What is the relationship between Science and Scripture? Do they see the world the same? Or are they at odds with one another? A study of this world and a true understanding of authorial intent in Scripture demonstrates these two are not at odds but enjoy the same aim—the worship and glory of God.

Author Mike Walters¹ thinks different as he states that “some claims and stories found in the Bible’s text have been undoubtedly disproven.” He offers six examples concerning how science has debunked the bible. Below are his claims followed by a corrected understanding.

1. Creationism vs. Evolution

Claim: Walters says, “Fossil records and genetic studies have both provided undeniable proof of common ancestry among different species - in other words, proof of evolution. While some religious people incorporate this into their beliefs, taking on a new view of “creationism,” the idea of a literal six-day creation has been thoroughly debunked.”

Response: The fossil record² does not support the theory of biological (or macro) evolution. The fossil record demonstrates two main things that actually capsize evolution—stasis and sudden appearance. Fossils do not show macro evolutionary stages of one animal forming into another. Rather, they appear suddenly and fully formed. “Darwin recognized this as a problem as well and wrote in On the Origin of Species, ‘Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain, and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be argued against my theory (Darwin, 280).’”³

On the other hand, the fossil record accords beautifully with Genesis 1. The Scripture states multiple times that God made everything according to its own kind (Gen. 1:11–12, 1:21, 1:25). Birds make birds. Fish make fish. People make people. Now, there is room for micro development (or micro evolution) within a species (for example dogs producing different breeds of dogs), but nowhere do we see reptiles turning into birds or monkeys turning into people (macro evolution).

Science and Scripture are not at odds but complement one another and join hands in giving glory to God as Creator.

2. The Great Flood vs. The Fossil Record

Claim: “Geology and paleontology - studies of the Earth and ancient life - have found absolutely no evidence to support the idea of a flood so large. Scientific studies of sedimentary layers and the fossil record suggest that numerous localized floods have occurred throughout history - but no floods big enough to wipe out the world’s entire population, contradicting the Bible’s claim of an immense flood encompassing the whole planet.”

Response: The sedimentary layers and the fossils found in them are not consistent around the globe as evolutionary models would have one believe. All over the globe discoveries show fossils that should be found in only one layer strangely found in another. How is that? The great flood explains that clearly. As the waters covered the earth and then settled, the fossils were dispersed and settled, and not always in an orderly manner. Sea Creatures have been found in rock layers on all the continents far above sea level; even “[f]ossilized shellfish are...found in the Himalayas.”⁴ Rather than denying the great flood of the Bible, evidence like this demonstrates the worldwide rising of the sea levels in accordance with the great flood.

Check out this informative video for more evidence and specific examples of a great flood (How Rock Layers & Fossils DISPROVE Evolution - YouTube).

3. Earth as the Center of the Universe vs. The Sun as the Center

Claim: “Once upon a time, the belief that the Earth is the center of the universe was very mainstream. It’s known as the “geocentric model” and was championed by religious people and scientists alike for many, many years.”

Response: There is not much to discuss here as the Bible doesn’t even make the claim that the earth is the center of the universe. There is no biblical truth here to defend.

4. Age of the Earth

Claim: “In the Bible, the so-called age of the Earth can be tracked by looking at its genealogical accounts. These accounts imply the planet is between 6,000 and 10,000 years old - another notion that’s been entirely debunked by modern science. Radiometric dating and ice core data - both modern scientific dating methods - profoundly contradict the Bible’s claim.”

Response: Radiometric dating methods are relied on today in order to support the notion that the earth is millions or even billions of years old. But are these methods reliable? When investigating the earth scientists can measure isotope concentrations—the elements within—very accurately, “but isotope concentrations are not dates.”⁵ In order to obtain dates from isotope measurements, scientists rely on assumptions “such as a) The starting conditions are known, b) decay rates have always been constant, and c) Systems were closed or isolated so that no parent daughter isotopes were lost or added.”⁶

Further, radiometric dating has produced bad dates on things of known age. “One example is K-Ar ‘dating’ of five historical andesite lava flows from Mt Ngauruhoe in New Zealand. *Although one lava flow occurred in 1949, three in 1954, and one in 1975, the ‘dates’ ranged from less than 0.27 to 3.5 Ma [Mega annum, million years].”⁷ “The scientific literature lists many examples of excess argon causing dates of millions of years in rocks of known historical age. This excess appears to have come from the upper mantle, below the Earth’s crust. This is consistent with a young world - the argon has had too little time to escape. If excess argon can cause exaggerated dates for rocks of known age, then why should we trust the method for rocks of unknown age?”⁸

Moreover, there ought to be consistency when comparing different dating methods, such as radiometric with carbon-dating. However, there can be discrepancies. “In Australia, some wood found in Tertiary basalt was clearly buried in the lava flow that formed the basalt, as can be seen from the charring. The wood was ‘dated’ by radiocarbon (14C) analysis at about 45,000 years old, but the basalt was ‘dated’ by the potassium-argon method at 45 million years old.”⁹

Radiometric dating is full of assumptions and inconsistencies. It does not debunk the genealogical accounts of Scripture nor the interpretation of a young earth.

5. Global Language Divergence

Claim: “On the other hand, linguistic research has proven that languages evolve over time through things like cultural interactions, isolation, and linguistic drift. There is absolutely no evidence to support the Bible’s claim of a sudden introduction of multiple languages.”

Response: If language evolves according to the evolutionary model, then we would expect language to evolve from simple to complex expressions, or from lower to higher level intelligence expressions.

Allan Steel states, “[N]atural processes have only caused languages to become more analytic over time and caused inflexional morphology to be simplified. English grammar is the greatest example of the effects of these processes. All evidence strongly suggests that there was a complex beginning for the language families of the world (not just for the IE [Indo-European] family, in fact). Thus the evolutionary model has an enormous problem in that it postulates a gradual transition from simple to complex, yet the observed processes are always going the wrong way.”¹⁰

Steel continues, “We have seen that in languages there has been a great ‘downhill’ simplification in inflexions, etc. by natural processes, while the huge ‘uphill’ growth of languages in their vocabulary and expressiveness has only come about through intelligent human input. These kinds of change are quite different to the processes proposed by biological evolution, so any analogy is completely unfounded.”

The greatest evidence for the introduction of multiple languages is the Bible itself, specifically Genesis 11. God detailed for us the confusion of language and why, as His creation failed to obey His mandates.

6. The Nature of the Cosmos

Claim: “In the Bible, there are passages that describe the heavens as a solid dome with stars affixed to it. It’s an idea that influenced the beliefs of many biblical writers - but it contrasts with our modern understanding of the universe as an expansive, three-dimensional space filled with galaxies, stars, and planets.”

Response: The Biblical writers wrote from their perspective. It is the same as if someone today says the sun went down at 7:00pm. We know the sun doesn’t literally go down, but that the earth rotates around it. We simply speak from our perspective. The biblical writers did the same.