Professional, peer-reviewed papers discussing a biblical worldview
Charles Darwin’s (1809–1882) ideas helped to guide Social Darwinism, which was an underpinning of the Communist and the National Socialist (Nazi) ideologies.
Friedrich Engels was in some ways as important as Marx in helping to establish the revolution called Marxism (Communism) that has changed the world.
Over 100 innocent people were murdered to prove a theory that turned out to be not only wrong but based on an erroneous secular philosophy, namely Darwinism.
Attempts to apply Darwinian eugenics were part of the Nazi effort to produce a superior race in Germany.
The deluge poems of Mesopotamia are soaked in a moral and theological framework that is not just different from Genesis but utterly hostile to it.
Inerrancy and Biblical Authority: How and Why Old-Earth Inerrantists Are Unintentionally Undermining Inerrancy
The old-earth signers of the CSBInerrancy unintentionally violated their own principles of interpretation and unintentionally undermined the inerrancy and the authority of Scripture.
Considerable disagreement exists in the church about what God made on the second day of Creation Week in Genesis 1.
Still No Replacement of Darwin—A Reply to Nathanial Jeanson’s Response to my Review of Replacing Darwin—The New Origin of Species
I used to think that when creationists talk about creation and evolution as a clash between worldviews, they were wrong. Jeanson has helped me change my mind.
It is not unintelligible that God created everything good from the beginning; it is only unintelligible to the person who makes the claim.
The biblical account of Noah’s Flood provides an update to modern microbial biogeography and modern creation apologetics.
We have been created fearfully and wonderfully by our Creator God, and the human body showcases God’s intricate design.
The place of the biblical Flood in the geological record remains one of the most hotly debated issues among creationist geologists today.
A Critique of Scientific Explanations of Belief and Unbelief and the Conflict between Evolution and Creationism
The recent claim that “conflicting networks” in the brain that explain belief and unbelief in God cannot be true.
This study shows that created heterozygosity, together with natural processes that are observable, is sufficient to account for species’ diversity.
We find that small variations in galaxy density as a function of redshift do exist, and are not due to the Malmquist bias.
Challenging the BioLogos Claim that a Vitellogenin (Egg-Laying) Pseudogene Exists in the Human Genome
Interestingly, BioLogos is probably the only evolutionary group that puts such a high level of focus on this hypothesis as key evidence for evolution.
This paper contends that Walton has given a magisterial authority to the ANE mythic texts in order to interpret the Genesis accounts.
Secularists claim that similarities between Israel’s worship and that of other nations in the OT prove Israel’s worship was rooted in its neighbors religion.
The mechanism of speciation remains one of the most contested scientific questions among both evolutionists and creationists.
This paper aims to present a detailed overview of interpretations offered by conservative biblical scholars on the identity of “the sons of God” in Genesis 6.
While many Christians support Ross’ broad conclusions, few would agree with the details of Dr. Ross’ argument.
There are at least three problems with Hugh Ross’ local flood model which render it physically impossible. This is in addition to numerous biblical issues.
Information Processing Differences Between Bacteria and Eukarya—Implications for the Myth of Eukaryogenesis
Based on differences in gene sets and molecular machines between bacteria and eukarya, we continue to demonstrate that unbridgeable evolutionary chasms exist.
Information Processing Differences Between Archaea and Eukarya—Implications for Homologs and the Myth of Eukaryogenesis
In the grand evolutionary paradigm, the origin of the eukaryotic cell represents one of the great mysteries and key hypothetical transitions of life.
Natural selection is controversial among many scientists, both in evolutionary and creationary circles.
Dr. Hartnett speculates about the idea that what we observe in the universe is not in equilibrium; that is, the state of the universe is in a transient state.
The problem of establishing an ontological basis for morality has troubled materialistic philosophers since Darwin.
Scientific Evidence Indicates Natural Selection and Brain-Based Education Conflict with Human Nature
Children have an innate, natural, intuitive, and unlearned tendency to reason about the world as biblical creationists do.
That psychological properties can be attributed to a brain is a popular notion, even among Christians. This paper argues that such claims are incorrect.
This paper contends that there is no real biblical evidence to suggest that the second law was inoperable prior to the curse.
The very teachings of Jesus are being attacked by those who state that, because of His human nature, there is error in some of His teaching regarding earthly things such as creation.
Chimeras, Cybrids, and Hybrids: A Christian’s Observations and Critique of Some Aspects of the Controversy Involving the Mixing of Human and Animal Materials for Scientific Research
On July 22, 2011, some readers of the Daily Mail UK were stunned by news that “Scientists have created more than 150 human-animal embryos in British laboratories.”
Dr. Faulkner examines the claims of one proponent of plasma astronomy, Donald Scott.
Literary theorist and prominent public intellectual Stanley Fish is a self-described “antifoundationalist”—someone who believes that truth is relative to one’s “interpretive community.”
In secular culture it is common to view the biblical history of Adam as a story, myth, or a parable but this is now also becoming the standard interpretation for many within the evangelical community.
Thomas D. Hennigan responds to Darek Isaacs’ paper, “Is There a Dominion Mandate?”
