Posted by: BibleScienceGuy | February 20, 2011

The Genesis Code 

The newly released independent film The Genesis Code is advertised as “the Christian movie of the year.” Family Christian Stores promotes it as “one of the most powerful Christian movies of the year.” Focus on the Family has approved it.

Conservatives and evangelical Christians are being urged to support the film and “vote with their dollars” to show moviemakers that it’s good business to make family-friendly films.

Are these promotional snippets accurate? What is the movie about?

Here’s my synopsis of the PG-rated movie:
Kerry is a college student, pastor’s daughter, and committed Christian. She interviews Blake, the college’s hockey star, for a story in the school newspaper. As the relationship develops, Kerry learns that Blake has a crisis — his mother is in a coma, and family members disagree about life support. Blake dismisses Kerry’s prayer suggestions. He “knows” science disproves the Bible, especially Genesis. Suddenly Kerry hits strong challenges to her faith at school. As a result she seeks to show, with help from her physicist brother, that science and Genesis do not conflict. Her brother unveils a “solution” — the Genesis Code — to show that what science teaches and what Genesis records are both true and in agreement.

Familiar stars in the movie include former US Senator Fred Thompson from Tennessee playing a judge, Oscar winners Ernest Borgnine (92 years old) and Louise Fletcher playing Blake’s grandparents, and Catherine Hicks (Annie Camden on Seventh Heaven) playing Kerry’s academic advisor.

Jerry Zandstra plays Kerry’s pastor-father. He’s a real-life pastor and economics professor at Cornerstone University in Grand Rapids, MI. He was also the executive in charge of production for the movie and is vice-president of American Epic Entertainment.

Industry professionals and Christian conservatives joined to form American Epic Entertainment to provide family-friendly alternatives to Hollywood movies. It’s the feature-film sister company of American Saga Productions. ASP shot “Station House” in 2008, a fire station reality-TV pilot.

The company spent $5 million making The Genesis Code, their first release. It’s 2’15” long.

Filming occurred for five weeks during July and August of 2009 in Grand Rapids, MI on the campus of Calvin College, at the Patterson Ice Center where the hockey scenes are filmed, the Grand Rapids Public Museum, and in the Michigan cities of Walker, Lowell, and Wyoming.

The movie was released to limited showings in Michigan in August 2010 and Indiana in October 2010. The nationwide release began February 18, 2011.

Here’s the movie trailer:

There are many good aspects to the movie:
– Repeated references to God’s transcendent wisdom.
– Multiple references to and affirmation of “absolute Biblical truth.”
– Frequent Scripture quotations, including Psalm 90 and repeated readings of Genesis.
– Meaningful prayers.
– Effective portrayal of muscular and compassionate and articulate Christianity.
– Warm family relationships and healthy, supportive friendships.
– Articulate science prof explains that what makes sense to his scientific mind is belief in the Judeo-Christian God.

Content issues:
– Two instances of taking the Lord’s name in vain.
– Bar scene with a beer chugging incident and a show-off biting into, chewing up, and spitting out a beer glass. It’s auxiliary to the movie, primarily for humor, and to paint the scene. The main characters are present but not involved.
– Male pastor discusses barbaric tribal rite with female professor. Although his point hits home, the subject is inappropriate for a family movie.

For those who require romance in their movies, Blake and Kerry provide it. Kerry is chaste and when pressed by Blake says she won’t give away something she’s saving for marriage. Clothing is modest; there are no titillating scenes. There is one short kissing scene near the end of the movie.

In my opinion the romance has two negatives. Kerry as a Christian should not pursue a romantic relationship with non-Christian Blake. Secondly, most of the initiative in the relationship comes from Kerry instead of Blake.

There are three major issues that generate conflict and interest throughout the movie.
– Discrimination against Christians in academia
– Sanctity of life
– Science vs. Genesis

It’s commendable that the movie treats these current issues in an entertaining and engaging manner. All are worthy of exploration. Movie treatments, like Jesus’ stories (parables), can often communicate more effectively than abstruse essays.

Kerry faces the all-too-common viewpoint discrimination against Christian beliefs in the classroom and especially from her academic advisor who tries to coerce compromise.

