Creation Science

Creation Science Rebuttals

Creation Magazine (Ex Nihilo)

Creation Science in the Churches

Ex Nihilo, Volume 2, Issue 3, July 1979

Review by Greg Neyman

© Answers In Creation

     This was the first article written in Creation Magazine (Ex Nihilo) by Answers in Genesis founder Ken Ham.  He starts out by saying

The teaching of evolution, despite many theologians claim to the contrary, is a major reason preventing people being receptive to the gospel of Christ. Evolutionary thought is so entrenched in the minds of most people today that they will not consider the Bible or the Gospel since they believe it is unscientific, false and irrelevant.

     How did we get here? Ham does not self-implicate, thus I is because of young earth creationism that people are prevented from being receptive to the Gospel.  Ever since the young earth movement started, it has been presented as an either/or scenario.  Either you believe God, or you believe evolution, but you cannot believe in both.  Today, we have millions of committed Christians who are evolutionists, who defy what Ham is saying.  The truth can believe in the Bible and evolution at the same time.  There is no conflict.  The only conflict is with "young earth creation science," which is merely an interpretation of the Bible.

    He calls all the forms of old earth belief a re-interpretation of Genesis.  If that is what the scientific data calls for, then so be it.  God does not care how we feel about creation.

     He goes on to give two reasons why evolution and creation are contrary.  First, the issue of death before sin.  Click here to examine it further.

     Second, the argument that evolution has man evolving, becoming more advanced, and with the Bible, man started out pure, and became corrupt, which is viewed as opposite evolution.  Ham's general statements are true, but inconsequential, as even theistic evolutionists could agree with his statements, and accept both man evolving, and man falling from grace.

     He calls the doctrine of origins as foundational to all other doctrines.  However, according to the doctrinal teachings throughout church history, there has been no doctrine of origins (creation) until young earth creationists arose, and put it there.  For more see Doctrines.

     Next, he goes on to argue the importance of creation evangelism.  I agree, creation evangelism is a powerful tool in the right hands, but "young earth creation evangelism" is an oxymoron.  You cannot reach educated people with a message which involves a 6,000 year old earth.  They will see you as foolish. 

     However, using the Big Bang, and millions of years, creation science can show people that there had to be a causal agent behind the universe, and we can go on from there to show them God. 

     In the effects of evolution, both of these effects (non-christians seeing the Bible as not true, and Christians losing faith) are a direct result of the either/or scenario they are presented with in the church.  If instead, the church had said all along that evolution was OK, we would not have these problems he mentions.  Therefore, Ham only needs to look in the mirror to see the problem.

     Ham asks "What must be done to rectify this situation?"  Young earth creationists must come to realize that you can be a Christian, believe in an inerrant Bible, and believe that the earth is billions of years old.  Ham completely misses the point on this (it's hard to see when you are part of the problem).

     Finally, Ham gives four problems with evolutionary theory, followed by four evidences for creation.  Three of the problems have largely been solved today (1,2,4).  The fourth (#3) I cannot speak to.  For the positives of creation, the evidence for #1 is non-existent, #2 may be partially true, but it presents no problem for evolutionists.  Number 3, again not my area of expertiese.  And, number 4, the claim that the fossil record can be explained by the flood, is a total disaster for young earth creation science (see Fossil Record, and Stratigraphy).

     He summarizes with the "Results of teaching creation science."  Naturally, he lists the positive, but here is the negative.  People who are not inclined to examine the truth for themselves are duped into believing scientific data which is not true.  Although they may feel their faith is strengthened, it is done so based not on truth, but on false interpretations of science.


This article is on the web at


    If you are not a Christian, and you have been holding out on making a decision for Christ because the Church always preached a message that was contrary to what you saw in the scientific world, then rest assured that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and you can believe in Christ and receive salvation, while still believing in an old earth.  Click here for more.


    Are you a Christian who believes in young earth creationism?  Now that we have shown the many difficulties of the young earth creation science model in this and many other articles, how does this impact your Christian life?  If you are a young earth creationism believer, click here.



Creation Magazine 1979


Related Articles

Evolution Articles


To learn more about old earth creationism, see Old Earth Belief, or check out the article Can You Be A Christian and Believe in an Old Earth?  

 Feel free to check out more of this website.  Our goal is to provide rebuttals to the bad science behind young earth creationism, and honor God by properly presenting His creation.