Darek Isaacs responds to the challenges to his paper, “Is There a Dominion Mandate?”
Joel McDurmon responds to Darek Isaacs’ paper, “Is There a Dominion Mandate?”
Andrew S. Kulikovsky responds to Darek Isaacs’ paper, “Is There a Dominion Mandate?”
This paper overviews the recent work of Peter Enns, The Evolution of Adam.
This paper will evaluate and critique six commentaries and the reasons they give for not taking the days of creation literally.
Before the traumatic devastation of the Nazi genocides, eugenics theory was widely accepted by both German and American scientists, especially in the pre-World War 1 era.
The dominion mandate is not named nor defined in Scripture, and so offering a deeper definition, which everyone can agree on, is not possible. However, it is possible to locate where the idea is found
Any understanding of Scripture that excludes or indicts the divine Himself is necessarily flawed and false.
Christians are caught up in theistic evolutionism without realizing that the worldview of theistic evolutionism is incoherent and inconsistent with the teachings of Scripture.
Review of John Lennox’s Book Seven Days That Divide the World: The Beginning According to Genesis and Science
Lennox reasons that the church has been wrong in the past over its interpretation of Scripture in light of scientific discovery, and that those holding to a young earth are wrong again.
To depart from Scripture at any point is neither safe nor right. Thus Estabrook’s discussion of my paper (Joubert 2011) in which he expressed his difficulties with my defense of the soul is welcome.
Certainly there is more to humans than a complex brain architecture from which a mind would seem to emerge. However, this reader has two difficulties.
Understanding the Nature of Scripture, of Jesus, and the “Dis-Ease” of Theistic Evolutionists (BioLogos)
The apologetic suggests that BioLogos should consider that the ultimate source of their “dis-ease” is the nature and character of the Creator.
I reviewed both the textbooks used for life science classes at the college where I teach and those that I used in my past university course work.
A Christian view of the world entails that science is not a Christian’s ultimate or sole source of knowledge and the physical world is not the only world there is.
Although the term uniformitarianism was not introduced until 1832, the concepts that Lyell so cleverly fused together had already been operating in the nascent discipline of geology for some decades
In Western civilization, the Mosaic generation and those that are younger are leaving religious institutions en masse while embracing spirituality nonetheless at unprecedented rates.
Emergentism defies commonsense; there is also no scientific evidence that something material could produce an entity of a kind radically different from itself.
An Examination of Augustine’s Commentaries on Genesis One and Their Implications on a Modern Theological Controversy
Few individuals in church history are as popular as Augustine of Hippo. Old-earthers claim him as support for figurative interpretations of Genesis 1. But what did Augustine really say?
On both large and small cosmic scales there is a diverse range of trends, patterns, and phenomena that beckon some kind of explanation.
Clear biblical teaching is that the universe is only a few thousand years old, so we should only be able to see objects within a radius of 6,000 light years.
Although the play was widely believed to be an accurate synopsis of the historical trial, often called the Trial of the Century, it grossly distorted the actual events of history.
Of the nine terms associated with uniformitarianism, seven can be replaced or eliminated, which refutes the accusation that diluvialists do not understand uniformitarianism.
A review of the history of paleoanthropology leads to the conclusion that the discipline is far less objective than that for physics, chemistry, or even biology.
The problem of evil is always a challenge for the Christian witness. However, William Dembski’s “solution” proves logically and biblically unsound.
The irony of the conflict over peer review is that peer review is poorly understood and criticized even in conventional journals.
Worldview on Answers Research Journal
Worldview is most aptly described as a way of viewing reality. Worldview is a fundamental part of an individual’s core self. An individual’s worldview encompasses their religious convictions, values, epistemology, ideologies, dispositions, philosophies, and all other deeply held beliefs. People’s worldviews describe not only their existing assumptions and beliefs about reality but also the manner in which they interpret all new information. The exact same information will be perceived and evaluated differently by two individuals with different worldviews.
A person’s worldview has rightly been described as a pair of glasses through which he or she views reality. When one is wearing glasses, all new visual inputs first pass through the lenses and are changed by them before reaching one’s eyes. As new information is received and filtered through a person’s worldview, it then becomes part of the existing paradigmatic infrastructure of their present worldview, which in turn will become the adapted filter for all further data and information. People’s natural tendency is to modify all new information in a way that strengthens their preexisting worldview. Truth that challenges a person’s worldview is unsettling, so it is normally ignored or discredited.
A person’s worldview is shaped by his or her culture, upbringing, community, family, friends, peers, reading, lifestyle, entertainment, choices, etc. No one is without a worldview, and no one is unbiased in interpreting data. Worldview neutrality is a myth.
The Answers Research Journal (ARJ) is dedicated to affirming a biblical worldview. The authors of the ARJ begin all academic inquiry and scientific study on the authority of God’s Word as revealed in Scripture. In contrast to other academic journals, all data is interpreted through the lens of Scripture, not the other way around. Although several religious belief systems exist in the world, ultimately, there are only two religions: one built upon God’s Word and one built upon man’s word. The ARJ is unapologetically committed to upholding a biblical worldview anchored upon the Word of God.