Over the weekend I had the privilege of meeting a self-proclaimed skeptic named Paul. Working in ministry in East Texas I spend most of my time around either Christians or people who believe in the existence of God on some level, so it’s always interesting to get to speak to people who have a perspective so different from mine. I met Paul in between sessions in which Dr. Brad Harrub and I spoke on Darwin, evolution, and dinosaur fossil evidence for creation, and though he was friendly enough, the purpose for his attendance became clear – he was there to challenge us.

He patiently sat through the lessons to wait for the Q&A period, and though he asked his questions in different ways, his basic message kept coming back to one main point that is being used against Christians all over the world these days. He wanted to know why we “don’t believe in science.” In his eyes, what we were presenting about God and the evidence for a young earth was against everything science shows.

As with any debate, though, the first thing one must do is define the terms. If by “science” you mean a consensus of academia in scientific fields, then yes, we’re anti-science. But that’s not science, is it? The term should instead refer to the evidence and information that we discover through exploration and discovery. Science does not belong to any one particular interpretation. Science is objective. Despite that fact, evolutionists still claim that their side is scientific and any theory that disagrees with theirs couldn’t possibly be scientific in any way.

Unfortunately, the definition typically used by evolutionists is that first one. In other words, they think we’re anti-science because nearly all of the people with advanced education in scientific fields disagree with young earth creationism. As Paul the skeptic wanted to know, why do we persist in disagreeing with so many educated people?

Well, history has told us that the consensus of scientists means very little. It was a consensus of smart people that told Galileo he was wrong when he proposed a heliocentric system. It was a consensus of scientific minds that decided that blood letting was the best way to heal diseases. Just because a group of people in the sciences believe something to be true doesn’t make it so. Science remains science, and man’s interpretation remains susceptible to mistake.

Where we make our biggest mistake, though, is assuming that those types of errors remain in the past. Through our pride we consider ourselves so much smarter and so far ahead of them scientifically. In some ways we are, but that doesn’t mean we can’t be wrong. Consider their own theories of evolution and origins. All dinosaur life was supposed to have been destroyed by an asteroid 65 million years ago. Now many scientists propose that the dinosaurs are simply alive today in the form of birds, the creatures they supposedly evolved into. There are still debates as to whether the universe is eternal or 13 billion years old. Or, take another area in which they’ve preached the idea that science is not to be challenged. Scientists told us that the polar ice caps could be gone by the early 2010s, and yet here we are. Additionally, if we’re simply tallying up votes of smart people, give me the side that is represented by Newton, Mendel, and Kepler over the side that has Bill Nye, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, and Richard Dawkins.

As always, we see that science is flawless and man’s ability to interpret it is anything but. We’re looking at the same evidence. The difference is in the worldview we bring to the evidence, because nobody has the ability to objectively look at data. However, if there’s been one constant in scientific discovery over the centuries, it’s that God continues to be right. Evolutionists continue to rewrite their theories, develop new fossil hoaxes, and deny clear scientific evidence all the time, but the word of the Lord endures forever. The Bible isn’t anti-science. It can’t be, and it never will, since God created both.

So how do we end this mindless debate? We point out the contradiction in the terms used. We make ourselves well-versed in the scientific evidence for the Bible. We point out their ability to make mistakes. And, we point out the biases and preconceived notions that the evolutionists bring to the discussion. Until they realize that it’s not science vs. the Bible, but it’s the Bible’s interpretation of scientific evidence vs. their interpretation of it, they will continue to use the wrong terminology to never have to face their own biases.

By Jack Wilkie