She engages her professor cogently in the classroom over his description of the “sudden Cambrian explosion of life with no apparent antecedent.” She underscores his reference to “order emerging from chaos” and points out that order is never observed emerging from chaos. In contrast, order naturally devolves into disorder. “Doesn’t that indicate the necessity of a Watchmaker?” she asks.

Kerry could have been more effective in answering her advisor’s contention that absolute truth does not exist. Instead she seems disconcerted by the professor’s strong insistence that she must abandon her Biblical beliefs to be successful. However, her pastor-father shows the professor that the professor herself lives by moral absolutes despite her claim that there are no absolutes or certain truths in the moral and philosophical arena.

Blake’s mother is in a coma with cancer, and the family struggles with conflicting views on whether to terminate life support. Blake comes to recognize prayer is a primary resource.

The movie is advertised as treating “Science vs. Faith“. It asks the question, “What if both are right?”

Of course true science (the word literally means “knowledge”) and true Biblical faith are both right and in harmony with each other. The Almighty who created the universe recorded His activity accurately in Genesis. But today, “Science” usually means “Scientism”, the belief that truth is determined scientifically and that the scientific community is the arbiter of truth. Science in this sense and Biblical faith cannot both be right.

Before viewing the movie, I was concerned about its harmonization of Genesis with science. Would it turn out to be, like most harmonizations, some version of theistic evolution?

The movie’s harmonization, called the Genesis Code, is not a secret code, but rather a framework for understanding the passage of time. It’s presentation is entertaining, but most people won’t fully understand without some knowledge of Einstein’s relativity theory.

The movie uses the physics of time dilation to argue for a billion-year age for the universe. It explains that time measurement depends on acceleration and mass. For example, an increase in mass or acceleration slows time. Therefore different frames of reference will measure time differently. The movie suggests that the six days of creation in Genesis are from God’s “cosmic” reference point, while the same thing viewed from earth would take 15.75 billion years.

The characters say repeatedly, “Genesis says created in 6 days.” But their Genesis Code harmonization is to interpret “day” as a time-dilated POT (passage of time) lasting from billions to hundreds of thousands of years. They believe in Six POTs of Creation which ends up being a version of theistic evolution, often termed progressive creation.

During the harmonization portion of the movie, the group marvels that God was able to inspire Scripture in such a way that “mankind had to evolve to its current level in order to understand the story as it was originally written.”

I disagree with the movie’s message in this area. Time dilation and the stretching of the fabric of space (Isaiah 40:22; 45:12 and 7 other verses) help explain how we see light from stars billions of light-years away even though the universe is only 6,000 years old. But it’s not a satisfactory explanation for age.

God inspired men to write the Bible to communicate His truth to mankind. He would have to use man’s frame of reference to communicate with man. Genesis is written from the reference point of earth, not from a cosmic reference point somewhere in the heavens that may have a different time scale.

During the harmonization the pastor says, “Genesis is not an easy book to understand.” I disagree. Genesis is straightforward history and is one of the easiest in the Bible to understand.

As I feared, the movie’s “reconciliation” of science and the Bible is all one-way, at the expense of literal Bible interpretation. The Genesis Code does not support creation in six literal days about 6,000 years ago. The movie accepts as indisputable fact scientists’ speculations that the universe is 15 billion years old and strives to find a way to interpret Genesis to fit this.

Near the beginning of the movie Blake says that if you can’t believe the beginning of the Bible, why believe the rest of it. This is a crucial point. If we can’t believe God’s plain words in Genesis, how can we believe other events science disputes like Noah’s Flood, Jonah’s Rescue, Virgin Birth, Resurrection?

So what do I think of the movie? Do I recommend it or not?

I give it a qualified thumbs up. While disagreeing with a major component, I still found it interesting and enjoyable. In case you’re wondering, I did not fall asleep like I do with some non-Indiana-Jones, Jane-Austen-type movies.

The movie doesn’t consider that scientism’s view of the past may be fallible. Some people will leave the movie thinking that if science and the Bible disagree about the age of the universe, then it’s the literal interpretation of the Bible that must be modified. But the plain meaning of the Genesis text is that God created everything in six normal earth days about 6,000 years ago.

I think we should stick with the plain meaning of what Yahweh said.

