Skeptics Often Don’t Want the Answers

Ad hominem attacks are always counter productive. However, citing the number of scientists who accept the literal biblical narrative is not science - simply demographics.

If your scientists are prepared to go toe to toe with evolutionist/billions of years theories, where are:

• - A reasonable narrative/evidences of the spread of humankind after the flood/Babel.
• - A linguistic analysis that shows how the languages after Babel are related or have evolved.
• - An alternative/consistent theory for dating techniques such as radiocarbon and radioactive (there must be some level at which these ideas are consistent, even if the current science is erroneous)
• - A demonstrable/reproducible theory to explain how the universe appears to be billions of years old with regard to the speed of light.

Science is not fixed - human understanding is not fixed. We propose, we test, we evaluate, we develop further theories, tests, etc. You claim to participate in the scientific process, without actually engaging in serious questioning and theorizing.

You can't prove scientifically in any sense of the word that there is a single fixed knowledge that answers all questions.

If god of the bible were all powerful, why isn't the bible an actual operation manual for our lives and the universe. And where are the biblical admonitions to do science: explore, expand, question - they're not there.

The bible is not a scientific platform - it is an ancient text similar in content and message to numerous others of the same age and origins.

We received the feedback above regarding a previous article. That article answered the accusation that young-earth creationists are “morons.” This response deals with new accusations that actually prove the point of the original article.

Ad hominem attacks are always counter productive. However, citing the number of scientists who accept the literal biblical narrative is not science - simply demographics.

Thank you for contacting us. I believe your first statement, “Ad hominem attacks are always counter productive,” is a reference to the original email calling us morons. Thank you for pointing that out. Your email is a more scientific approach to the question of origins rather than just calling us names. We greatly appreciate that.

Citing the number of scientists who accept the Biblical narrative was simply to demonstrate that Biblical creationists are not a handful of religious nuts who have no foundation in real science.

If your scientists are prepared to go toe to toe with evolutionist/billions of years theories, where are:

First, I would like to recommend that we both agree on our starting bias. My father has said it correctly: “It’s not a matter of whether one is biased or not, but which bias is the best bias to be biased with!” We do not deny our biblical bias but clearly proclaim the Bible as our first and final authority. In fact, it is often the humanist who refuses to acknowledge his anti-biblical bias. What this means is that in our experience no matter how much scientific evidence is presented for a young earth, the evolutionist will continue to suggest ideas to employ as a rescuing device to defend his own worldview.

Furthermore, your questions prove the point of my original article. I could stop here and say no more, for I had said in my first paragraph of the original article that “at Answers in Genesis, we have dealt with these same questions literally hundreds of times in many books, videos, magazine and website articles, emails, and conferences.” Please don’t continue to “follow the historical precedent and tradition that blindly rejects Christ” as I stated in the last paragraph.

- A reasonable narrative/evidences of the spread of humankind after the flood/Babel.

- A linguistic analysis that shows how the languages after Babel are related or have evolved.

Who defines “reasonable” and “evidences”? You? Me? The majority opinion? Bible believers will give “evidence” when asked, but it often does not meet the arbitrary, unspecific requirements of skeptics. In return, we are expected to believe “evidence” that is really nothing more than guesses about the past that cannot be observed or repeated in the present. Besides, how can there be any such thing as reason in a world that is supposedly only material and physical?

On the spread of man and languages from Babel, check out the new book Tower of Babel by Bodie Hodge. It contains incredibly detailed and well-researched information on the cultural history of our ancestors using ancient sources.

- An alternative/consistent theory for dating techniques such as radiocarbon and radioactive (there must be some level at which these ideas are consistent, even if the current science is erroneous)

After reading through our articles on dating methods such as “Radiometric Dating: Back to Basics” and “Carbon-14 Dating,” watch Radioactive and Radiocarbon Dating by Dr. Andrew Snelling and read Thousands . . . Not Billions by Dr. Don DeYoung as a layman’s explanation of the technical RATE research. There are numerous other resources that I could point you to like the two-volume set Earth’s Catastrophic Past or the DVD Dating Fossils and Rocks, but the items I mentioned at first should be a good start, especially to deal with the many assumptions and errors in radiometric dating.

