Scriptural Truth and Scientific Models
This ministry always affirms our absolute commitment to Scriptural truth. This is what our Statement of Faith says on the subject:
We believe that the 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout, in that holy men of God were moved by the Holy Spirit to write the very words of Scripture. It is without error (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21). The final guide to the interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself, and that Scripture is our final authority. No apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and science, can be valid if it contradicts Scripture.1
There are some issues about creationism that we are asked where Scripture does not give a clear answer. Our Statement of Faith includes a paragraph, under the subheading “Creation”, which explains what our attitude to such problems should be.
Hold Tightly to Scripture
The simple but factual account of origins as presented in Genesis provides a reliable framework for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life, mankind, the earth and the universe. It is legitimate for us to build a scientific model to provide an explanation for what we think may have happened. However, this scientific model may, on further research, be shown to be insufficient or even inaccurate. In such cases, we will judge the model by the research, and amend or replace it accordingly. However, we never lose our commitment to the truth, inerrancy, accuracy, infallibility and authority of Scripture. We judge the research by Scripture, not the other way around.
Hold Loosely to Scientific Models
It can be seen, then, that a scientific model does not have the same level of authority as Scripture. This is an important point, because there is always the danger that we will treat our scientific model as if it is Scripture, refusing ever to let go of it, and attacking those who question the model as if they were questioning Scripture.
For example, in another article I have listed a number of creationist models to explain how distant starlight could be visible on Earth, when the star from which the light comes may be millions of light years away, given that the Bible teaches the Earth is only 6,000 years old. Obviously, not every one of the models can be correct. Of the four main models, I have stated that I think that two of them are definitely incorrect. That leaves two other models, where I cannot say which is correct and which is wrong. Of course, although they can’t both be correct, they could both be wrong! However, the Scriptural truths that the Earth is 6,000 years old, and that the stars were created on Day Four, are not undermined by any of these considerations.
This should be our watchword on the subject of Scriptural truth and scientific models: We hold to Scripture tightly, but to our scientific models loosely.2
- Creation Today Statement of Faith, < www.creationtoday.org/statement-of-faith > ↩
- I have written on this subject before, in Answers magazine, in Taylor, P.F., Can Creation Models be Wrong?, Answers v2 n4 (Oct-Dec 2007), pp68-72, < http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n4/can-creation-models-be-wrong > ↩
Age of the EarthApologeticsAstronomyAtheismBaraminologyCreationCreationBytesDarwindaysDinosaursDragonsEducationEvangelismEvolutionFlood & GeologyFossils & Ancient ManFuzzy WordsGarden of EdenGenesis 3D MovieGod & the BibleHebrewHigh School ScienceHistoryQuestion & AnswerRadiometric DatingReligion & PhilosophySocial Issues