Supplemental Material (rebutting the movie’s thesis):
Here is a series of six cogently-argued articles defending an age for the universe of about 6,000 years and countering the thesis of the movie that the universe is 15.75 billion years old:
Age of the Earth 1 — Essentials
Age of the earth estimates are usually based on interpretations of physical evidence, not on direct observation. Interpretations are driven by worldviews. Dependable answers to age questions require eyewitness testimony. The only record of eyewitness testimony for the creation of the earth is Genesis which specifies heaven and earth were created about 6,000 years ago. A 6,000-year-old earth blows Evolutionism out of the water. This is the real reason for the relentless attacks on the Genesis genealogies.
Age of the Earth 2 — Jesus’ View
How would Jesus answer the question, “How old is the earth?” Jesus would have interpreted the genealogical and chronological texts literally and historically, just as He did with other Scriptures, and just as His contemporaries and His apostles did. Therefore Jesus would have answered the question with “Have you not read Moses and the Prophets? It’s about 4,000 years old.” Jesus believed in an age of only thousands of years for the earth — not millions or billions. It is incumbent upon those who follow Jesus as Lord to accept His view as their view and to reject fanciful interpretations which violate the literal sense of Scripture.
Age of the Earth 3 — Genealogies
Scripture is filled with chronological information. Chronology anchors Scripture solidly in real-world history and underscores its authenticity. The Genesis chronogenealogies record an unbroken line of descent from Adam to Abraham and provide a solid foundation for constructing a reliable chronology. Grammar and context support this, and numerous other Scriptures confirm it. The Genesis chronogenealogies show that Adam to Abraham covered 2,000 years.
Age of the Earth 4 — History’s View
Throughout history the great preponderance of scholarship regarding the Biblical records and the unanimous testimony of cultures worldwide is that the earth is only thousands of years old. This was also the historic teaching of the church until the ascendancy of the theory of evolution in the 19th century. The push in the last two centuries to increase the age of the earth was motivated, not by evidence, but by evolution’s requirement for long eons of time. What have scholars through the ages taught about the age of the earth?
Age of the Earth 5 — Radiometric Dating
Is it conceivable that today’s scientists are dead wrong about the age of the earth? What are radiometric dating methods? The reliability of radiometric dates hinges on the validity of three questionable assumptions. If radiometric methods are wrong for rocks of known age, why trust them for rocks of unknown age?
Age of the Earth 6 — Scientific Dating Methods
Is there positive scientific evidence supporting the Biblical timeframe of thousands of years? Hundreds of different processes have been used to estimate the age of the earth. Scientific evidences from many fields dispute evolutionary timescales but cohere with Biblical chronology. The weight of the scientific evidence is that the earth is thousands, not billions, of years old.

Here is an article showing from the Genesis text itself why the Creation Days of Genesis must be understood to be normal earth days and not long eons of time as the movie argues:
Are the Six Days of Creation Regular Days or Long Ages?
The historical record in Genesis supplies compelling reasons proving the Creation Days were regular days. Six Days is the key distinguishing characteristic of the Biblical explanation of origins.

This article explains “What is science?” and “What is its relationship to Biblical truth?
What Does Jesus Think of Science?
Science is often confused with Scientism (faith in science as the arbiter of truth). Scientists often play bait-and-switch with Science and Scientism, claiming for Scientism the reputation and authority earned by true science. There is no conflict between Jesus and Science. He created nature and the minds that strive to penetrate its mysteries. However, the conflict between Jesus and Scientism is irreconcilable.

This article explains why the The Big Bang! is wrong from both scientific and Biblical perspectives.
The Big Bang!
“Nothing exploded into everything.” That’s the Big Bang theory in a nutshell. Nothing could be more wrong, for from nothing, nothing comes. The prevailing worldview asserts the universe popped into existence with a Big Bang 15 billion years ago. How could this be? What caused the explosion? Where did the matter and energy for it come from? How did the physical laws that governed the explosion originate? This article discusses scientific and Biblical problems with the Big Bang theory.

Click here for an AMC coupon for a $5 ticket to the movie valid till March 10, 2011.

Soli Deo Gloria.

