The Berean
Well-known member
I was wondering who are the leading creation scientists today?
-
This is a new section being rolled out to attract people interested in exploring the origins of the universe and the earth from a biblical perspective. Debate is encouraged and opposing viewpoints are welcome to post but certain rules must be followed. 1. No abusive tagging - if abusive tags are found - they will be deleted and disabled by the Admin team 2. No calling the biblical accounts a fable - fairy tale ect. This is a Christian site, so members that participate here must be respectful in their disagreement.
Creation Scientists
- Thread starter The Berean
- Start date
That would be God. You can read about him in the Bible.
Right Divider
Body part
The Berean
Well-known member
By scientist I mean people who conduct actual scientific research. Dr. Brown would count. Ken Ham is not a creation scientist. He's a creation science writer and advocate but as far as I know he doesn't conduct any actual research. On a side note I met Ken Ham about 17 years ago at a dinner where he spoke. A very nice man.
Right Divider
Body part
Do you have a Googler? https://creation.com/creation-scientists
GoodCat
New member
The foremost scientists, who are believers, are not the ones listed.
Ken Ham Kenneth Alfred Ham is an Australian born Christian fundamentalist, young Earth creationist and apologist... He has but a bachelor's degree.
Walter T. Brown is a young Earth creationist, who is the director of his own ministry called the Center for Scientific Creation. He has a PhD from Mass Inst of Tech in mechanical engineering.
Hugh Ross is an old earth creationist, who started his own agency (www.reasons.org) Hugh Ross is a Canadian Astrophysicist, Christian apologist, and old Earth creationist. Ross obtained his Ph.D. in Astronomy from the University of Toronto
I personally am an old earth creationist - meaning that the scientific evidence for the age of the earth and universe is so strong. That does not mean that I think that humans have descended from apes or that human civilization is more than a few thousand years old.
I do not agree with theistic evolution, but I respect believers who hold to this position. In general, New Earth creationists are not fair to old earth believers. They way they put them down alarms me, and frankly turns me off. People should just be willing to listen to what other Christians think on this matter.
Oh, nuclear dating is very reliable, and there is no evidence that decay rates can or have changed over time.
Just wanted you guys to think about the fact that believers may have different views on creation, and still be devout believers, with a strong respect for God's Word... including yours truly. I'm old; I've spent thousands of hours reading, studying and memorizing God's Word. I do wholeheartedly believe it is inerrant and infallible. Some views:
Young Earth: Creation of everything happened from 6,000 to 10,000 years ago... There was no big bang, etc.
Day-Age: The 6 days of creation symbolically refer to periods of God's creation. Problem is they do not align with anything evolutionists hold to.
Progressive Creationism: Hugh Ross' position... similar to Day-age creationism, yet he has several different twists.
Framework: A view that the creation record in Genesis 1 & 2 is really a framework, which describes what God did, but not in chronological order. They note that the 1st 3 days describe forming, and days 4 - 6 describe filling what was formed in the first 3 days.
Theistic Evolution: A view that essentially God used evolution to accomplish creation.
I'm sure there are other views. My particular position is one of pan creationism... I'm not sure exactly how God did it, but I'm sure it will all pan out. There is much evidence of the age of the universe and the big bang as the starting point, as well as the age of the earth. The way I do view it is that God did not intend to try to give details of how precisely He created everything. He wanted it to be clear that there is but one God, and all things were created by Him. John 1: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things came into existence through Him and without Him nothing came into existence that has come into existence.
Note: Angels were created by God, yet nothing is said in Genesis about their creation.
BadDog (GoodCat)
Last edited:
Right Divider
Body part
Hugh Ross in only a creationist by definition of his own version of creationist. He rejects the Bible's version of creation and forces the Bible to agree with secular theories. Sorry, he's not really a creationist.
GoodCat
New member
That is your opinion. You could be taking the Bible in a way that God did not intend...
For example, when it says in Psalms that the trees clapped... should we assume that this literally happened? Should we not assume that this was spoken with hyperbole? Many view the Genesis creation record similarly. They do not think that it was intended to be a literal record, regarding times, many of the details, chronologically, etc..GC
Last edited:
What scientific evidence caused you to believe this? Can you explain it yourself? Or are you trusting what someone else tells you?
Right Divider
Body part
That's your opinion.That is your opinion. You could be taking the Bible in a way that God did not intend...
GC
I could be taking the Bible exactly the way God intended.
Last edited:
Right Divider
Body part
Duh... it's not that hard to tell when the Bible is using figurative language. That doesn't mean the whole thing is figurative.
Yes, when we clearly see figurative language... we should take it figuratively.
It matters not one bit what "many" view. Those many are wrong.
You need to support your argument. The natural understanding is that creation was literally six days. The rest of the Bible supports that position. Like this:
That passage does not allow any other understanding than six literal days.
Right Divider
Body part
Right Divider
Body part
Note: Granite was created by God, yet nothing is said in Genesis about its creation.
Bradley D
Well-known member
I found it interesting years ago that I learned from a physics professor that the universe continues to expand.
Space expands, and hence grows, by virtue of creating new space. ... In this way of thinking, the expansion of space is reflected in the distance between two such galaxies growing larger and larger over time. And that characterization of the expansion holds true whether the universe is finite or infinite.
Space expands, and hence grows, by virtue of creating new space. ... In this way of thinking, the expansion of space is reflected in the distance between two such galaxies growing larger and larger over time. And that characterization of the expansion holds true whether the universe is finite or infinite.
Ask Brian Greene: What Exactly Is the Universe Expanding Into ...
www.worldsciencefestival.com › 2011/11 › ask_brian_gr...
Right Divider
Body part
These sorts of ideas are highly speculative and based on very indirect types of "observations" and heavy reliance on models (which are, themselves, highly speculative).
The Bible speaks about God "stretching out the heavens". Those that believe otherwise see something different in the "observations".