How’d we Arrive at the Biblical Canon

No, not that kind of cannon!

I had a lot of question about the collection of books we call the Holy Bible. The Bible is supposed to be inspired, so why did men decide which books to include? Who exactly decided this anyway? And why are the Catholic and Protestant Bibles different? So I did some research and found a lot of answers.

A canon, to begin with, is an authoritative collection of literature. In this case, the biblical canon includes books and letters widely regarded as the revelation of God’s ultimate truth. It is held by Christians as the living, unchanging and final Word of God, inspired and preserved by God himself and applicable for all situations and all time. I don’t have any trouble believing that God could have orchestrated such a collection. He is God, after all. But I needed solid reasoning behind why these books are acceptable and others are not. So I did some research of my own, and I am pleased to have found that inclusion was based on very logical grounds.

Who decided which books would be included in the Bible?

Early Christian leaders were actually Jewish rabbis. Jesus Christ was Jewish, and this new religion was born out of the ancient one. It wasn’t really a new religion at all, if you understand the correlation between Old and New Testaments, rather a fulfilling of the old. But as many Jews didn’t agree that Christ was truly the Messiah, Judaism and Christianity are today held as two separate religions. Nevertheless, the first church authorities were Jews, the men who walked and talked with and learned under Jesus. These were the men who heard his words, recorded them, and taught them to others. Their combined message was incredibly consistent. It was this consistency and first-hand experience that prompted their books and letters to be universally regarded as the authority among early leaders. Theirs was, in essence, the message preached by Christ.

As time passed, the church grew and spread and Gentiles took up leadership in their own congregations, heresies began to arise. There came into existence documents claiming new revelation, new doctrine. The need for a cohesive, authoritative collection (canon) became apparent. So a variety of councils were held in the first four centuries after Christ to decide which literature should be included.

What criteria were used to determine inclusion?

At the time these leaders met, the Old Testament scriptures were firmly established and widely accepted. It was primarily the New Testament collection they were debating. A variety of factors were used to decide which documents could be considered authoritative of church doctrine and added to biblical canon and which could not. Was the book written by an apostle or someone with a close association to them? (In other words, did they a have proper first-hand witness?) Were they consistent in their message? Did they contain high moral and spiritual values? Were they widely accepted by the early church? Did they contain errors?

This process of evaluation is very mindful of the methods scholars use today to determine the authenticity of historical literature, or even how testimony is evaluated in a legal case. New Testament scripture was held to a high standard, and if any document could not pass muster, it was discarded. In essence, this process whittled down the selection to only the books that were consistent with the message of Jesus Christ. As I’m already fully convinced of his deity, I’d say that’s a pretty reliable basis.

But what about the Old Testament? Just because they were already established, do we simply takes those books on faith? Not at all. They had to meet similar criteria. Were the authors prophets or known men of God? Are their words without error? Have prophecies been confirmed? Have miraculous events verified the authors? Are they consistent in their messages?  The Old Testament books were reaffirmed by the early church councils. In fact, the Old Testament has been tested and reaffirmed much longer than the New Testament!

So why do Catholic and Protestant Bibles differ?

The answer to this question is quite simple and even political in nature. The books in question are called the Apocrypha. Though they are highly regarded, these books contain historical errors and inconsistencies in doctrine.

Over time the church grew in political power and added to its beliefs, traditions and doctrines. We’re all familiar with Calvin and Luther and the Protestant Reformation that took place in the 1500′s to combat this drift. As a direct result of the Reformation, the Catholic Church officially canonized the Apocrypha because it supports Catholic beliefs and practices that are not in agreement with the original canon (like praying to saints, giving alms as atonement, etc.). But the books of the Apocrypha do not measure up to a stringent evaluation process. A whole study could be done on the their shortcomings. My examination wasn’t as thorough as the ones done by fourth century councils who originally rejected them, but I gleaned enough to agree, they don’t jive with the most reliable recordings of the teachings of Christ.

Is the Protestant canon free of debate?

No. As you’ve already seen, opinions are split on the Apocrypha. Others have debated Esther and Song of Solomon. Luther himself wanted to remove Hebrews from the canon. The debates will probably endure as long as the text, and I think that’s a good thing. Yet the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments have been consistently reaffirmed by the majority of scholars despite rigorous testing by generation after generation. Yes, the canon has been assembled by men, but the consistent message they preach originated with God. It’s almost like men discovered the canon.

