Thank you for that explanation, it is very helpful. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/BigThumbUp.gif" alt="" />
You said:
The obvious impetus for the promotion of this view is that the ancient understanding of Genesis — that it is primarily a narrative account of creation — is out-of-step with the findings of modern science. That impetus is wrong. But on the other hand, so is much of the impetus behind the work at the Creation Museum, which is to answer pagan science on its own grounds, thus also making science the arbiter of whether or not the Bible is true. We ought to unswervingly uphold the authority and absolute truth of Scripture without making modern scientific presuppositions the ground of truth.
Although I agree with much of what you wrote here. Unless I misunderstand the people at Answer in Genesis, they believe first and foremost that the Bible is the source; we should lean on rather than science.
They have stated that science can only take us so far and the rest is all presuppositions. They have a very high view of Scripture and are not afraid to say so.
The Creation museum is basically trying to show what the Bible says about creation and showing where the facts that science do not contradict the Bible account of creation.
Now whether or not they should as a Christian organization be doing this sort of thing may be another manner.
I lean towards the Vantil (sp?) way of apologetics, but I must say that I have found Answers in Genesis a great tool in helping me understand God's creation.
As someone who is amazed at the beauty and majesty of God's creation, sometimes my mind can not help but wonder how God created certain things.
From cave stalactites & stalagmites, mountains, lakes to the wonders of sea life, you name it. They surely are a testament to God's creative genius.
Tom
