Back Contents Next

An Awful Lot of Science Is Not Wearing Any Clothes

In a better world, we would now be done. But the very atmosphere as it were is polluted by Satan’s lies. Thus, to complete this book, we need to give some attention to the lies and refute them. Unlike many other books on six-day creation, we will not trouble to debate with the scientists,49 but simply and easily show that the splendid clothing of their theories of origin is only imaginary. This is much easier than it might seem at first. There are two reasons for this, as will become clearer later. First, there will be no pretended neutrality as though humans are in a position to judge God. The discussion will continue in the light of Scripture and what every person knows deep down: the creation bears witness to God’s eternal power and divine nature and we must all give account to that Creator. More than that, this book primarily addresses six-day versus long-day creation; it thus speaks mainly to believers in Jesus Christ and His Word, and with that Sword of the Spirit, “We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ” (3 Corinthians 10:5).


Second, the larger and more majestic the house of cards, the easier it is to flatten it with a bit of sanctified common sense. This is saying nothing more than the bigger the target is, the easier it is to hit and the more weak points it has. The bigger and more complex the lie, the easier it is to find simple ways to destroy the lie with truth. For example, in Psalm 35:1921 and 41:510, David complains of slanders against him. These could have been when King Saul was persecuting David and it is likely Saul’s courtiers slandered David on multiple occasions. So far as we know, David did not debate with the accusers. He did demolish those slanders when he twice preserved Saul’s life in spite of having opportunity to kill him.


49There is no implication intended here to the effect that all scientists believe or think alike. It would just become a bit tedious to qualify the term each time with “who believe in long-day creationism, a Framework Hypothesis, Darwinism, evolution, Big-Bang cosmogony, and so on.” The author himself has a science degree and has worked in science.

Back Contents Next