- A demonstrable/reproducible theory to explain how the universe appears to be billions of years old with regard to the speed of light.

Please see Dr. Danny Faulkner’s paper “A Proposal for a New Solution to the Light Travel Time Problem” and Dr. Jason Lisle’s paper “Anisotropic Synchrony Convention—A Solution to the Distant Starlight Problem.” You can also acquire The New Answer Book 4, which also covers the topic, and watch Distant Starlight by Dr. Jason Lisle. Please browse the starlight topic on our site to research several other articles on the issue of distant starlight.

Science is not fixed

Our understanding of science is not fixed, but what is science? You don’t believe science is observable, testable, and repeatable? Science can be divided into two areas (operational science and historical science). Operational science is observable, testable, and repeatable; however, historical science is based on assumptions about the past. We assume God’s Word is true, and use the Bible to interpret the world around us. In an effort to deny God exists, atheists assume matter is all there is, and use that starting point in an attempt to prove evolution. We have many articles on the nature of true science.

human understanding is not fixed.

Don’t be a typical skeptic who hurls insults and accusations without seriously considering our work.

If you truly believe your understanding is not fixed, please consider the articles, videos, and books I have linked to. You ask for answers, and I have provided you with many resources that already answer the questions from a biblical perspective. Now be honest: test and evaluate these answers. Don’t be a typical skeptic who hurls insults and accusations without seriously considering our work.

From a biblical perspective though, all true wisdom and understanding is found in Jesus Christ (1 Corinthians 1:30) as God, Creator, and Savior (John 1:1–4). You can choose to place your trust in the changing opinions of man or believe the unchanging, infallible words of God. God’s understanding is eternal (Isaiah 40:28) and fixed (Hebrews 13:8), which is why we must let Scripture be our final authority in all matters of life. Only then does life and science make sense!

We propose, we test, we evaluate, we develop further theories, tests, etc. You claim to participate in the scientific process, without actually engaging in serious questioning and theorizing.

You don’t think we engage in serious science? Have you read any articles in the ? Have you read any of our technical books? Have you seriously engaged yourself in considering the Word of God?

It amazes me how the atheist does not consider the invalidity of his own position. The atheist calls for real science and knowledge, but he denies the God who makes it possible to even do scientific research because He promised to maintain the universe in a uniform way (Genesis 8:22). In a world with no God where everything came about from nothing by chance, how could we observe and repeat experiments consistently from day to day?1

You can't prove scientifically in any sense of the word that there is a single fixed knowledge that answers all questions.

What is knowledge? Where does it come from? And by what authority would we know that we had knowledge? Without God’s Word as the final authority, the answers are relative and ever-changing.

How does knowledge, which is immaterial, exist in an atheistic, strictly material world? Love, knowledge, self-awareness, and other abstract or immaterial concepts do not make sense in an atheistic worldview where only the material exists. Besides, if God does not exist and there are no absolutes and no ultimate answers for the meaning of life, then why do science at all?

Love, knowledge, self-awareness, and other abstract or immaterial concepts do not make sense in an atheistic worldview where only the material exists.

You probably think that by calling for scientific proof for the Bible and the existence of God that you’ve already won the argument. In the original feedback article, the critic made a similar condemning cry for “one iota of SCIENTIFIC truth concerning the existence of a god.” Did you carefully consider my responses?

Please read through our many articles on science to find answers to your questions. You should definitely read The Biblical Basis for Modern Science by Dr. Henry M. Morris. You might cry foul that I’m not answering your questions directly and simply hurling large quantities of articles, books, and videos at you. As in the original feedback article, my point is that we have already answered from a biblical perspective many of the skeptical questions and arguments, but in emailing us your question you have failed to realize we have already answered the same questions numerous times before.

If god of the bible were all powerful, why isn't the bible an actual operation manual for our lives and the universe.

