The folly of theologians favouring the ‘science of the day’ over biblical foundations.

Nigel K., a student in training for ministry, wrote to CMI’s Dr Carl Wieland as follows:

Dear Dr Wieland

In a recent Systematic Theology class discussion on Chapter 4 (creation) of the Westminster Confession of Faith my professor said that “a 6-day creation was regarded as an impossibility by mainstream scientists, no more credible than a flat earth.”

I subsequently met with him today and asked that he would acknowledge before the class that highly-respected, highly-qualified scientists examining the same data could conclude that it was possible to hold to a literal 6-day creation.

He is reluctant to do this because he believes that, “from the standpoint of mainstream science, there were no highly respected creation scientists whose argument for a 6-day creation had been peer-reviewed.”

Would you agree with his claim or not?

Thank-you in anticipation for your help with this matter.

Best regards


Carl replied:

Dear Nigel,

I think your theology professor has been very ‘clever’ in his wording. Because ‘mainstream science’ generally means ‘the majority of scientists’, i.e. views of the current establishment—nothing to do with the quality of the science of any alternative views, nor the qualifications of the person holding them. Such views will inevitably favour evolution and reject divine creation….

Continue Reading on