I have been reassured by my study, as unscholarly and brief as it may seem to others who have gone before me, that the books of the biblical canon are reliable. And I’m convinced that God intended that we use our brains to discover what literature is consistent, accurate and authoritative. And I think God had his hand inspiring and guiding all of it.

Noah Zarc, by D. Robert Pease, 2011, Book Review

For those of you who read my children’s book review blog, Bookworm Blather, you may have seen this post on Monday.  Rarely do I have content that crosses over the line between mainstream children’s literature and religion, but this book has appeal enough for both genres.  Besides, I loved the way it fit in so nicely with my current study of origins and the Flood, which I’ve been posting about a lot lately.  Take a look…

One thousand plus years into the future of our solar system, Earth has been destroyed. People now live on Mars and Venus, fly around in the coolest space ships, and utilize amazing technology (like holopads, personal flying thermsuits, chef-bots that speak with French accents, and neuro implants). They’ve even perfected time travel. But, unfortunately, all animal life has been destroyed in the great Cataclysm.

Enter the Zarc family. Hannah and Noah Sr. are scientists in charge of a government sanctioned project to rescue extinct animal populations and resettle them on the slowly recovering Earth. They do this by traveling back in time, capturing a male and female of each species, and holding them within the Animal Rescue Cruiser (ARC) until their natural habitats can sustain them on Earth. Twelve-year-old Noah Zarc, a paraplegic and incredible space pilot, is a vital part of this family program. Not everyone, however, is excited about the repopulation efforts, and some will go to any lengths to stop it.

Futuristic sci-fi is not usually my first choice, but this spin on Noah’s ark looked so intriguing I had to download it. I’m glad I did. Not only is it one of the most original stories I’ve read recently, it’s well-written, entertaining, sometimes unpredictable, and just plain fun. It’s also squeaky clean, totally appropriate for middle-graders as young as eight, though I’d probably rate it at about a fifth grade reading level.

One thing that I really appreciated about this book was the worldview from which it was written. I expected the usual naturalistic approach. You know, one more repetition of the we-all-evolved, save-the-earth mantra of modern science. But this story was refreshingly open-minded. It did have one reference to people “evolving past” something, but it also spoke again and again of creation, and it gave cave people high intelligence. And my favorite, my absolute favorite statement it made was that the earth – this uniquely life-supporting planet – was MADE FOR PEOPLE. For you see, the Poligarchy (the solar system government), in an effort keep power, will not allow people to repopulate the earth, only animals. Not even when people are dying on Venus. This adds a unique element of sympathy for the antagonist. It also counters the real-life Green Movement that sometimes erroneously places greater importance on our planet rather than on the people for whom the earth was made.

Kudos on an excellent first novel, Mr. Pease!  It would be a worthwhile purchase even if it wasn’t only 2.99 on Amazon.  And in honor of a clean, kid-friendly read, I’m bestowing on Noah Zarc the first ever Bookworm Blather Squeaky Award!

Mr. Pease has a second Noah Zarc novel (Cataclysm) coming out this year. Jump onto his website for more information. He can also be found on Twitter, Facebook, and his blog.

Read my 5-Q Interview with Noah Zarc author, D. Robert Pease.

Prophecy – The Numbers Don’t Lie

Photo by Ulner at Photoxpress

Christianity is not a blind faith. It’s supported by a good deal of evidence. Last time, I laid out some of the reasons I believe Jesus truly is the Son of God. Here’s another big one: 300+ prophecies. I’ve found a range of actual numbers, from 365-456, as given by different different scholars and organizations. I’ve read many of them for myself, and I admit some can get pretty obscure, but the fact remains, there are at least 365 prophecies that everybody agrees on. That’s a pretty impressive number.

Let’s back up. Messianic prophecies were given throughout the Old Testament so we would recognize the Messiah when he came. Some told what he would do, some described his birth, others revealed what would happen to him at the hands of others. Many are details that could in no way be manipulated by a counterfeit. And all of them were foretold between 400 and 1,000 years before Christ was born. Four hundred years! That’s like making a predictions about the governor of Michigan in 2512!

How can we know they were written that long ago? Maybe someone just wrote them down after-the-fact. Three words: Dead Sea Scrolls. These ancient documents found in the 1940′s and 50′s are widely believed to date back two centuries before Christ’s birth. They not only verify the accuracy of biblical transcription, but they also prove the Messianic prophecies were written long before Jesus was actually born.

Now the really cool part. Jesus fulfilled them all! That adds some veracity to the claims he made about Himself, doesn’t it?