Read my other Movie Reviews:
Marilyn Monroe and the Age of the Earth
Mystery of Noah’s Flood (with videos)
God’s Not Dead, the Movie (with videos)
Noah, the Movie (with videos)
Exodus, the Movie (with video)
1. Patterns of Evidence: Exodus – Did It Happen?
2. Patterns of Evidence: Exodus – Facing the Facts (with video)
3. Patterns of Evidence: Exodus – The Debate
4. Patterns of Evidence: What Did Jesus Think?
5. Patterns of Evidence: Exodus – Does It Matter?
Risen, the Movie

Bible-Science Guy logo

©William T. Pelletier, Ph.D.
“contending earnestly for the faith”
“destroying speculations against the knowledge of God”
(Jude 1:3; 2 Cor 10:4)
Sunday February 20, 2011 A.D.

SUBSCRIBE – Don’t miss future blog posts!
Click the sidebar’s “SUBSCRIBE” button to follow the Bible-Science Guy Blog. You’ll automatically receive new posts by email. Click
Subscribe Now!

Read my February 2011 Bible-Science column:
Where Did Cain Get His Valentine?.

It is the Lord who made the earth by His power, Who established the world by His wisdom, and by His understanding He stretched out the heavens.
(Jeremiah 51:15)


  1. Thanks for your thoughtful critique.


  2. I think maybe you are allowing what you believe to be absolutely true. Perception and interpretation can be, as you stated, flawed. Why should I hold to simply a literal understanding of genesis. I agree it’s not a hard book to read. It is straightforward. However God has always been beyond time and space. So how would a God relay a message of an event that He knew we wouldn’t understand and as the movie hits on what perspective would He have? I’m no scientist, but I know Einstein enough to grasp the concepts involved here. I think this was a great human effort not to alter the meaning of the Bible or to change it as some OEC ( old earth creationists) would believe, but I can’t hold fast to a young earth or to reconcile literal six days based on our time frame with the apparent age of our earth and our universe age. I think they actual did present clear and correct evidence. Plus when Moses wrote down those five books do we know if he served as a word for word scribe for God or if like every other book we pertain to plenary verbal?

    However I love the coined term “scientism!”


    • Man’s difficulty in understanding has never stopped God’s communication. Sure, Creation is beyond our understanding. But what God chose to communicate was clear. There are many things in Scripture that we cannot fully understand but that God communicated in part very clearly.

      For example, how does Christ’s death resolve my sin problem? We don’t really know, but we trust the statements of Scripture that it does. The Resurrection is another example of something far beyond our understanding, but it’s something for which God clearly communicated the part we needed to know…namely that Jesus did physically rise from the dead.

      I believe in tenaciously holding to what God has clearly said even though I don’t understand all the details of how He accomplished it.


    • After seeing the movie I agree with its premise. I don’t believe the universe is 6000 years old. Traveling at the speed of light (using light speed as a constant) the universe is around 16 billion years old, not 6 thousand years. Where creation and the big bang agree is that the universe exploded into existence, except it was God behind it, saying, “Let there be light!). That being said, Genesis is correct.


      • See the 6 articles on the Age of the Earth linked in the Supplemental Material section above for Biblical and scientific cases why the earth is only 6,000 years old and not 16 billion years. See The Big Bang! article for an explanation why the The Big Bang! is wrong from both scientific and Biblical perspectives.


        • If you are correct, that would mean that God just pretty much splashed the universe into existance – hence the “let there be light” command, and every thing happened at once. I don’t buy that. I used to believe the Earth was around 6000 years old, and that the flood caused some serious premature aging to take place.

          As for the Big Bang being wrong, it is from Hawking’s perspective, as he gives gravity the credit for it. Although, perhaps a little romantic, I truly believe that the universe did explode into existence, just the way the Big Bang happened,and no, the Bible doesn’t mention either way, unless you are reading a very contemporary version that say’s anything you want to hear. I stick with the KJV, or something very simllar.

          I will concede to not calling it the Big Bang, and call it creation, but the premise of “let there be light” gives much credence to the theory that the universe, before it existed was just a small particle of creation that our Lord held in His hand and tossed it into existence. Remember, the speed of light travels at 186,000 miles per second. At that speed it would take it 4 light years to travel to the nearest star that is not our sun. That star is Alpha Centauri. Do the math, and you will figure out that 4 light years adds up to a lot more than 6000 years.

