern science was originally developed primarily by godly men. They started with the philosophical foundation of biblical theism and divine creation.
Roughly during the 18th century Enlightenment the gradual takeover of science by secular humanists began. They rejected the notion that man needs to learn anything from God. For them scientific research motivated by the pride of human intellect became the only source of true knowledge of nature. Man would by himself, without God, understand all reality and use his knowledge to change society and the world. The work of Charles Darwin put this cultural movement into high gear. Today virtually the entire scientific-educational-intellectual establishment is wholly given over to the vision of an evolving cosmos in which God has no place and no part. To them evolution is the creative force and the total explanation of all of the complexity and apparent design and purposefulness of the universe. And the goal of their scientific research is to complete the evolutionary explanation of everything that is.
The Creation Explanation is written to offer evidence that the secular enterprise has failed and that the data of science accords with the biblical revelation of a cosmos created by God and for His glory.
The most powerful evidence for creation and against evolution is generally held to be specific evidence of intelligent, purposeful design in nature. This evidence is all around us and is something that lay people as well as scientists can appreciate. Therefore, we open and close The Creation Explanation with this kind of information. In general, the aim of the book is to bring the pertinent facts and concepts down to the level of high school students and people who are not trained in science. Because many readers lack a scientific background, the opening sections of Chapter-2 are devoted to a rudimentary explanation of some basic science. In later chapters a few complex topics are discussed that may seem rather technical to some readers. The consistent attempt has been made to explain everything in basic terms. Such subjects are included because they are either important to recent evolutionary arguments and therefore need critical analysis, or because they provide important support for creation. We hope all of our readers will find most of the book easy as well as interesting reading, and that they will be able to work their way through the few more difficult sections for a better understanding of the principles involved.
The most pervasive of the misconceptions about the evolution/creation controversy that are propagated by the mass media and by the greater part of the educational/ scientific/intellectual establishment is the allegation that evolution is science whereas creation is religion. The error of this claim can be seen as soon as science is clearly defined. The central policy of the scientific method is the requirement that every theory about the natural world be constructed so that it can be subjected to and perpetually open to empirical testing by observation and experiment. The new observations and experiments may prove the hypothesis or theory to be in need either of improvement or false. A theory that cannot be subjected to potentially falsifying tests is not scientific. It belongs in the realm of metaphysics (philosophy and religion). Thus we say, with the eminent philosopher of science, Sir Karl Popper, that the "criterion of demarcation" by which science is distinguished from other fields of knowledge is the empirical falsifiability of all theories of science.1
The Creation Explanation is concerned with theories of origins. But can any general theory about the origin of all things be falsified by observation or experiment? The answer is No! It is not possible to devise experiments that have the possibility of conclusively falsifying the grand historical scenario of either the evolutionary or the creation explanation of origins. Neither the history of creation nor the history of evolution can be either observed or reproduced experimentally. Strictly speaking, therefore, neither grand historical process evolution or creation is subject to scientific investigation. Furthermore, in a profound sense they are equally religious; the one is allied with the philosophy of materialism, the other with that of theism. The view called theistic evolution is discussed in Appendix C.
The philosophy of materialism traces all reality and being to the properties and processes of an eternal material cosmos. This is sometimes termed materialistic monism, meaning that there is no real existence of anything except the space-matter-energy-time universe. Theism traces all reality and being to eternal, infinite-personal Spirit. Neither view can be established by science. They are both belief systems. Nevertheless, circumstantial evidence from the present world may be adduced in support of either of the two competing world views. All of the data of science may be interpreted from the viewpoint of either theory of origins. Which view do the data of science better fit, evolution or creation? The authors believe that the scientific facts pointing to intelligent, purposeful design and therefore to creation are very persuasive. Our readers must come to their own conclusions.
As a corollary to the definition of science given above, it follows that there is no absolute knowledge in science, for every scientific theory must be open to reevaluation and potentially falsifying tests. It may be overthrown tomorrow by new evidence, or it may have to be modified. The aim of the scientific enterprise, then, is to continue approaching an ever more accurate knowledge of nature. But since philosophy can have such a powerful effect upon interpretations of scientific data, if the philosophy or belief system of scientists may be in error, so also may their interpretations and their understanding of what the universe is all about.
Is there, then, any source of absolutely reliable knowledge? There can be only one, God Himself, speaking to us in divine revelation. And this is what the Bible claims to be, divine revelation, the word of God to man. This is part of the authors' epistemology (theory of knowledge) as Christians, and we reject the secularist epistemology that denies the possibility of divine revelation. We accept the claim of the Bible to be the Word of God. And we accept the opening chapters of Genesis, therefore, to be true to scientific fact. This is our fundamental postulate, and we make no apology for it. We do not claim to "prove" creation by means of science. On the other hand, the Bible says that the evidence to be found in nature for the real existence of the infinite-personal Spirit, the sovereign God of creation, is conclusive, rendering all men everywhere "without excuse" before God (Romans 1:19,20). But the Bible also says that the Bible and its report of divine creation are to be received as truth by faith (Hebrews 11:3). Nevertheless we are commanded to persuade men (2 Corinthians 5:11), using every reasonable means, including the "foolishness of preaching" (1 Corinthians 1:21).
In Peter's first epistle we are admonished, "...be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks you a reason for the hope that is in you with meekness and fear" (1 Peter 3:15). So we present this book with no confidence in the flesh, not depending upon any knowledge or persuasive power of our own. We make no claim to have specific answers to all of the questions that confront the advocates of a scientific apologetic for biblical creation. In fact, a few of the as yet unsolved problems are indicated in the book so that the reader may not be taken by surprise if such problems are used in an attack upon his or her faith. Evolutionists in a century of effort have accumulated persuasive arguments and massive evidence to support their case. However, we believe that taken as a whole and entirely on the basis of logic and supporting evidence, the case for creation is the better one. This case is open for examination by all people everywhere. Indeed, the Scriptures assert this as fact in Psalm 19:1-7. Nevertheless, in this life we walk by faith, regardless of how extensive or how limited our knowledge may be (2 Corinthians 5:7). The essential foundation for security, stability, and effectiveness in the Christian life is "faith which works by love," a faith that is expressed in unwavering confidence in and humble obedience to God's Word the Bible.
It is our earnest desire that The Creation Explanation may prove to be enlightening, encouraging, and persuasive to the end that every reader may have joyful, satisfying faith in Jesus Christ and in His Word. We also hope that this book may help every reader to see true science in its proper character, as the fulfillment of the divine command to be God's steward, exercising dominion over the world, and as a searching out of the handiwork of the Creator for the glory of the triune God Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Then Job answered the LORD and said: "I know that
You can do everything, and that no purpose of Yours can be withheld from You. You asked,
'Who is this who hides counsel without knowledge?' Therefore I have uttered what I did not
understand, things too wonderful for me, which I did not know." ..."I have heard
of You by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees you. Therefore I abhor myself, and
repent in dust and ashes."
1. Popper, Karl R., The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Basic Books, New York, 1959), pp. 40-42, 78-92.