I’m not going to get into the chapter and verse of individual prophecies. I’ll let you look them up for yourself. There are some excellent websites that present these much better than I could. Here’s one, and here’s another. I am, however, going to relate an astounding statistic concerning the scientific probability that Jesus could fulfill multiple prophecies.

Peter Stoner, Professor Emeritus of Science at Westmont College, with the help of 600 students, worked out the probability that one man could fulfill only eight prophecies. His numbers were widely reviewed by scientists and skeptics alike and found to be sound. The chance he came up with? One in 10 to the 17th power. That’s a one with seventeen zeros. To help us wrap our brains around that figure, he provided this analogy:

“Suppose that we take 10^17 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They’ll cover all of the state two feet deep. Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would’ve had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man, from their day to the present time, providing they wrote them in their own wisdom.”

You have to admit, those are pretty incredible odds. Almost hints at some intelligent choreography, doesn’t it?

The reason why prophecy is an indication of the divine authorship of the Scriptures, and hence a testimony to the trustworthiness of the Message of the Scriptures, is because of the minute probability of fulfillment. – David Williams, mathematician

Why Do I Believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God?

I’ve been sorting through some of the foundations of my faith, identifying them and putting them into words. Writing always helps me get a handle on things, and if one is going to stake her life to a belief, I think she ought to have a pretty good handle on it. So I’m in the process of some internal spring cleaning, sorting and proving and tucking back away.

Christ’s Claims

One of the basic tenets of my faith is that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. Why? Well, first of all, because he said his is! Do I believe everyone who makes that claim? Of course not. So why do I believe this one? I guess you have to look at the whole package.

Jesus Christ made it abundantly clear who He thought He was. Read through the book of John and you’ll see what I mean. He believed He was the Messiah sent by God to provide atonement for the sin of mankind. That’s a pretty huge claim. And there are only three logical responses to it. Either Christ was a liar, or He was crazy, or He was who He said He was.

If you read the rest of the gospels, you’ll see right away that the first option just doesn’t jive. Christ preached against lying and for a moral lifestyle based on God’s law. It makes no sense that He would lie. Nor would he sacrifice His life for a lie. And you can’t argue that He was simply killed. He didn’t have to enter Jerusalem where it was widely known the religious establishment was plotting against Him. But He did. He could have made a very good case for Himself before Pilate, but He didn’t. He chose to die. Would a man die for a lie? That’s ridiculous.

So could He have been crazy? A crazy man might die for believing a falsehood. But that doesn’t make sense either. Jesus profoundly influenced the world with his teaching and his life. His ideas are succinct, wise, and highly regarded universally. Is this in keeping with an unsound mind? Did his actions at all imply imbalance? I just don’t buy it.

That leaves only one option. Jesus Christ was who He said He was.

Eleven Good Reasons

A second reason I believe Jesus is the Son of God is the change that occurred in His followers. Jesus chose twelve young men to be his disciples, and you have to admit they weren’t too impressive. When Jesus was teaching, they always seemed to miss the mark. They argued among themselves. They asked ridiculous questions. And they turned out to be real cowards when Christ was arrested.

But after Christ’s death, that all changed. These men, with the exception of Judas, became vocal proponents for Christ’s message. They took on the Jewish leaders. They traveled to foreign lands. They won converts, started churches, bucked established pagan religions, endured jail time, suffered beatings, and according to tradition, all of them but John died for their faith.

These guys firmly believed Christ’s message. Something substantial made them change. But what? How’d they go from coward to martyr?

The Resurrection

The eleven remaining disciples were witness to the most astonishing event in history, Christ’s resurrection. It’s the number one reason I believe Jesus is the Son of God. It changes everything. It verifies Christ’s claim, and it forms the substance of the Christian religion. In it are tied up faith, love, forgiveness, atonement, and hope through this conquering of death. But it’s so crazy! So unprecedented! So unnatural! Can it really be true?

Would the cowardly disciples give their lives if it wasn’t?

But aside from the change in these witnesses, there are other things that convince me that, no, the Resurrection was not a hoax. Since Jesus had said ahead of time that he would rise from the dead, the Jewish religious leaders took precautions. They wanted to nip that idea in the bud. They wanted Christ’s body firmly in the ground as proof that he was a counterfeit, so they asked for Roman soldiers to guard the tomb.

