Creation Museum and the Ark Encounter

Critics of the Creation Museum say that it presents a “pseudoscientific” young earth creationist view of the origins of the earth and universe “even though scientific evidence shows the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old and the Universe about 13.8 billion years old.” I hate taking a side in this fight. My argument is that the age of the earth is one of the least important details one can hope to glean from a study of scripture (and in point of fact the Bible does not say how old the earth is).

I can empathize with Ken Ham’s motives for organizing Answers in Genesis and desiring to build a Creation Museum. As a science  teacher in the 1970’s, Ham would take his students on field trips to places like museums of natural history. While there is much to learn about archeology and anthropology from such a museum visit, evolutionary processes and geologic time scales are accepted as fact without question. Ham moved from Australia to the United States where the population of conservative Christians is much higher and began Answers in Genesis in a small storefront office. The idea of a creationist museum was in the back of his mind for a long time.

God is Near: Book Discussion #1

Maybe I’ll come up with a more clever series title but let’s try this out. If you haven’t read the book don’t worry, there should be enough discussion of scripture and of the Christian life in general to give these posts merit. If you don’t know what book I’m talking about it read this page. 

The process of writing God as Near as it exists in its final published form took place over a 2 year period of time, more or less. The first 4 or 5 chapters in particular have been around a while. Chapter 1 deals extensively with the creation story recorded in Genesis and Chapter 2 begins with a quick summary of the Noah story. As publication drew near I decided to leave those chapters alone and ignore certain recent events which are more suited for blogging anyway.

Creation Debate: The Issue is Viability

Is creation a viable model for origin is the topic of the Bill Nye – Ken Ham debate. Ham wants us to define some critical terms, namely creation/evolution and science. What I can’t believe we are not defining is viable.

UPDATE: View the full debate by clicking here.

Avoid Foolish Controversies

“Is creation a viable model of origins?” will be the topic of the Ken Ham vs. Bill Nye Debate on February 4 at the Creation Museum. Internet Monk has a rundown of the gory details, I will share just a couple of brief thoughts below.

Academic Discussion: Young Earth Debate

We started our academic discussion series by defining terms. One of my favorite sayings is “Don’t make the Bible say something it doesn’t say.” I enjoy a hearty discussion and even a little bit of friendly debate as much as the next guy, but we must be careful to build up not tear down other believers. There are many things that we simply cannot know. There are mysteries that will only be revealed to us when we come into God’s Kingdom. The ancient Greeks were occupied with continuous discussion and debate, but Paul encourages us to keep our eyes on the prize so to speak, focusing on what is of most importance.

In the 17th century an Irish bishop named James Ussher worked out a chronology of biblical events, based on male lines of lineage presented in scripture. His work is the basis of many young earth creationists, which it might be noted, was his particular bias when he started the started task.

The Read and Share File

If you wonder what I’ve been reading lately:

Easter is coming up when we celebrate the death, burial and resurrection. Read Cloudwatcher on Justification: No Record.

There are three headlines in the Internet Monk post Updates on the Creation Wars, but I want to specifically draw your attention to the one on homeschooling parents and their choice of science textbooks.  “Jen Baird Seurkamp, an evangelical who homeschools her children, avoids textbooks that discredit evolution. “Our science curriculum is one currently used in public schools,” she says. “We want our children to be educated, not sheltered from things we are afraid of them learning'”

ESVBible.org will be upgrading their website shortly. Take a look at this page detailing the new features and functionality.

Here’s a scary read: The Freedom from Religion Foundation is suing the Treasury Department on the grounds that “In God We Trust” discriminates against atheists and other Americans who do not believe in any god. More at HLN.

Stephen Hawking Settles Things Once and for All

Stephen Hawking’s latest book, The Grand Design, goes on sale next week.  Here’s a preview:

“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist,” Hawking writes.  “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going.”

“Evolution is a Proven Fact” -Dilbert

Defending Contending has tons of stuff like this. I couldn’t help it.

The Failure of Science vs. Religion

When I first heard of “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” I was hoping it would open some doors. I was optimistic that the popularity of this movie would get people asking the right questions, and that Christians would have some answers ready. It could be expected that atheists, evolutionists and Darwinists would oppose the film and its ideas, but Expelled has also received negative criticism from other circles.

Intelligent Design is sort of a redheaded stepchild to begin with. It is not creationism, and conservative evangelicals think of ID as a compromise between religion and science. They accuse ID of trying to “water down” religious faith enough that science can accept it. So IDers are going to take it from both sides; Darwinists who think that it’s creationism as well as religious zealots who thinks it isn’t creationism enough.