          The only way your theory would be correct would be to assume that God formed everything the way it looks now; creating a 16 billion year old universe in 6 days. Certainly possible as He can do anything, but not logical – why would He?


        • Another explanation might be found here:


    • I do think we can sometimes be too dogmatic. Everyone would like to interpret the bible according to their understanding of the world. I don’t know whether the universe is old or young, but I believe He created it. Perhaps if we could open our hearts to the Holy Spirit, God could teach us more about the creation, than if we dig our heels in the ground for our favorite private interpretations. Perhaps then we would be “one faith” instead of 2000 different Christian faiths.


  3. However I find your articles compelling and being of open mind will dive deeper into the idea that scientific dating may be wrong.


    • The supplemental material I listed above should be helpful as you “dive deeper.” Especially look at articles 5 & 6 on Radiometric Dating and Scientific Dating Methods in the Age of the Earth series.


  4. I do not even know the way I finished up right here, however I thought this submit was once good. I don’t know who you are however definitely you’re going to a famous blogger in case you aren’t already. Cheers!


  5. I watched the movie tonight. I think you missed something. The movie never stated that the world or universe was not 6,000 years old by our time (earth orbiting the sun). It said it would depend on point of reference.
    For instance – when we pray how can we expect God to listen to and answer all of those prayers? I have been told by several churches that because we don’t know if time is the same for God as it is for us. Obviously God has control over time.
    I believe in God with all of my heart and soul, I believe that The Bible is the word of God but also that need not be so dogmatic. Do you realize that people in church 100 years ago would be totall offended by our church today. Again, point of reference. How do you think flat earth Christians from many centeries ago would see us today? In other words, the church has changed over the years due to scientific fact (I’m sure they argued for 100 years about the earth being flat), society and financial gain. It will continue to change for these same reasons but God will always exist and be there.


    • People did not have the same access to Gods word that we do today, the ones that did would of known the earth was round,it says so in job.


      • See my Circle of the Earth article for a discussion of the history of knowledge about the shape of the earth, including Scriptural testimony. The earth was known to be a globe at least as early as the 6th century BC and probably far earlier.


  6. Where do you get you figure that the universe is about six thousand years old? Continue reading your bible and it gives three account of the family tree of Adam… Then Noah, of Abraham…etc… Then add two thousand years since our Lord died for our sins.


    • According to the chronogenealogies in Genesis 5 & 11, Adam to Abraham was about 2,000 years. From recorded history we know that Abraham to Christ was about 2,000 years. Christ to the present is about 2,000 years. That adds up to about 6,000 years since Creation.


  7. I came away from this movie with the same reservations that BSG did. I loved the movie, and will watch it many times again, but I agree that I still adhere with a 6000 year old earth and Genesis as an accurate account of Creation. I will use the analogy of Blake’s argument. If we reject or modify Genesis, it will lead to a path of rejection or modification of all of the events of the Bible. Where does it stop. Just because we don’t understand, doesn’t make it untrue. Using Kerry’s analogy that science will catch up to the Bible I feel is a good one. Just like Dr. Brown’s Creation Science work on the flood. If we view the world from a Biblical perspective, we will see God’s hand in it. If we view from a secular point of view, we won’t.

    Isn’t that exactly what God teaches us over and over …. I think so.

    Thank you for a very thought provoking review. Well done!


  8. Great review….Me and my wife watched this movie together and loved it. She is a physics person and understood everything they were trying to explain. It was a very convincing presentation, but I realized that they were saying the evolutionists view of billions of years was true. They claimed in the movie that it wasn’t a compromise like the Day-Age theory, but it seemed to come out that way in the end. I really do appreciate your explanation of this. If God inspired the writers of the Bible word for word than he had them write it to where we would understand it: six literal days. Also, I’ve been taught that carbon dating is based on whether the earth as we know it has been at a constant, but we know from scripture and from scientific discoveries that the earth had a different atmosphere due to the water canopy, or the firmament. But I do like the explanation that if carbon dating can’t get the right date of a material that we already know the date of, than how can we trust it to date a substance with an unknown date?

    Thanks once again, enlightening article.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Have you thought of this point, If God who is the master and creator of time, and the universe as a whole had a day do you really think it would be twenty four hours long. he is a timeless being there for time doesn’t actually matter in his workings. How ever every part of the bible disproves the fact that God works in our time. God didn’t just say oh i want a savior so “let there be a savior born to a virgin” no he set it up generations in advanced. He Sets things up in the long run. That being said, A POT as the Code calls it could very well be a Day for the Almighty.