These soldiers were the most well-trained, effective army in the world. They were career soldiers, hardened men who didn’t flinch in battle. No one was getting by them. Yet something happened. They scattered. They ran away frightened. What could cause this but a supernatural event? Even an unlikely overpowering force of men wouldn’t send them scurrying but would cause a battle there’d be some record of. They simply scattered. Why?

And where was the body? If it was a hoax, wouldn’t the Jewish leaders move heaven and earth to lay hold of the body and squash rumors of a resurrection? But they couldn’t produce it.

And what about the hundreds of recorded witnesses who also claimed to see the risen Christ? Could this all be false? Is it all a hoax? If so, it’s the most elaborate, perfect one in the history of men. But I don’t think it’s a hoax at all. I think the Resurrection is the pivotal moment in which God displayed His power. It’s the centerpiece of a cohesive, premeditated plan. I think Jesus really was who He said He was.

I willingly admit much of my material today was taken from Josh McDowell’s book, More Than a Carpenter. I read it many years ago, but I did not reread it before writing this post. I wanted to take stock of the ideas and reasons I’ve assimilated as my own. I plan to reread it now, and I highly recommend it for anyone who wants more information on this subject. It has so much more content than my little post.

Dinosaurs for Kids, by Ken Ham, 2009, Book Review

Like most kids their ages, my boys are fascinated by dinosaurs. You have to admit, there’s an air of mystery and horror surrounding these monsters of the past. What were they like? What was their world like? What happened to them? Secular scientists have supplied their version of the answers to these questions, but they are answers that don’t jive with my belief in Creation as described in the Bible. So it was to creation scientists that I turned for information to teach my kids about dinos. And I discovered this book.

It’s amazing! Full of huge, full-color illustrations and chock full of easily digestible information, Dinosaurs for Kids is a real kid-pleaser. And a mom-pleaser. To quote from the book, “When trying to solve the mysteries of these mighty dinosaurs, it is important to remember to start with the truth found in the Bible.” Author Ken Ham takes the same scientific evidence on which scientists base evolution and interprets it in a way complimentary to what God says.

Within, he discusses seven ages of dinosaurs:

Age 1 – Formed: The creation of dinosaurs and the rest of the world—including humans—in six days.

Age 2 – Fearless: For a time before sin entered the world, the animals and people lived together without fear and without aggression.

Age 3 – Fallen:  After man sinned, everything changed. Death entered the world.

Age 4 – Flood:  The time when most fossils were formed.

Age 5 – Faded:  The age when dinosaurs died out and became extinct, just as animals still go extinct today.

Age 6 – Found:  Man has only rediscovered dinosaurs in the last couple hundred years.

Age 7 – Fiction:  Today, scientist have created untrue stories about dinosaurs living millions of years ago.

In Dinosaurs for Kids, Mr. Ham has provided a logical, scientific, biblical explanation for the mysteries surrounding these amazing animals. It really isn’t that much of a mystery if you break down the evidence according to the history God has recorded for us in his Word. This book has been a huge read-aloud hit at our house, and I’m so pleased at not having to sift through lots of evolution propaganda.  I’d recommend it for ages 6-13 and probably place it at a fourth to fifth grade independent reading level.

 

Water and Fire

Flickr image by 111 Emergency.

Nope, I’m not really a doomsday prophet.  I don’t predict comets colliding with Earth or end-of-the-world dates. But when the Bible speaks, I listen, and it has much to say about a past catastrophe (the Flood, which I’ve been studying lately – can ya tell?) and some to say about a coming judgement.  Here’s text taken from 2 Peter 3: 4-7 (NIV):

“(Scoffers/unbelievers say) ‘Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.’  But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water.  By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.  By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.”

This passage is talking about the Great Flood which, according to Genesis 6:5-7, was sent as a judgement because “The Lord saw how great man’s wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.”  The Flood follows so quickly after Creation in the Bible that it seems only about forty-two people should have been born yet, but in actuality, over a thousand years transpired.  During that time, mankind spread out and built a thriving civilization, one that some speculate could have been only centuries away from an industrial revolution.  Remember, the first people were created perfect, lived an extremely long time, were given talents and intelligence, and the degenerating effects of sin hadn’t been in effect for very long yet (unlike today).  The Flood wiped out civilization BIG TIME.  And the Bible says it was because mankind turned away from God.

Fast forward.  Civilization has been rebuilt, technology is incredible, mankind is thriving, and our future seems amazingly limitless.  However, scientific theories have undermined a general belief in God, the Flood has been explained away (remember Peter’s “they deliberately forget” statement?), right and wrong have become debatable, and no one really believes that God (if He’s real) will destroy the world by fire.

