Recently I flew to London on the new Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Despite what media hype might lead a Dreamliner passenger to expect, there were no fires on board and the experience wasn’t particularly different from what I’ve experienced on innumerable other flights. From my perspective, the seats were too small, too close together and too hard. That is not to say that there were not some differences,…

If one accepts the evidence of the Cambrian Explosion at face value, the Darwinian theory of evolution is falsified. Unsurprisingly, evolutionists have tried to explain the Cambrian Explosion as an artifact, due to the incompleteness of the fossil record. However, there is an explanation for the Cambrian Explosion that is consistent with the data. An intelligent being could generate the genetic information needed for a diversity of body types in a short time.

In the contemporary scientific academy, as is well-known, the word “creationism” derisively refers to a worldview irrevocably rejected by the secular scientific community in general. What may be less well-known is that there are contrastive worldviews generally subsumed under the term “creationism.”

As Christians, we believe that God created the Earth and us, and has entrusted us to care for the planet and each other. What are some practical things that we can do at home to care for the Earth’s environment?

Creation and Sabbath provide key rationale for the continued necessity of earth care. In the biblical theology of conservation, we cannot dismiss care for animals and care for the environment by reasoning that the earth will eventually be “burned up” (2 Pet. 3:10). All living creatures are co-inhabitants on the earth, and as they also depend on its ecosystems for survival, the Bible holds humankind responsible for the preservation of the earth and the care of all living creatures.

Can we detect design in nature? What kind of arguments have been used to make the design inference?

From the trillions, yes trillions, of non-human cells that live in our bodies cooperating with us in various ways that keep us healthy and happy, down to the molecular machines that keep each cell running all the way up to the cooperation between plants and animals that keep the animals fed, the plants pollinated and any number of other cooperative relationships between organisms, the real question is, “Who designed the marvelous plans we see brought to life all around us?”

In this article I examine the biblical record, selected evidences of science, and the resources of the Spirit of Prophecy in an attempt to answer some of the basic questions regarding the nature of selected curses proclaimed by God on the earth after the Fall.

We are warned in Romans 1:20 that those who observe God’s handiwork yet do not believe “are without excuse.” Before the artist-Creator we must stand in awe.

Truly, in our planet, life is everywhere. And without water, this profusion of life would not be possible. In the battle over origins, Darwinism cannot offer a convincing explanation when advocating for the random emergence of life and matter, including water.

Recently, the city buses in my neighborhood gained a new set of brightly-colored advertisements along their sides. In bold letters, they proclaimed that humans and chimpanzees are 98% identical: “Come and meet your relatives.”

Many of us struggle to correlate catastrophe and the Creator – and perhaps never more frequently than now.

In a "land of plenty" it is not easy to be motivated about being fugal with the earth's abundant treasures. Yet, when God brought the children of Israel to the "Promised Land," He carefully instructed them on good ecology.

The whole purpose of the great controversy scenario is to vindicate God from the responsibility for the evil that theistic evolution attributes to Him by virtue of how He created.

Creation in the prophetic literature of the Old Testament is employed as a constant literary and theological reference which connects to a historical past, motivates the interpretation of the present, and moves towards a perspective for the future by means of a continuous contextualization of the topic via the triad creation–de-creation–recreation.

Environmental ethics now defends the inclusion of large communities of animals, plants, rivers, lakes, mountains, and valleys, referred to as ecosystems, “biomes,” or “the natural environment.”

Environmental ethics expands the circle of moral concern beyond human beings to include at the very least some “higher” mammals with whom we share important morally relevant characteristics. Environmental ethics explores why nonhuman life should count morally. By contrast, with rare exceptions, Western ethics is predominately anthropocentric.

As science develops more complete naturalistic explanations to describe the universe, it may appear that there is less room for God in the picture. And if science ever discovers a “complete” theory, it could be presumed that it would describe a universe without God. I am confident, however, that this conclusion is neither necessary nor valid. Drawing upon examples from physics, my purpose is to show that in developing a more complete picture of the universe, scientists are led to greater evidences for God and His design.

This paper evaluates a representative sample of the best anti-ID and pro-ID publications and presents a conclusion as to the present state of the evidence and arguments regarding these positions. Published in Origins, n. 63.

A collection of short commentaries of scientific papers published in 2008, covering topics such as biogeography, sponge reefs, origin of life, human mutations, Arctic tree rings, fossil gecko. Published in Origins n. 63.