BiblicalInsights.net

Jonathan Sarfati, in Refuting Compromise, makes an important observation and distinction.  He states, “It sounds very nice to say that God’s revelation in Scripture must agree with His revelation in nature.  But this overlooks a key difference between nature and the books of the Bible, that is, what constitutes the data in both domains.  Ross (Hugh Ross-DS) and CMI would agree that the propositions contained in the 66 canonical books of the Bible are facts of special revelation, but what are the facts of nature?  Nature is not propositional revelation, so it is not subject to objective hermeneutical principles.  Rather, in a study of nature (that is, science) propositions must be formulated from observations by interpreting them in a framework or paradigm.  This framework depends largely on the axioms, or starting assumptions of the scientist” (p. 41).
The Big Bang theory is not scientific truth.  In fact, within science itself there is a debate about origins.  “In his 1950 BBC radio series, The Nature of the Universe, Sir Fred Hoyle (1915-2001), mockingly called this idea the big bang (in doing so, he coined the phrase-DS), considering it preposterous.  Hoyle never wavered from this opinion.  In 1994, he wrote, “Big Bang cosmology refers to an epoch that cannot be reached by any form of astronomy and, in more than two decades, it has not produced a single successful prediction” (Sarfati, Refuting Compromise, pp. 150-151). Hoyle affirmed the steady state theory in contrast to the Big Bang theory.  We can confidently affirm that “science” itself is conflicted about the origins of the universe.  We affirm again, the Big Bang theory is not scientific truth.  Consequently, it is an egregious error to use the Big Bang theory in a superior way to the Scriptural account of creation given in Genesis 1.  When individuals attempt to change the interpretation of God’s Word (truth) to conform to “science” (the Big Bang theory), they fall into error.
Prof. Evelleen Richards, a non-creationist, states, “Science…is not so much concerned with truth as it is with consensus.  What counts as “truth” is what scientists can agree to count as truth at any particular moment in time..” (Ibid, p. 42).  For this very reason, “science” must never take precedence over Scripture.
This is one of the fundamental mistakes Nobie Stone makes in Genesis 1 and Lessons From Space (published by the Warren Christian Apologetics Center).  Stone attempts to use the Big Bang theory to compromise the Genesis account of creation and force interpretations on the text that cannot be supported by the lexical and grammatical features of the text.  Stone desires to compromise the biblical text with a scientific theory which is based on inferential science and not observational science.  He simply does not compare truth with truth and his efforts at compromise fail for this reason.