Yet it’s written there in 2 Peter.

We can argue about whether such complete destruction is ethical, or if God has the right to do such a thing. We can debate the authenticity of scripture and the probability (or not) that God exists.  We can make up our own minds, choose our own beliefs, and live exactly as we choose.  But in a way, we’re like ants squabbling beneath a kid with a magnifying glass.

I, for one, would rather befriend the kid.

So Many New Movies!

So, you’ve probably figured I’m anticipating the release of the new Hunger Games movie on March 23, especially if you’ve read my book blog. I have to share the trailer. UGH!  Doesn’t it just get you when Katniss volunteers to take her sister’s place?  It’s a must-see. If you haven’t read the books, DO IT!  

But two more movies have popped up on my radar, both of which also release in March. If you haven’t heard of this one, I encourage you to watch the trailer for October Baby. It looks amazing. I believe it’s put out by the same folks who brought us Fireproof and Courageous. It also starts playing on March 23, 2012.

And finally, the ever-endearing Kirk Cameron has a brand new documentary titled Monumental releasing on March 30. It looks to be a journey to a variety of historical sites important in the creation of America and a look into the Christian foundation on which our nation was built. A foundation that has been forgotten and rewritten. Watch the trailer here. Now pick one of these fabulous films and go see it!

The Blood of Lambs, by Kamal Saleem, 2009, Book Review

If you believe Islam is a peaceful religion, read this book.  If you don’t think radical Muslims are a serious threat to America, read this.  Let a former Muslim Brotherhood terrorist convince you otherwise.   Islam is in America, and it’s growing, and while only 10 percent of Muslims may be considered “radical,” even the seemingly peaceful ones are dancing in the streets when Israel or America suffers a defeat.  Remember 9/11?  Islam is looking to rule the world by Sharia law.  It’s called Omma.  Niceties like freedom, love and neighbors mean nothing.  Islam thrives on terror, power, hatred and lies.  It’s in their book.  When an agenda is written out for us, we should take a lesson from history (Mein Kampf, anyone?) and educate ourselves before it is carried out.

Let’s consider some of the basic tenants of Islam, taken right from the Koran and being taught to children at every devout Muslim table, even “peaceful” ones:

Sura 9:5 “Fight and slay the pagans wherever you find them.”

Sura 2:191 “Kill the disbelievers wherever you find them.”

Sura 9:123 “Murder them and treat them harshly.”

Sura 9:5 “Fight and slay the pagans, seize them, harass them, and lie in wait for them with every trick.”

Sura 8:12 “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads.”

 

It’s a friendly, peaceful religion, indeed, when a drop of infidel blood will save 70 family members from hell.  Or when self-sacrifice earns paradise and seventy-two virgins.  Or when you kill a Jew so your right hand will “light up before the throne of Allah, and all his heavenly host will celebrate.”  Or when the enemy’s land and women and children rightfully belong to Muslims to take and use as they will.  Muslim children all over the world are being brainwashed to hate, to attack, to die.  It’s the foundation of their religion.  And did I mention Al toquiah – the doctrine of lying to your enemy for the sake of Islam?  So, are we to believe what Muslim interest groups claim about their peaceful nature?  Quite frankly, I don’t.

Now let’s consider Islamic treatment of women, where a man has complete ownership of his wife.  He may beat her at leisure, divorce her with a word; her testimony is nearly worthless in court.  She may not be educated beyond twelfth grade.  No part of her body may be seen in public besides her eyes, because “women are not strong.  They bring sin to the house.”  Therefore, women must be subjugated completely to a man’s will.  And if a man suspects a wife or daughter of not aligning completely with the laws of Islam, they may dispose of that female in an “honor killing.”  It happens all the time in the Middle East.  It’s happening here.  Google it.  This is Sharia law.

So as Christians, how do we proceed?  I’d say, on an individual basis, treat Muslims with love and respect and kindness.  But on every level of government, proceed with eyes wide open to the motive behind their demands, and act in every single instance for the good of America.  Do not be deceived.

Is Carbon Dating Reliable?

Evolutionary scientists use a method called carbon dating to determine how old a fossil is.  They use the results they get to support their theory that the earth is millions and millions of years old.  But is their method reliable?  Let’s check out the basics:

Carbon dating uses the Carbon-14 isotope.  Because it’s radioactive, C-14 loses neutrons and turns into N-14 at a constant rate, measured in half-lives.  A half-life simply refers to the time it takes for half a radioactive element to disappear from the fossil.  The half-life for C-14 is 5,730 years.   It is therefore presumed that we can figure out how old a fossil is based on how muc C-14 is left in it.

