Category Archives: Creationism

“The Genesis Flood”

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Pretty early on in my Christian life, I acquired two books about the relationship between science and the Bible.  One was Bernard Ramm’s A Christian View of Science and Scripture (1954) and the second was The Genesis Flood, by  John Whitcomb and Henry Morris (1961).  The latter was intended, in part at least, to be a response to the first.  Ramm had argued for an old earth creation and localised flood, whereas Whitcomb and Morris attempted to make a case for a young earth creation and a worldwide flood.…

If Genesis doesn’t teach science, what does it teach?

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Andy Karplus

In a panel discussion on the origins of life  Dr Andy Karplus (Professor of Biochemistry, Oregon State University) advocated a ‘theistic evolution’ position.

Such a position raises the question, ‘If you do not think that the first two chapters of Genesis teach science, what do they teach?’  Dr Karplus gave a helpful summary of the main doctrines taught in these chapters:-

  1. There is one all-powerful God, who is distinct from creation and created all things.
…

The genealogical Adam and Eve

Walking With Giants Posted on by

Very often it’s put to us as a stark choice: either you accept the biblical account of human origins, or you accept the scientific account.  Either you believe that we are all direct descendants of Adam and Eve, or that we are all products of a long evolutionary process, stretching back a million years or more to a (non-human) common ancestor.

But can we have our cake and eat it?  Can we hold both to the essential factual historicity of the accounts of creation in Genesis 1 and 2, and to the validity of evolutionary science?…

Adam: a historical figure?

Walking With Giants Posted on by

What options are available for relating the biblical account of Adam and Eve to the scientific account of the evolution of the human race?

Todd Beall lists some of the main alternatives.  Adam and Eve are variously considered to be:

(1) historical persons, though if there were many humans around at the same time, they would be chieftains of a tribe specially selected by God (Collins 2011, 121);

(2) archetypes but historical people, though not necessarily the first or only humans (Walton 2015, 96–103);

(3) literary figures who may or may not be historical (Longman 2013, 122); or

(4) not historical at all, though Paul thought that they were (Enns 2012, 120–122, 138).

…

Some thoughts on Young Earth Creationism

Walking With Giants Posted on by

According to Young Earth Creationists (YEC) the cosmos came into being not more than about 10,000 years ago.  I must admit that I have tended to regard this view as unnecessary from a biblical point of view, and implausible from a scientific point of view.

But let me just note, without irony or mockery, what kinds of arguments could be used to support it.

1.  YEC regards its theory as theologically coherent. 

YEC is committed to a high view of Scripture. …

Creationism in Britain

Walking With Giants Posted on by

We tend to associate Creationism (that is to say, Young Earth Creationism) with American fundamentalism.  However, it is alive and kicking in Britain too.  According to a recent survey carried out on behalf of Theos think-tank, 17% of Britons take the Young Earth position (compared with 11% for Intelligent Design, 28% for Theistic Evolution, and 37% for Atheistic Evolution).

Not long ago, The BBC website carried this article about British creationists.  It discusses, among other things, the Genesis Expo museum, set up in Plymouth by the Creation Science Movement.…

Sir David Attenborough ‘gets hate mail from creationists’

Walking With Giants Posted on by

“They tell me to burn in hell and good riddance,” said Sir David in a recent interview in Radio Times.  And the hate mail bit of the interview was headlined in The Telegraph, The Guardian, and many other newspapers and news sources.

I don’t disbelieve the story for a moment.  There are hateful, lunatic minorities in all movements, from the animal rights lobby to the anti-abortion lobby.

But it’s not very scientific, is it? …