  10. I just watched this movie. As a christian who is open minded to physics and astronomy I believe this is the best scientific and religious evidence I have heard in support of one another. The movie explains that the Big Bang is what created the universe, but does not say that God wasn’t in control of the Big Bang. Then explains that the speed of light is a measure of time (which I’m sure everyone already knows), and that since God is the creater of the entire universe; not only earth, than his frame of reference on time is the speed of light not a 24 hour day cycle. It also explains that at the speed of time it accounts for the order in which everything arose on earth according to the Bible in a 6 day period (creating light the 1st day, 2nd day water etc. on a frame of reference on God’s perspective of time using the speed of light.


  11. good movie . the passage of time science being used to explain the six day creation sounds like a plausible truth .


    • The movie’s “proposal” may sound plausible and appealing, but it doesn’t cohere with a close scrutiny of the Genesis record as I detailed in the blog post and in the list of supplementary material at the end of the post.


  12. My understanding of what was being said in the movie is that with the time dilation and God’s possible perspective (center of the big bang), the universe, sun, and earth would be the age that the scientists say, but the human lineage would be 6,000 years old. Not a young universe or earth, just young “us”.


  13. Having watched the movie there is a couple of areas I find interesting. I have always believed the problem with the science versus the Bible is idea that there was a zero point at the beginning. For example God created Adam as a functional human capable of fending for himself if needed not as a child/ baby. My picture for Adam is a late teenager or early 20 something in appearance. The next day after creation Adam was only 1 day old not 20 but he looked 20. The world could be created by God to appear 15 billions years old and still be one week old. The evidence from science however based on simple interpretation leads one to believe it is older especially if it had a zero beginning. My faith is not shaken by lack of explanation, but my scientific curiosity is always titillated by new ways to look at old concepts. God is not bounded by my simple concept of time or my ability to explain how God created stuff from nothing but my God given intellect does allow me to make use of fundamental natural laws of physics, math, and chemistry to explain why certain physical things happen. I am thankful God loved me to send Jesus and relish with delight challenges in nature to understand the universe better and see the magnificence of God at work.


    • I’ve always found the debate about the existence of God based on scientific fact amusing, because it is completely dependent on God being rational or bound by rationality. Without rationality, science fails. and God is not rational. love is not rational, it’s completely rediculous in the best possible way.


      • I’m curious about your statement that God is not rational. Is there a scriptural reference to for it? I would be interested. I’ve always pictured a God who looks like us (per Genesis) only infinitely more intelligent – more rational if you will. Always open to learning new things though. 🙂


        • I think God is both rational AND irrational, which logic cannot handle. God is not bound by anything. God created logic. If God is purely rational, how are women made in the image of God? The Bible clearly states that women are made in the image of God. Very little of the Bible is rational/logical. There is creation, which is 1 chapter, and some of the laws around things like mould and pigs. The rest of the Bible is God’s love story with mankind. God sacrificed His own son, which seems impossible to rationalize without trivializing it. The motivation behind creation also might not have been rational. It’s interesting to think of God presenting some of his creation to the world’s best minds, and then saying something like: “I created this particular thing like this, so that in 5 years, a homeless orphan in India will know that I love them.” The beatitudes defy logic. The fruits of the Spirit aren’t rational. Also, the image of God can’t be defined. There is no picture that accurately describes Him. He is indescribable. These are just a few of the images of God in the Bible: tree, rock, hen, lion, lamb, fire, dove, water. God is both male (strong, courageous, adventureous) and female (beautiful, desirable).


        • Thanks for the insight. 🙂


  14. Can’t put my finger where i heard this before but its still interesting


  15. i think i heard about this not too long ago, still interesting though,


  16. i’m no pro. in fact, i’m a complete amateur. i don’t know accuracy on the scientific projections about what happened in the time periods and how they related that to the Bible. but, I did like the simple beauty of the explanation. does anybody know whether this was based on a scientific theory? or did they just make it up for the movie?


    • it was indeed based on a scientific theory, but once again, only another THEORY.