However, to figure this out irrefuteably, three things must be known for the equasion:  the rate of decay (half-life), got it; the amount of C-14 presently in the fossil, got it; and the amount of C-14 in the organism when it died, um, DON’T have it.  Instead of throwing this equasion to the wind, however, scientists make an assumption and call their resulting findings fact.  Sorry, guys, there’s a problem with that.

Let’s look at the science behind the assumption.  To determine how much C-14 was present when an organism died, scientists look at how much C-12 the fossil contains.  C-12 is an isotope of Carbon that does NOT decay.  So, if it can be determined what the ratio of C-14 to C-12 was, it can be presumed how much C-14 was in an organism when it died.  So, scientists assume  that the present-day ratio of C-14 and C-12 has always been a constant ratio, and on this assumption they complete their formula.   That this ration has always been constant, however, cannot be proven.  In fact, there’s good evidence the ratio fluxuates, because the amount of C-14 present in the atmosphere fluxuates.

At any time, the amount of C-14 present in living organisms is equal to the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere, because that is where it comes from.   For the C-14 to C-12 ratio to stay constant, the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere must also stay constant.  That means the intake and output must be equal all the time.  But are intake and output constant?   To decide that, one must understand where it comes from and where it goes.

C-14 is constantly being created as cosmic rays from outer space smash into atoms in earth’s atmosphere.   For a constant rate to be achieved, the earth’s magnetic field must remain constant, yet this protective barrier has grown measureably weaker since 1845, when the first measurements were taken.   Ten percent weaker, in fact, which means more radiation is being permitted through the atmosphere, and more C-14 is being created.  And if the atmosphere contained smaller amounts of C-14 in the past, the resulting ages given to fossils are over-inflated.

How about output?  C-14 disappears from the atmosphere when it’s absorbed into living things.  For a constant rate of output, a constant rate of organisms (including vegetation) must be assumed.  But has earth always had today’s amount of vegetation?  Or in the past, could it have had more?  More vegetation would do two things: absorb more C-14 from the atmosphere thereby lowering the ratio; AND it would absorb at a lower rate per organism because of a greater number of organisms (like pouring water into 5 pails instead of three).   This would further inflate the ages given to fossils.

So it can be seen that the assumption upon which scientists base Carbon dating can result in arguable data.  Take their millions of years with a grain of salt.  They want their data to support their theory.  However, when the weakening magnetic field and a dwindling supply of vegetation (“save the rain forests,” remember?) are taken into consideration, the numbers support a much younger earth.

Three Types of Science

Nowadays, people tend to think science is science, infallible and absolute. Not true. There are actually three types of science, and much of what is taken as concrete fact is actually based on assumption.

Don’t get me wrong. I agree science has given us concrete facts. These are based on science that is observable and repeatable. I won’t argue with anyone who says the Earth revolves around the Sun. We can watch it happen the same year after year after year. This is operational science. It happens in the PRESENT and can be proven beyond debate.  True science by its nature, by its very definition, must be repeatable and observable.

Historical science can also be accepted as fact, though in a more limited capacity, because it cannot be repeated. Not one person alive today has first-hand knowledge of the American Civil War, but it is accepted unquestionably because it has been credibly recorded in a variety of ways by those who were there. It happened in the PAST, but it has been observed and added to mankind’s collective factual knowledge.

But events that took place in the PAST which were not observed and recorded can only be speculated about. This is called origins science, and it’s based on theories.  Don’t mistake them for facts. This third type of science cannot be proven absolutely.  Scientists make their best guesses as to what happened and when it happened based on the evidence they find; however, evidence is open to interpretation. Two people might have vastly different ideas about what the same bit of evidence suggests. For example, evolutionary scientists believe the fossil record is evidence for millions of years of history. Creationist scientists believe it to be evidence for a worldwide flood. Notice I used the word believe in both cases. There is a great amount of faith behind both. They must be taken on faith, because both of these ideas are theories - assumptions. They cannot be proven beyond doubt, because they cannot be repeated and observed.

I cannot scientifically prove to anyone my beliefs, theories and assumptions about the events of the past. However, neither can anyone scientifically prove to me that their beliefs, theories and assumptions about these same events are more true than mine.  On both counts, it is a matter of faith.