Secular History, Science and the Bible

Unfortunately, many Christians today fall prey to two concepts that Satan loves to utilize: 1. Secular history/science must confirm an event to be true before it can be accepted and 2. If we compromise, more of the world will accept God.  On occasion, secular history/science does point to God, but is it only true because we have evidence apart from the Bible? Can we truly convince non-Christians about the power of God if we ourselves to not fully accept what the Bible states (i.e. – the 24-hour days of creation)?

Mankind needs to realize that “science” is not always what it is projected as being; many scientists today, such as Stephen Hawking, insinuate that “science” is infallible and often Christians believe such lies.  Science is constantly changing, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse.  For instance, the scientific community used to present the view that the world is flat as fact, not a theory.  Did that make it true that the world is flat? If so, someone needs to inform modern science that the world is flat because scientists used to claim it to be so.  Obviously, no one today accepts this view, but amazingly enough the Bible actually confirms the truth and did so long before scientists “discovered” it (Isaiah 40:22).  An ancient text confirms a “scientific” fact before science does, and yet we rely on “science” to confirm God’s existence and power? Perhaps our priorities are more than a little out of order.

One archaeologist, Dr. Hawass, stated that, “Sometimes as archaeologists we have to say that never happened because there is no historical evidence” (New York Times, “Did the Red Sea Part?”).[1]  If this logic applies to Biblical events, then it must also be true for the theory of evolution; if there is no historical evidence, then it is not true.  How many scientists would stand behind such a claim? Not many, if any, but it is a commonly accepted view concerning the Bible.

When it comes to miracles, mankind often goes to the extreme in order to explain away the existence and power of God.  In his article, “Walking in the Midst of the Sea,” Henry Morris states that liberal “theologians, always seeking naturalistic explanations for Biblical miracles, have attempted to explain this Red Sea crossing as a shallow fording of what they call the ‘Reed Sea,’ at the extreme northern end of the Red Sea.”[2]  A “shallow fording”? Consider: Is it a greater miracle that God parted a deep section of the Red Sea, or that He drowned the Egyptian army in shallow water? Additionally, modern scientists have run computer models on shallow parts of the Red Sea in order to prove that it could simply have been wind that parted the waters.  Christine Dao and Brian Thomas state that according “to the researchers, winds blowing at over 60 miles an hour ‘could have pushed water back at the bend where an ancient river is believed to have merged with a costal lagoon.’”  Consider this quotation for a moment; note the use of “could” and “believed.”  How is this scientific proof? Dao and Thomas further state the following: “How relevant is this study to the famous crossing of the Red Sea? First, it is doubtful that the shallow-water area that the model examined was the real site of the crossing…it does not fit with the details of the Exodus account…”[3]  Logically, Dao and Thomas acknowledge that God’s intervention is the only viable conclusion.

Often in the scientific community there arises archaeological discoveries that are indicative of God’s hand, yet scientists attempt to explain it away.  For instance, in 2010 workers building a highway discovered the fossils of 80 whales encased in sandstone in the desert of Chile.  How did 80 whales get to that location? How were they so well preserved? Even if they had found the fossil of a single whale, similar questions would arise, but 80 whales? Brian Thomas writes that clearly “a catastrophe must have happened, since so many whales died at once.  Just as clearly, the catastrophe must have involved large quantities of fast-moving sand in order to encase the huge animals in sandstone.”  Likely, given the exact location of the whales in “a low spot called the Caldera basin,” they were deposited there in this number as the waters from the flood abated, which “would account not only for the large numbers of remains found in one place, but also for their preservation.”  While some scientist may claim that the whales were deposited there millions of years ago in some sort of evolutionary primordial soup and further claim that the existence of only sea creatures substantiates such a claim, how would they explain another instance in South America in which 300 whales were found buried alongside land animals?[4] The flood, it seems, is the only viable conclusion to arrive at.

Considering such “scientific knowledge,” the words of the Apostle Paul ring true.  In Romans 1, Paul depicts a society that has lowered God to be equal with men and animals, which is essentially what mankind has done with the theory of evolution.  In Romans 1:20, Paul states that for “since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse…”  While we are without excuse, we fit very well with what Paul states in 1:22, “Professing to be wise, they became fools…”  The majority of scientists believe themselves to be too intelligent to believe in God (if you doubt this summation, read nearly anything said or written by Stephen Hawking concerning the existence of God). 

While it is interesting to look at research done that further supports the Biblical proof that God exists, it is not necessary for our salvation.  We do not need secular history or science to prove that God exists.  Remember the words of the writer of Hebrews, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1).  On occasion, secular history and science will line up with the Biblical accounts, but more often than not we will have no “scientific” evidence.  Which is worth more, faith or fallible science?

Finally, consider the following question in connection with this brief study: what hope is there in evolution?

---

[1] Slackman, Michael.  “Did the Red Sea Part? No Evidence, Archaeologists Say.”  The New York Times.  The New York Times, 02 Apr. 2007.  Web. 31 January 2015.

[2] Morris, Henry.  “Walking in the Midst of the Sea.”  The Institute for Creation Research.  N.P., n.d. Web. 31 January 2015.

[3] Dao, Christine & Brian Thomas.  “Computers Help Show the Mechanics of a Miracle.”  The Institute of Creation Research, Web.  31 January 2015.

[4] Thomas, Brian.  “Whales in the Desert?” The Institute for Creation Research.  11 Dec. 2011.  Web. 31, Jan. 2015.