      Honestly, I don’t think God will be too disappointed in me when I get to heaven if I thought he created the world in 6000 years if he did it in 13 billion yrs or vice verse.


      • See the six Age of the Earth articles listed above at the end of the blog under Supplemental Material that defend an age for the universe of about 6,000 years and oppose the idea that the universe is around 15 billion years old.


  17. You 6000-year-old-Earth guys drive me nuts, are you so intimidated by the concept that GOD Is so Much Greater, and so Much More Wonderful than your puny minds could ever conjure up that he called All Matter, Space, Time and Distance “INTO EXISTENCE”,13.777 billion years ago, is it that you don’t want to believe that GOD could this? I’ve heard people say, well, GOD would be wasting HIS time if he started the Big Bang 13.777 billion years ago, (really? , you know better than GOD?. How dare you!) Do you even believe in the Big Bang? using the red shift measuring technique IT’S AN ABSOLUTE PROVEN FACT, the red shift light measured properly is “Proven!!!”
    back to to you even believe in the Big Bang? . If not? GOD is just a big cosmic remodeler for you. That would mean that HE didn’t really create anything, because He just used what was already laying around.


    • Thank you for reading and commenting.

      The issue is not whether God could or could not create in Six Days or in billions of years. Obviously He could do whatever He wished. The issue is: What did He say He did in Genesis 1 and Exodus 20:11? He said He did it in Six Days, 6,000 years ago (according to the Genesis 5 & 11 genealogies), so that’s why I believe it. See the links listed at the end of the blog, especially Age of the Earth 3 — Genealogies and Are the Six Days of Creation Regular Days or Long Ages? for more reasons.

      No, I do not believe in the Big Bang. See The Big Bang! for my reasons why not.


  18. This is a wonderful website filled with quality information, i will be back.


  19. Mr. Bible-science guy can u please explain how the view if genisis is from an earthly perspecticve because from what I’ve read of it it was from the perspective of a third party that was not there but was inspired to write the story of how god created the universe by god himself… In which case puting the perceptive into the perspective of god who inspired said man to write it in the first place… Would it not be a story from the eyes of god passed to said man and then written into the words of genesis


    • The best understanding of how we got the account in Genesis is that Adam kept records which were supervised by God, and these records were preserved and continued by his descendants, again with God’s divine oversight. They would have been preserved in the ark and continued by Noah and his descendants. Eventually Moses compiled Genesis, still with God’s divine direction, inspiration, and supervision. See my blog post Rivers of Eden for a fuller discussion of the records behind Genesis.

      Regarding the method you suggested: God is certainly able to give accurate words to a third party and inspire them to write down a clear account of what happened when He created the universe. But it is more reasonable that someone who was there recorded it as a first-person history, namely Adam.


  20. Although was it not God who commanded someone to write down the book of Genesis? Therefore it was God’s view and we know that God isn’t from Earth so his view of time IS different.

    Also, how do you explain the layers of rocks? We see layers of rocks taking hundreds of years to form today, and yet there are thousands of layers WITH fossils in them. So if God created the rocks that way, did He then create fossils that are already in them? I doubt it.

    This is not to put down anyone’s beliefs, I’m just very curious as to the answer to these questions. In Biology class my teacher constantly puts down Christianity and relies heavily on the fact that there is so much evidence pointing out how the earth couldn’t be made in 6/7 days.


    • Certainly God inspired men to write Genesis to communicate His truth to mankind. But He would have to use man’s frame of reference to communicate with man. Genesis is written from the reference point of earth, not from a cosmic reference point somewhere in the heavens that may have a different time scale. Such would be of no help communicating to man on earth.

      Almost all the sedimentary rock layers were laid down by Noah’s Flood around 4500 years ago. Animals and plants that were buried in the Flood sediments comprise the fossils we find today. See Unlocking the Geologic Record for more details and links to relevant articles.

      I know of no evidence proving the earth could not have been made in six days. Towers of assumptions and interpretations are neither facts nor proofs. They are merely speculative theories.


      • The flood explains some things, but how come deeper in the earth there are less and less complex organisms? Such as why are there no pigs and cows and humans found with the dinosaur fossils? why are there no dinosaur fossils founds even deeper where only cyanobacteria and other bacteria is found?

