In the Beginning: Science and Genesis 1-11 “If the foundations are destroyed, what can the righteous do?“ Psalm 11:3

As medical doctors we are skeptical of the claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the origination and complexity of life and we therefore dissent from Darwinian macroevolution as a viable theory. As medical doctors we are skeptical of the claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the origination and complexity of life and we therefore dissent from Darwinian macroevolution as a viable theory.

USF Sun Dome 9 06

What Darwin Didn’t Know January th 19th 21st 23rd 25th

Portland/Vancouver 11 08

Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

Genesis 11:9 “Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of the whole earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of the whole earth.”

Class Schedule Jan 23 – IntroductionJan 30 – Introduction Feb 6 –No ClassFeb 13 –Introduction/Gen 1:1 Feb 20 – Gen 1:2-10Feb 27 – Prayer Meeting Mar 6 – Gen 1:11-19Mar 13 –Gen 1:20-25 Mar 20 –Gen 1:20-25 Cont’d Mar 27 – Easter Break Apr 3 – Gen 1:26-31Gen 5 Apr 17 – Gen 7:1-20Apr 24 Gen 7:1-20 May 1 – May 8 –Gen 9:18-19 & 11:9 Feb 6 –No ClassFeb 13 –Introduction/Gen 1:1 Feb 20 – Gen 1:2-10Feb 27 – Prayer Meeting Mar 6 – Gen 1:11-19Mar 13 –Gen 1:20-25 Mar 20 –Gen 1:20-25 Cont’d Mar 27 – Easter Break Apr 3 – Gen 1:26-31Apr 10 –Gen 5 Apr 17 – Gen 7:1-20Apr 24 –Gen 7:1-20 May 1 – Gen 7:21-24 May 8 –Gen 9:18-19 & 11:9 Gen 10:25 May 15 – Overview (Final Class) Gen 10:25 May 15 – Overview (Final Class)

In the Beginning: Science and Genesis 1-11 Rich Akin Lakeside Community Chapel January-May 2013

Is there compelling evidence for evolution?

New Atheism: “…is the belief that religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises. Proponents of New Atheism argue that recent scientific advancements demand a less accommodating attitude toward religion, superstition, and religious fanaticism than had traditionally been extended by many secularists.” “…is the belief that religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized, and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises. Proponents of New Atheism argue that recent scientific advancements demand a less accommodating attitude toward religion, superstition, and religious fanaticism than had traditionally been extended by many secularists.”

Evolutionist Philosopher Daniel Dennett: Darwinian evolution is “a universal acid; it eats through just about every traditional concept and leaves in its wake a revolutionized world-view.” That worldview is Materialism

Christopher Hitchens “the tenets of organized religion are nothing more than the “delusions” of humankind needed to sustain our desire for pageantry and meaning.” “the tenets of organized religion are nothing more than the “delusions” of humankind needed to sustain our desire for pageantry and meaning.”

Science Books???

The God Hypothesis

Conflicting Worldviews

Without a Biblical worldview, there is no basis for knowledge and therefore the evolutionist’s worldview is irrational. Without a Biblical worldview, there is no basis for knowledge and therefore the evolutionist’s worldview is irrational.

Matthew 12:30: “He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters.” “He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters.”

The Ultimate Proof of Creation “The ultimate proof of creation is this: if biblical creation were not true, we could not know anything (italics his)! This proof can be stated in a number of different ways, but what it really comes down to is this:” “The ultimate proof of creation is this: if biblical creation were not true, we could not know anything (italics his)! This proof can be stated in a number of different ways, but what it really comes down to is this:”

“…only the Christian worldview (starting with a literal Genesis) can rationally make sense of the universe. Only if biblical creation is true can we have genuine knowledge about anything.” “…only the Christian worldview (starting with a literal Genesis) can rationally make sense of the universe. Only if biblical creation is true can we have genuine knowledge about anything.”

“The argument is that the Bible’s account of origins (along with its other accounts) must be true. Only the God described in the Bible can provide the foundation for the things we take for granted.” “The argument is that the Bible’s account of origins (along with its other accounts) must be true. Only the God described in the Bible can provide the foundation for the things we take for granted.”

“Without God’s Word, we would not have a good reason to believe in the preconditions of intelligibility: the basic reliability of memory and senses, laws of logic, uniformity of nature, morality, personal dignity and freedom, and so on.” “Without God’s Word, we would not have a good reason to believe in the preconditions of intelligibility: the basic reliability of memory and senses, laws of logic, uniformity of nature, morality, personal dignity and freedom, and so on.”

Naturalism (Nature is all there is): You are the product of random, natural processes that did not have you in mind. You are the product of random, natural processes that did not have you in mind.

There are no absolutes!

Why should we take seriously what the Bible says over any other “religious” book? Why should we take seriously what the Bible says over any other “religious” book? Aren’t science and religion separate disciplines that do not involve each other? Aren’t science and religion separate disciplines that do not involve each other? Isn’t Genesis just an allegory and not intended to be read as a narrative of how the earth and all that is in it was created? Isn’t Genesis just an allegory and not intended to be read as a narrative of how the earth and all that is in it was created? Don’t the days indicated in Genesis Chapter 1 really mean long periods of time and not literal, Don’t the days indicated in Genesis Chapter 1 really mean long periods of time and not literal, 24-hour days? And what about the Gap theory - billions of years passed between Gen 1:1 and 1:2? 24-hour days? And what about the Gap theory - billions of years passed between Gen 1:1 and 1:2?