Creationism - National Center for Science Education

If the words of the Great Book are not in full accord with all known fact, then we have been mistaken in
calling it the Word of God. We use the word ‘fact’ in its accepted meaning, as distinct from theory and
unproved hypotheses. our main objection to the pseudoscientific philosophy of this present generation is
that it manifests an amazing willilngness to surrender the eternal verity of God’s revelation for the
unfounded theories propounded by men who are utterly without ability to prove their wild imaginings. And
science, we must repeat, is a correlated body of absolute knowledge.
In Modern Science and the Genesis Record, written the following year, Rimmer declared
that:
even if we view the first chapter of Genesis as a theory only, it is at least a reasonable theory and may be
scientifically adopted as a working hypothesis. On the other hand, the alternate theory, that of evolution, is
utterly discredited scientifically. We do not advance the first chapter of Genesis as a theory, however, but
boldly contend that it is a scientific record of absolute facts. [1937:249]
Here we see an anticipation of the current “creation-science” “two-model” argument: that
“evolution-science” and “creation-science” are both scientific theories or “models” of
equal validity (though of course creationism is true).
James Lee Martin stated that the purpose of his 1938 book Monkey Mileage from
Amoeba to Man was to lead open-minded searchers of the
origin of matter and Man into those channels of Thought and Reason that lead on beyond where Science
ends to where Faith in a Creator of All Things begins. Our research to that end may be scientific, but
Science itself can deal only with facts reduced to immutable law.
The fact that Darwinian theory has been modified is for Martin “conclusive proof that
Darwin was theorizing rather than dealing with established facts; because a fact once
established as such remains unimpeachably a truth” (1938:46).
Therefore, Stand (1946) by Wilbur N. Smith, subtitled “A Plea for a Vigorous
Apologetic in the Present Crisis of Evangelical Christianity,” includes the assertion that
“the facts of history, and the facts of science, are not on the side of agnosticism and
atheism, but on the side of Christian truth, and that our faith is definitely not contradicted
by facts, but is opposed only by the theories of men...”
In Evolution and the Bible (undated but written in the 1920s), A.I. Brown
explains:
The mistake of many writes and speakers is that they confuse evolution with science. Evolution has no
claim whatever to be called science, because it is nothing more than a philosophy. A certain school of
scientists have by vociferous and dogmatic utterances, endeavored to confer upon it the dignity of proven
facts, so that the idea has become more or less fixed in many minds, notwithstanding the almost total
absence of corroborative evidence. [nd:2]
Scientific Creationism, written by the Institute for Creation Research under the
direction of Henry Morris, and widely considered the most authoritative presentation of
modern creation-science, states that “There is not the slightest possibility that the facts of
science can contradict the Bible” (1974:15). Morris is trying to explain here that even
though the “scientific creationism” he presents contains no biblical references, this does
not mean that it is considered more reliable than “biblical creationism.” “To the contrary,
it is precisely because Biblical revelation is absolutely authoritative and perspicuous that
the scientific facts, rightly interpreted, will give the same testimony as that of Scripture.”