Is It Biblically Proper to Seek Evidence for Creation? | The Institute for Creation Research

 
Is It Biblically Proper to Seek Evidence for Creation?

The Institute for Creation Research has become known for its attention to research. It's important to recognize that we don't try to "prove the Bible." The Bible doesn't need our help. Whether or not there is evidence, the Bible is true! In our research we assume the Bible, and conduct our investigations in that framework. We interpret all historical data within the model of true history given in Scripture.

For instance, we do a lot of research in Grand Canyon, a huge scar in the earth gouged out by moving water. We go there with the firm conviction that the world-restructuring flood of Noah's day covered Arizona, and that its processes and aftereffects would have left their mark. We interpret the data in that light.

This is not a naïve stance. Everyone has a perspective. Evolutionary naturalism has become such a worldview and is unquestioningly used by its adherents in their interpretation of data. We feel that of the two broad viewpoints of history, creation is the better choice. The Bible and its teachings have proven to be trustworthy, and a solid foundation for our faith. It handles the data better, with no inconsistencies or contradictions.

Since the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, there is no need to fear putting it to the test (I Thessalonians 5:21). Francis Schaeffer used to declare the Bible to be "true Truth." It is absolutely accurate in all matters on which it touches, and the worldview it presents is applicable in all areas. Research can fill in the gaps in our knowledge, for the Bible doesn't give all the details. Furthermore, in the Dominion Mandate of Genesis 1:28, we (i.e., all representatives of mankind) are commanded to study creation, in order to use it wisely for man's good and God's glory. The Creator instructed Adam to "subdue [the earth]: and have dominion over [it]." Furthermore, He is pleased when we learn more of Him through research into what He has done and give Him the glory. Research can answer questions which might have arisen in the minds of Christians, remove obstacles to salvation in the path of non-Christians, and show the superiority of the Biblical way of thinking. It can and should do all these things.

Nevertheless, some Christians think otherwise. They feel that the Bible is beyond such investigation, and doesn't even need to be supported. They are offended that we attempt to demonstrate its accuracy, and chastise us for trying. While this may sound "spiritual," it differs from Christ's example.

After His resurrection, He appeared to His disciples in the upper room, but Thomas was not present (John 20:24). When told by the others that they had seen the risen Lord, Thomas insisted that he needed to see the evidence. "Except I shall see in His hands the print of the nails . . . I will not believe" (v.25). A few days later He again appeared. This time Thomas was present. Did Jesus upbraid him for his need for evidence? Not at all. He graciously invited Thomas to come and see the scars. The evidence was there, and his faith was well placed. Throughout Scripture we find God revealing Himself and validating the truth with evidence. Still, He requires faith, but that faith is a reasonable faith, based soundly on demonstrable fact.

* Dr. John Morris is President of ICR.

Cite this article: John D. Morris, Ph.D. 2005. Is It Biblically Proper to Seek Evidence for Creation?. Acts & Facts. 34 (6).

The Latest
NEWS
Alive with Christ
“Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death...

NEWS
April 2026 Wallpaper
"Ask the Lord for rain in the time of the latter rain. The Lord will make flashing clouds; He will give them showers of rain, Grass in the field...

NEWS
Does Earth Have a Twin?
A possible Earth-like planet 146 light-years away has recently been discovered by citizen scientists.1 The evolutionary community is cautiously...

NEWS
Giant Virus, Big Claims: Does Ushikuvirus Explain Complex Life?
A newly discovered giant virus called ushikuvirus has been described by conventional scientists as a possible clue to how complex cells evolved. But...

NEWS
Conventional Science Still Struggling to Exhume the Great Unconformity
The book of Genesis tells us about a global flood that occurred about 4,500 years ago, an event that began with the bursting of the fountains of the...

NEWS
Designed to Handle Oxygen: Lessons from Asgard Archaea
Oxygen gives cells energy. But oxygen can also harm cells. Any organism that uses oxygen must both harness the power and protect itself against being...

NEWS
New Species of Spinosaurus Supports Flood Catastrophe
Many people are fascinated with dinosaur discoveries—a new fossil, a new species, and the impressive size. But whenever we read a news article,...

NEWS
Adaptation Without Innovation: Rethinking Mutations and Design
What if mutations that seem helpful today become harmful tomorrow? That question sits at the center of a new genetics study published in Nature Ecology...

NEWS
More Soft Tissue in Archaeopteryx
Was the famous extinct fossil named Archaeopteryx a bird or an evolutionary link that led to birds? And how confident should scientists and others feel...

NEWS
The Lipstick Vine: Evidence of Designed Adaption
In their desire to validate the questionable case for evolution, conventional biologists will appeal to local adaptation, variation, and ecological...