I have been told that it is regrettable that I need science to justify my faith. True faith, it is said, needs no such evidence. In fact, some add, requiring scientific proof may even be a sin.

Of possessing a scientific background, a thirst for scientific knowledge, and an inquiring mind I plead guilty. However, readers who feel that I need scientific evidence to justify my faith have developed an erroneous opinion of me. Nothing could be further from the truth. Although I use science to advance the "cause" and the legitimacy of the Bible, that does not necessarily mean that my faith is derived from scientific validation of the Bible.


"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age." - (Matthew 28:19-20 NIV)

My book and this webpage are apologetic tools aimed at individuals with scientific backgrounds and those who hold science in very high regard. Quite often these people do not accept the existence of God or the legitimacy of the Bible because they believe erroneously that science has proven the errancy of the Bible. In my book, it is my hope to demonstrate that Genesis 1:1-2:4 is actually in harmony with modern scientific theory. With my articles and articles written by others, I hope to demonstrate further that science and the Bible are not in conflict.

There are many way to bring people to God. Sermons, tent revivals, music, pamphlets, church groups, books, and religious movies are some common ways that this goal is accomplished. I believe that using science can provide us with another method of legitimizing the Bible and bringing people to God. Since my background is in science, I feel that if I can touch people through science then that only advances our cause. Doesn't our Lord, Jesus, require this of us? When He gave His disciples the responsibility of fulfilling the Great Commission, wouldn't that include learned men and women with scientific backgrounds?

Paul gives us an excellent example of how Disciples should spread the word.

Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings. - (1 Corinthians 9:19-23 NIV)

It is clear that the Word must be spread to ALL of humanity, and we must use all peaceful means to achieve this. Since scientists would be included in this goal, we are virtually required to find ways to reach them.


Some argue that the Bible's holy nature - written by authors inspired by God - is sufficient proof of its validity. They need no further evidence - science or otherwise - to justify or enhance their faith. I disagree with that opinion.

Virtually every one of us requires some evidence - scientific, historical, or archaeological - to support the legitimacy of the Bible. If the New Testament declared that Jesus lived in Atlantis, and it was the Atlantisians who had put Him to death, people would rightfully be skeptical of the story. If the early Christian writers stated such things I sincerely doubt that the Gospel would have spread, since the historical evidence would be questioned. The fact that we know the Roman Empire ruled Palestine at the time the Bible said it did, that Pontius Pilate and King Herod all ruled during the time the Bible claims helps legitimize its authenticity. If the Bible claimed that Alexander the Great had put Jesus to death in 33 A.D. people would have questioned its accuracy immediately, since Alexander died centuries before Jesus was born. The Good News would not have spread.

The fact that the Bible has been shown to be so historically accurate is one of the reasons it has stood the test of time. Christian historians, archaeologists, geologists, sociologists, and other scientists have all provided apologetic material throughout the centuries to help justify man's acceptance of its holiness. Without SOME evidence supporting its truthfulness the Bible would be just another book claiming to be the word of God.

Each of us then - by our own human nature - requires some level of corroborative evidence before we accept the truthfulness of the Bible - or anything for that matter. I think that very few of us would just blindly accept the Bible without such evidence.

My book demonstrates that one piece of the Bible - Genesis 1:1-2:4 - can be harmonized with modern scientific beliefs. The articles on this webpage further illustrate the harmony between the Bible and science. My faith has not been demonstratively enhanced by any of this literature. And if science one day declares that the science the Bible employs is inaccurate my faith will not diminish.

In the meantime, I see nothing wrong with testing the scientific validity of the Bible. Its words have passed the test of time. It has proven to be accurate even when scholars in the past have declared its claims to be inaccurate. Science as an apologetic tool is merely another method whereby we spread the Good Word and the legitimacy of the Bible. Let us keep an open mind then on using scientific theory to achieve the Great Commission. Let us be bold and put the Bible to the rigorous tests of science, knowing that such tests can only strengthen its legitimacy. Finally, let us do what our beloved brother Paul once suggested:

Test everything. Hold on to the good. - (1 Thessalonians 5:21 NIV)

It's the Biblical Creation versus Science in The Theory of Creation! The Theory of Creation - A Biblical Creation book