I am a teacher in North Wales and I am concerned by your website. I try to follow international news and have heard of creationists. Is it true that you believe all the Bible to be true and not just moral stories to make us think about life? It concerns me that children will be brainwashed to believe that the Bible is totally true and not look at scientific evidence that not just suggests, but tells us how we have evolved. is it not more important to pass on the message that we should not judge others. Is that not the true message of the Bible?? I see many children that are only concerned with material goods and being promiscuous at a young age. Surely there are more important messages to be passed on to young people today rather than wasting time with this. It deeply upsets me to see so much time and effort put in to something that does not benefit anyone; does not help to solve any problems in this world or even help open minds. It is such a waste of time and effort.

Helen Clements
UK


I am a teacher in North Wales and I am concerned by your website. I try to follow international news and have heard of creationists.

Yes, most people have but many times have not realized it. Most people have heard of Jesus but don’t realize that He was (is) a Creationist. Some others would include Isaac Newton, George Washington, Louis Pasteur and Abraham Lincoln.

Is it true that you believe all the Bible to be true and not just moral stories to make us think about life?

This is correct. We do believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God, inerrant and infallible; and that it is true and factual concerning spiritual matters, ethics, morality, history (especially origins) and science (2 Timothy 3:16; Psalm 33:4; John 17:17).

It concerns me that children will be brainwashed to believe that the Bible is totally true

What concerns us is that children within the public school systems are being brainwashed by evolutionary religion. Children are being taught that they are just evolved pond scum, that there are no absolutes, and that they can decide what is right for them (this ultimately means that rape, murder, etc. are ok). I hope this concerns you, since you care what children are taught. Without absolutes, children will do what feels good and right for themselves (likely at the expense of others).

and not look at scientific evidence

When most people think of creationists they think of a stereotyped religious fundamentalist who ignores scientific evidence that contradicts his or her beliefs. However, this is a result of a mistaken understanding of the nature of evidence and how it is interpreted. We do look at the scientific evidence, and we see that it supports what God has told us in His Word. So did Isaac Newton, who came to the same conclusion we did:

This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being. … This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called “Lord God” παντοκρατωρ [pantokratòr], or “Universal Ruler”. … The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, absolutely perfect. (Principia, Book III; cited in: Newton’s Philosophy of Nature: Selections from his writings, H.S. Thayer (Ed.), Hafner Library of Classics, NY, p. 42, 1953.)

that not just suggests, but tells us how we have evolved.

Tell us how the bare evidence supports evolution. Since there can only be one true history, any evidence that seemingly contradicts that history must have been incorrectly interpreted—the evidence itself is indisputable. And in reality, all evidence actually supports the Bible and its claims (see Get Answers: Young Age for several good examples) and contradicts “molecules-to-man” evolution (see Get Answers: Origin of Life); however, evolutionists reinterpret it to fit their worldview.

Thank you so much for your great website and magazine.

Both have been invaluble resources to me, as I am participating in a forum where I am the only creationist. (Probably the youngest too, as I am fifteen)!

I have found your mag to be a well written, well documented and a easily understood resource. We (my family and I) have used AiG material for years now, finding it very useful for homeschooling.( with our history based curriculum) Keep up the good work!

SHALOM
Hannah
New Zealand

Also, many people do not realize or understand the difference between “historical/origins science” (creation and “molecules-to-man” evolution) and “operational/observational science” (shuttles, vaccines, mapping genomes, etc.). (See Argument: Creationism is religion, not science for more information.)

Operational science

Let’s say a scientist is looking at a gene (the evidence) and doesn’t know what it codes for. The scientist makes a prediction (this may or may not be based on presuppositions) about what the gene codes for and then performs tests that can be observed, documented and repeated. Based on these repeatable tests and observations, the scientist’s prediction may be accepted or rejected. So, let’s say this scientist predicts that a specific gene codes for eye color. But based on the repeatable tests and observations, she finds that the gene actually codes for hair color. This is operational science and in no way denies the Creator God or disproves the Bible.

Historical science

Looking at this same gene (evidence) the scientist says, “it evolved from pigments of the skin because certain hair colors may be more advantageous in attracting a mate.” What possible repeatable tests and observations can be made to prove or disprove this overall statement? None. But, another scientist says, “No, this gene was passed down by Adam and Eve.” What possible repeatable tests and observations can be made to prove or disprove this overall statement? None. Both statements are based on presuppositions: the first is based on a belief in naturalism and the second is based on a belief in God as Creator. Notice the fact (the gene) is interpreted differently in the realm of historical science based on what people already believe.

is it not more important to pass on the message that we should not judge others. Is that not the true message of the Bible??

Here at AiG we are many times told that we “shouldn’t judge others” or that we are “close-minded.” What’s interesting (and yet disturbing) is the very people who voice these opinions judge us, sometimes saying “God will punish you for this,” and are close-minded to what Scripture says. Many times we are condemned for believing God’s Word over man’s ideas.

However, the true message of the Bible is of God’s loving redemptive plan (John 3:16) for the people He created (Genesis 1:27; Acts 17:26) that fell into sin (Genesis 3; Romans 3:23). But, we do agree that one of the moral messages of the Bible is not to judge others (Matthew 7:1–5; Romans 14:1–13). We do not judge those outside the church (1 Corinthians 5:13) but we will uphold the authority of Scripture and preach the whole gospel (Acts 20:27) which has the power to convict (1 Thessalonians 1:5) and condemn (John 12:48). We are hated because of this, but it is because the world hated Him first (John 15:18).

I see many children that are only concerned with material goods and being promiscuous at a young age.

Evolution denies the Creator and rejects His authority, replacing it with man’s authority. If there is no absolute authority and evolution is true, then morality is relative and we are nothing more than just advanced animals, as evolution teaches. Promiscuous and materialistic behavior are consistent outworkings of what’s been taught. Who then can say what they’re doing is wrong? Who then can say that even rape, murder, child molestation, stealing and lying are wrong? Everyone decides for themselves.

Surely there are more important messages to be passed on to young people today rather than wasting time with this. It deeply upsets me to see so much time and effort put in to something that does not benefit anyone;

There is a double standard here. People want the morality of the Bible, but they don’t want the God of the Bible. In an evolutionary framework it is okay to “upset” someone as long as it benefits the one doing the upsetting. Within this evolutionary framework, there is no absolute standard to decide what is “upsetting” or “beneficial.” These sorts of standards of right and wrong can only come from an ultimate authority, the Bible and its Author, Jesus Christ.

Evolutionists must borrow from the Judeo-Christian worldview to decide what is right and wrong. Even logic and trusting that the laws of nature don’t change (which is what makes operational science possible) cannot be adequately explained by naturalism. By proclaiming the authority of Scripture we are, in fact, benefiting all who hear.

But He said, “On the contrary, blessed are those who hear the word of God and observe it” (Luke 11:28).

does not help to solve any problems in this world or even help open minds. It is such a waste of time and effort.

Helen Clements
UK

By proclaiming the Bible as the Word of God we are not wasting time and effort, but calling people back to the Absolute Authority. When people realize that the Bible is the absolute authority, they then realize that they are accountable to Him. When we return to the Word of God we return to that which has given us morality and hope.

But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life (Titus 3:5–7).

In His name and for His glory,
David Wright, AiG–USA

Help keep these daily articles coming. Support AiG.