Creation As Science P4

http://www.reasons.org/

I am deeply committed to the authority of the Scriptures and their inspiration by God. I do not condemn those who prefer a young-earth interpretation of Genesis, and I expect the same. We are all searching for understanding. We must have room for the interplay of different views.

I support the ministry of Astrophysicist Dr Hugh Ross, Reasons to Believe. The very best modern science is in agreement with the Bible. Atheism is irrational in light of the evidence against it.

He presents a testable scientific model for divine creation by the God of the bible and makes predictions based on that model. He also shows why the evidence dismisses abiogenesis & panspermia entirely and supports the biblical creation account. Even down to the DNA bottleneck at Noah and family.

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Creationism
• Evolution
• Hugh Ross
• Reasons to Believe
• Atheism
• Abiogenesis
• Panspermia
• Science
• God
• Cosmology
• Astronomy
• Darwinism
• Biology
• Jesus

[C0nc0rdance]

Please don't be offended, but I think it's a shame that believers need scientific evidence to support their faith. It seems like bad theology.

If you have faith in God, you don't need evidence to support it. That's a much more honest position, because it can't be challenged.

All of this "Reasons to Believe" has the potential to seriously backfire and end up weakening faith, making it dependent on material observation.

Just a thought.