Biology is the scientific study of life. But what is “science?” And what is “life?” Most of us use these words all the time and have a general idea of what we mean by them, however, it is common for scientists themselves to not have a clear understanding of what science is and this is not as surprising as it sounds. Philosophers of science struggle to define their own area of study, with different…

The aim of this article is to use the example of Homo naledi to illustrate the distinction between data and interpretations, and to discuss some of the questions a biblical creationist might have in relation to this new discovery.

Suppose we consider science to be a game. What are the rules of the game, and what difference would this approach make? Published in Origins, n.. 64.

However one defines the scientific method, the role of predictions is of significance. A researcher, from his/her knowledge of a topic, makes a prediction of a phenomenon to be found or verified by future research. Published in Origins, n. 64.

The philosophy of Naturalism dominates scientific thinking, for reasons that can be understood from review of the history of scientific thought. This article evaluates the nature and implications of Naturalism. Published in Origins, n. 64.

This article was originally published as a chapter in the book " The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament"

This article was originally published as a chapter in the book “The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament."

Science is not a straight pathway to total reality and truth, but involves numerous tentative conclusions, reversals of opinion, and inherent uncertainty. Its utility is not that it is always true, but that it is useful and leads to further discovery.

Occasionally, the scientific community rejects an idea that was previously widely accepted and replaces it with a new idea, which becomes the current consensus. This rapid change in scientific opinion is known as a “scientific revolution.”

This second part of a series on Christianity and the Development of Science provides additional examples of well-known past scientists whose study of nature came from a desire to know the Creator better. Many of these men were active Christians and held administrative positions in the church. Their study of the Bible led them to view the world in a way that helped them understand nature.

Warfare and conflict are often what come to mind when thinking about the relationship between science and religion. Some of the best known examples are arguably (Gould) the flat earth, the church's resistance to Galileo and his heliocentric system, Darwinian evolution, and the Scope's trial in Dayton, Tennessee.

Since its establishment in 1863, Adventism has believed in biblical protology, but valued both the positive outcomes of the Enlightenment and Scriptural authority. The purpose of this essay is to trace how Adventists have maintained their belief in biblical protology since the inception of the church.

Several invalid arguments have been attributed to creationists, and should be avoided. Lists of such invalid arguments can be found at various creationist websites, including the following: Creation Ministries International We applaud efforts to improve the arguments used by creationists, and provide the following list of invalid arguments to help in this process.Invalid arguments pertaining to…

It is reasonable to assert that Christianity was an essential component of the culture in which modern science developed because it provided a more encouraging worldview for the investigation of nature than did alternative belief systems.

Researchers discuss the role and position of Neanderthals in an alleged evolutionary process and debate whether they went extinct before, during or after anatomically modern humans colonized the northern hemisphere, and if the former interbred with the latter. However, many recent studies, ranging from genetics to the analysis of Neanderthal technology and culture suggest that Neanderthals might be understood within a different scientific framework.

Recent discoveries have shown artistic behaviors in Neanderthals including decoration of their bodies with jewelry and probably pigment. Moreover, these are clear indicators that they made use of language and verbal communication.

An unbiased reading of Genesis 6-8 unquestionably demonstrates that Noah’s flood was universal. Reasons for its denial are located in sources from outside the Scriptures, such as scientific arguments and the mythology of the ancient Near East. Published on Adventist World NAD edition, December 2012, p. 42.

I suggest that the level of confidence any one person has in the truth of evolutionary history directly reflects the degree of confidence they have that science is the surest way of finding truth in any topic, and/or the confidence they have in the assumption of naturalism.

The way in which God interacts with the world, or divine action, has long been a matter of discussion for theists in the philosophy of science, and continues to remain a complex and controversial topic. In recent decades, this question has taken on additional complexity with advances in contemporary physics, namely quantum physics, which posits a random or probabilistic world in contradistinction to the apparently completely deterministic natural world of Isaac Newton.

In discussions of science and faith, one often gets the impression that either science or Scripture can be believed—not both. In the secular world, science is by default seen as the true source of knowledge.