Jason Lisle is our favorite creation scientist. He’s the new Director of Research at the Institute for Creation Research (ICR). We recently posted Jason Lisle Describes the Earth and the Moon, but he’s made some more news today. No, he didn’t come out as a flat-Earther — not specifically. Our title will be explained at the end.
At the website of the Christian Post (CP), which describes itself as “the nation’s most comprehensive Christian news website,” they have this headline: Letting Science ‘Interpret’ Scripture Is Slippery Slope, Says Young Earth/Universe Creationist. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:
A “young earth” creationist, who also believes the universe is much younger than many astronomers calculate, says once people begin to rely on science rather than the Bible to answer questions about our origin, even for just parts, they are asking for trouble.”
They’re talking about Jason, about whom they later say: “Lisle is the director of research at the Institute of Creation Research. His team of scientists investigate and demonstrate the evidence for Creation.” Jason says if you rely on science, you’re “asking for trouble.” If that’s the conclusion of Jason and his “team of scientists,” we assume they’re not having much luck demonstrating the evidence for creationism. Anyway, we know you don’t want any trouble, so we urge you to pay attention:
“It’s a very slippery slope when you decide that there are some sections of the Bible that you are going to allow the secular scientist to tell you what it really means,” said Dr. Jason Lisle, during an interview with the press shortly after his debate at the National Conference on Christian Apologetics with astronomer and pastor Dr. Hugh Ross, who argued for a universe that is nearly 15 billion years old.”
Beware of those slippery slopes! If you’re not careful, you can end up in the Lake of Fire. Let’s read on:
“You’ve opened a very dangerous door,” Lisle continued. “Basically, you’ve decided to say that ‘I’m going to make the secular scientist my ultimate standard by which I interpret the scriptures’ and if you are consistent with that, and most people are not, thank goodness, but if you are well, hey, most scientists don’t believe the resurrection of the dead is possible.”
Wow — science opens a dangerous door. Let’s keep that door shut! The article continues:
“Some people will say they can live with the inconsistencies. They’ll tell me: ‘Well, it’s just Genesis that I allow the scientists to tell me what it meant,’ Lisle explained. “But, what we’ve found is that children will see that inconsistency, and they will be more consistent, they will reject all of the Bible. They’ll say, ‘Well, mom and dad don’t really believe in the Bible because they don’t believe in the first few chapters. Why should I believe in the Gospel?’ We’ve seen that happen. The statistics are just alarming. We see the students walking away from church in droves.”
Jason is right — it’s gotta be all or nothing. Here’s more:
“When you make an age estimate scientifically you have to make certain assumptions, and for that reason you can never really prove the age of something scientifically,” Lisle said. “You need a history book and fortunately we have a history book and not just any history book. It’s the history book by the one who actually did the creating, the one who never lies and the one who knows everything – that history book is the one written by God.”
Admit it, dear reader — there’s no way to argue with Jason about that. Moving along:
Lisle was asked about his thoughts on the argument by some that the origin’s age is not an issue of salvation.
[He said:] “I would argue that although you can be saved apart from believing in six days, in a way, salvation does not make sense apart from creation in six days. If you believe in millions of years, if you believe the fossils are millions of years old, you have death before Adam sinned, in which case death cannot be the result of Adam’s sin if it was already there for millions of years. If death is not the penalty for sin then why did Jesus die on the cross?”
He’s right again. So where does flat-Earth come into this? In a sense, our title is unfair, because Jason didn’t discuss it. But if the question were put to him, he’d have to answer that it’s flat. We’ve previously given you a large list of scripture passages that clearly say so — see The Earth Is Flat! And Jason must also believe that The Earth Does Not Move! That’s why he’s our favorite creation scientist.
Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.