Your statements come across as though you’ve never read the Bible. Scripture addresses man’s biggest problem, which is that he is a sinner who has rebelled against God and needs a Savior. Check out the Bible to see that it is indeed an operation manual for our lives, starting with the need for every person to repent of their sins and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, His death on the Cross for our sins, and His Resurrection from the dead. This is the first step to real understanding and true knowledge (Proverbs 1:7, 9:10).

From the first two chapters in Genesis and throughout the rest of Scripture, only the Bible lays down an accurate framework for correctly understanding the origin, structure, and laws that govern the universe. The Answers in Genesis website contains literally hundreds of articles demonstrating operational science is consistent with the Bible.

And where are the biblical admonitions to do science: explore, expand, question - they're not there.

Only someone unfamiliar with the Bible and true science (knowledge) would not understand the biblical basis for observational science. Genesis 1 is the place to start. Here man is given dominion and to subdue and rule over the earth (Genesis 1:26–29). With such a foundation, man can study, observe, and explore God’s creation, and we still do this with technologies and science today. Ultimately our purpose for scientific research is the glory of God (Psalm 19:1).

On this subject, the passage from Job 38–41 is very interesting because God requires Job to answer dozens of questions related to animals, the atmosphere, earth, sea, snow, rain, stars, light, and so on. He demands of Job to answer Him (Job 38:3). One would have to be a scientist to get even some of the questions right, and it was hundreds of years before scientists could even give answers to the more difficult questions. Proverbs 25:2 and Ecclesiastes 1:13 also are verses encouraging mankind to study the things around him.

But I could easily turn the question around on you. If there is no God, there are no absolutes, and life is a meaningless nothing, why do scientific research? And what is the real basis for it? Why try to make sense of something that can’t be made sense of since it came from nothing?

The bible is not a scientific platform

The Bible is the very foundation for a scientific platform; it is the basis for science to be possible because the laws of the universe are upheld consistently by the Almighty God (Colossians 1:17). Again, I encourage you to read The Biblical Basis for Modern Science by Dr. Henry M. Morris.

- it is an ancient text similar in content and message to numerous others of the same age and origins.

This prejudicial conjecture shows how little you actually know about the subject. No other ancient text contains the kind of detailed and accurate scientific, historical, prophetic, archaeological, and otherwise truthful statements as the Bible.

I turn the question around on you. Are you greater than the God of the Bible and can you prove to me He had no involvement in the authorship of that book? You have a very big task ahead of you. I warn you: just on the topic of the Resurrection alone, many have tried to disprove it but ended up believers!

My point in linking to so many AiG resources is to prove the point of my original feedback that “at Answers in Genesis, we have dealt with these same questions literally hundreds of times in many books, videos, magazine and website articles, emails, and conferences.” This was not as true when my dad (Ken) first entered the ministry as it is today. We thank the Lord for providing so many biblically minded scientists, theologians, and laymen who have helped write and compile the many resources over the years.

This feedback on my article proves my point that many skeptics often don’t really want the answers already provided, since they are blinded by sin and rebel against God.

You must settle in your heart that the Bible is our final authority and basis for all correct thinking.

For the Christian, don’t be afraid when skeptics barrage you with many technical or detailed questions that seem impossible to answer. There are answers. You must settle in your heart that the Bible is our final authority and basis for all correct thinking. The Christians who, at their own peril, reject Genesis as literal truth and foundational to all of Scripture will succumb to the lies of evolution and millions of years. The blindness of the skeptic to the many evidences creationists have given them for years proves that the greatest need is for Christians to preach the gospel. Only the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ can open blind eyes (2 Corinthians 4:4) and soften hard hearts (Ezekiel 36:26). Always use your response as an opportunity not to just give scientific evidences for creation, but to point the sinner to Christ and his need for salvation.

Proverbs 1:7 states, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.” Real knowledge starts with an understanding that there is a Creator God (Genesis 1:1), that man’s sin against His Creator brought death into the world (Romans 5:12), that man is more than just a physical being (Genesis 1:27), that man is in need of salvation (Romans 6:23), and that all wisdom and knowledge is found in Jesus Christ (Colossians 2:3).