DISCLAIMER: This is not meant to be the start of a debate. The debate has been on-going for ages. This is to prove that creationists who accept the Bible first have a logical basis for accepting the Bible and a literal 6-day creation. This puts the Bibles claims to the test versus the evidence.
When a scientist digs up a dinosaur bone it does not have a nametag on it saying 65 million years old. Scientists use the best information available to them to make educated guesses about the past. In fact, creationists and evolutionists have the same evidence. We have the same fossils, the same rocks, the same laws of science. Where we differ is our starting point.
Evolutionists believe they start unbiased, but this is impossible. Scientists come up with a hypothesis and then collect information to either validate or dismiss that claim. But have they already assumed an old-earth during their research? Are they encouraged to prove their finding financially? These lead to bias and presumptions before the research even begins. How about leaving out a crucial piece of evidence
Most scientists will not use the Bible as historical evidence because of popular belief that it is such an ancient document it cannot be trusted, without even researching that position. Current Biblical translations can be compared to much older original manuscripts, and it still holds up. A study of the real processes involved in Biblical translation is awe-inspiring. Scribes would destroy entire hand written scrolls if they misspelled one word. And how about over one hundred Biblical characters verified outside of the Bible itself? How about archeological evidence pointing to physical locations and characters in the Bible? How about the fact that it is a collection of 66 books, written by over 40 authors, on 3 continents, over 1500 years, yet telling a cohesive prophetic non-contradicting story? How about the fact that its principles and promises have been tested time and time again by billions of believers and proven to be reliable? What we have is a historical written account of thousands of eye-witness testimony verified over and over again.
Now let me ask you this
how do you know the U.S. Revolutionary War happened? Were you there? Did you see it happen? What kind of proof do you have? Well, we have written documents, eye-witness testimony, and archeological evidence. The same things we have in the Bible. Why now, can we not use the Bible as a historical, reliable document? If we cant, does that mean that people a thousand years from now may doubt the Revolutionary War happened, just because of time? Thats absurd isnt it.
The Bible is unique because it claims to be the inspired word of God, written down by His appointed followers. There is actually a way to test this. In Genesis, the Bible makes a lot of bold claims about historical events: a 6-day creation, an originally perfect world made corrupt, a worldwide flood, people groups created at the tower of Babel. Now, if we look at the evidence science has collected through a Biblical worldview does it still hold up?
The Bible (and Jesus himself) claims over and over that the world as we know it was created in six literal days. Many Christians have re-interpreted the Genesis account to fit into modern old-earth theories, but this doesnt hold up with further scriptures that talk about taking a Sabbath day once a week because God only took six days to create the entire world and rested on the seventh. The original Hebrew word for day in Genesis in yom which always means a literal 24-hour day, especially when combined with the phrasing of evening, then morning, the next day. Any other understanding of the creation story requires us to re-interpret what is plainly written. This becomes very dangerous for a Christian. If we re-write this part of scripture, what stops us from re-writing any part that doesnt fit our opinions?
Well then, why do we supposedly have so much evidence for an old earth? There are actually several explanations for this. Radiometric dating of rocks makes several critical assumptions before they even begin their dating methods. They assume original and ongoing conditions of the rock have remained unchanged and uninterrupted. But the Bible tells us there was a worldwide flood that would have disrupted the genetic makeup of every rock on the planet. But if we assume the Bible is correct, when God created the world he would not have created it in an infant stage. The animals and the people would have had no one to raise them. If the plants and world was in an infant stage, there would have been nothing to eat, or insufficient air to breathe. God had to have created everything in that week in its adult stage, therefore inferring age. We would have looked at a plant, or tree, or animal and seen many years, but in actuality they would have only been minutes old. Therefore when modern scientists use presumptive dating methods and see an older earth than it really is, this is actually what they should be seeing without the information the Bible adds to the equation.
But couldnt have God just used evolution to do his creation? No. With millions of years of creatures living and dying before man is even created, weve undermined and destroyed the doctrine of sin, and ultimately Jesuss reason for dying. The Bible teaches that our world was created perfectly and when sin entered the world through Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden, death was introduced for the first time and the land was cursed. This is contrary to millions of years of things dying before humans were even around.
Death is the result of separation from God. God left our physical presence in the garden. Ever since then our world has been gradually degrading. This is evident in our current social relative morality decline, the increasing amount of disease and sicknesses, mental illnesses, anxiety, wars, and famine. Natural selection is actually a testament to the fall as well. Every mutation we have studied in a laboratory has always turned out to be a loss of DNA information, never an increase. There is some re-arranging of information, and sometimes physical characteristics have adapted to the environment around them but it is always a result of a loss of irrecoverable information. This is the exact opposite of evolution. Scientists have this evidence, they know this. What is represented is that species develop within their own kind, but do not change into another species, exactly what the Bible tells us. Again, with a Biblical worldview, these occurrences start to make sense as should be expected in a fallen and gradually declining world that the Bible describes.
The next fantastic claim the Bible makes is that God destroyed the world through a worldwide flood, saving only two of each animal, Noah, and his family. Does the evidence make sense of this? Absolutely. In fact, the evidence is overwhelming, its practically everywhere you look. Rock layers all over the world that stretch continents, canyon layers laid down rapidly from massive water flow, a fossil record of millions of animals killed instantaneously, polar ice caps, and the fact that the earth is still two-thirds water. Evolutionists make the claim that because animals are in the fossil layer before humans, then animals came first. But according to the Bible, all animals were created on day five, and two humans on day six. Thats a big outnumbering of animals. Therefore in the first 1500 years of existence before the flood, the animals would have reproduced in much greater quantities than humans. The animal to human ratio would have been astronomical. So again, animals in the fossil record (laid down by the flood) before humans make sense according to what the Bible tells us.
The final topic I will tackle today in the story of the Tower of Babel. After the ark, humans were encouraged to spread out and populate the earth. They did not listen. They stayed together and rebelled against God. At this point God decided to confuse their languages as to separate them out. This is what caused all the different races we see today. But according to the Bible, we all come from Adam and Eve. This would make us genetically only one race. The Human Genome Project confirmed that there is only one race the human race. This is another example of different kinds within a species, but only one species, one race. This is consistent with what the Bible teaches.
In these few short paragraphs I have presented a basic defense of using the Bible as a reliable historical document, a literal 6-day creation, the fall of man, a worldwide flood, and the Tower of Babel; and that each of these accounts align perfectly with the evidence of the world when properly interpreted. Creationists do have logical reasons for believing what they believe. We can debate the various issues, but classifying creationists as illogical is a horribly flawed argument. In fact does logic and science make sense outside a God-created world? In a completely random universe how would science and logic work? Wouldnt they be constantly changing and unreliable? I am not claiming that my accounts are hole-proof, but Ive obviously displayed that neither are the secularists claims. Choose for yourself. Mans word or Gods word. Its up to you.