Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
No matter how attractive a “favorite” argument is, no matter how “perfectly” it seems to explain something in the Bible, if it does not hold up to scrutiny, it should be avoided. Casting aside a flawed model is not the same as casting away Scripture.
We most often equate entropy with decay and thus associate this idea with the “running down of the universe.” However, some aspects of entropy are important for maintaining life, and these aspects are not “bad.”
As much as we would like to believe that Darwin died with a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, it is much more likely that he didn’t. It is unfortunate that the story continues to be promoted by many sincere people who use this in an effort to discredit evolution.
There is nothing about the existence of modern apes that would trouble an evolutionist. In fact, raising this issue only shows a lack of understanding on the part of those believing that the existence of modern apes is a stumbling block for evolution.
Some Christians claim that there was no rain before the Flood; however, as Dr. Tommy Mitchell shows us, a close examination of Scripture does not bear this out.
After all, it is obvious that things would not “run down” in a perfect environment, right?
When dealing with issues about the age of the earth, many people defend the young-earth position by claiming the even though the world is young, God created it to “look old.”
Many creationists today, sadly, demonstrate their lack of understanding of the evolutionists’ position when they ask this question.
Many people have claimed that Darwin doubted his theory by claiming it was absurd to think the human eye could have evolved. Is this argument valid?
Many believers have claimed that a Japanese fishing boat discovered a recently deceased plesiosaur. Is this accurate?
Many Christians mistakenly claim that NASA scientists have confirmed the Bible by finding Joshua's missing day. Dr. Tommy Mitchell explains why this is another argument Christians should not use.
Many well-meaning Christians maintain that Charles Darwin on his deathbed not only renounced evolution, but also accepted Jesus Christ as his savior.
Do women really have an extra rib?
Have skeletons of giants been discovered in the desert in Saudi Arabia? Haven’t they found evidence of giants in Greece?
Why would we advise against using some arguments that appear to support creation?
Dr. Wolfe declared to the TV audience: "To teach kids that creationism explains something about the world is no different than teaching them that the earth is flat."
I appreciate your page that lists discredited arguments for young earth Creation. Some of them are ones I employed recently in sharing my faith and I do not want to perpetuate error.
Some creationists believe that the scientific assault on the Bible did not begin with biological evolution, but with the acceptance of the geokinetic theory centuries ago.
The Word of God can, and must, be defended. But let us make sure we do not defend it with a “broken sword.”
Christians are called on to believe—but that means believing God’s Word, not uncritically believing everything we hear or read, no matter how sensationally it appears to bolster our faith.
What then is the massive boat-shaped formation which rests at 6,300 feet above sea level in Eastern Turkey, about 12–15 miles (15–24 kilometres) from the summit of Greater Mount Ararat?
You can’t always know whether something is true or not. But you can at least be like the Bereans in Acts 17 and search the Scriptures to see if such things are so.
Much information over the past 40 years or so indicates that the remains of Noah’s Ark may still exist on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey.
Despite the large number of cartoons and the almost universally accepted tradition, Eve did not eat an apple. Why then is it so popular to believe that she did?