        This is truly fascinating, for I did not think of the flood as putting down sediments. And thank you for the link, this is simply further preparing me for more debates with my teacher and i need all the help I can get – I’m 16, she is 40


  21. We watched this movie 3 nites ago and enjoyed it… I guess I am an old earth creationist, or evolutionary theist, or??? My basic question in these matters is: Why is it that only Young Earth Creationists come to the conclusion that the Earth is 6000 years old? Why are there no atheist scientists that come to the same conclusion, simply by looking at the evidence in an un-biased fashion? I can’t believe that the scientific community as a whole are a bunch of lunatics, or that God is a great deceiver…..


    • Thank you for reading and commenting.

      Your “basic question” is tautologous. Those who conclude that Earth is 6,000 years old are essentially by definition Young Earth Creationists.

      God is certainly not a deceiver — He gives us clear data in Genesis 5 & 11 from which one can calculate the age of the universe as around 6,000 years.

      Atheists do not reach this conclusion due to their evolutionary worldview, not because they are lunatics. Nobody looks at evidence in an unbiased fashion. Everybody’s worldview influences their interpretation of the evidence.

      Hundreds of different processes have been used to estimate the age of the earth. Scientific evidences from many fields dispute evolutionary timescales but cohere with Biblical chronology. The weight of the scientific evidence is that the earth is thousands, not billions, of years old. The only billion-year-age methods are the radiometric ones. See Radiometric Dating for reasons why radiometric dating methods give incorrect results. See Scientific Dating Methods for examples of methods which yield young ages for the earth.

      I’m glad you’re thinking and interacting about these important issues.

      Liked by 1 person

  22. Interesting explanation. One point that you fail to comprehend or explain in this explanation is that the word ‘day’ was never used in the original biblical records. If you look to the original Hebrew, you would know that the word only means ‘a period of time’ nothing more. But when the bible was being translated, the word they agreed on to explain this period of time, was ‘day’. Nothing more nothing less. To believe that it is a day, when God never said that, is man’s philosophy that most religions misunderstand.

    The period of time, could be any period of time, any other period of time, and in fact could be billions of years. The only time we have given to us is after the time of Adam, which is after the creation itself… so the time of the creation, and then the time after Adam, might be different since it is only a period of time, but not a time that is actually specified.

    What God related, was a period of time passed and this happened. Then during this period of time, this happened, and then this happened, etc. The earth since the time of Adam could still be around 6000 or so years… that may be an accurate figure, but all the things that happened during the creation, could be any period of time, we simply do not have any evidence one way or the other. Just guesses and faith.


    • Thank you for reading and commenting.

      Actually the Hebrew word used for “day” in Genesis 1 is “yom.” This is the usual word used for day in the Old Testament. It can mean a period of time, but the vast majority of time it means a regular day. One has to use the context to determine which meaning is correct in any given passage. The context in Genesis 1 makes it clear that “yom” means a regular day.

      For example, the boundaries of the Creation Days are specified as “evening and morning.” Evening and morning bound a regular day, not long periods of time. God created the sun to “govern the day” (Genesis 1:16). We know what period of time the sun rules; it’s a regular day. Moreover in the Ten Commandments God Himself said, “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.” (Exodus 20:11) He gave this as justification for man’s work week of six days. The same Hebrew word is used for the Six Days of creation as for man’s days.

      Jesus also did not believe the Creation Days were long ages, for He said, “But from the beginning of creation, God made them male and female.” (Mark 10:6) This places the creation of Adam and Eve in the beginning. If the Creation Days were long ages, the creation of Adam 6,000 years ago on Day 6 could in no wise be said to be at the “beginning of creation.”

      Finally, here is an article with more arguments showing from the Genesis text itself why the Creation Days of Genesis must be understood to be normal earth days and not long eons of time:
      Are the Six Days of Creation Regular Days or Long Ages?
      The historical record in Genesis supplies compelling reasons proving the Creation Days were regular days.


  23. If you believe, there’s no reason to know any of it. When you are touched by the holy spirit there is no way to explain how it feels,it is your faith in him that lets you know all you need to know, your eyes become open, your heart burst open for no apparent reason, all of it is impossible to explain, for if we knew all the answers then we could be God couldn’t we! I don’t feel that we are meant to know all that he knows. I always figured if your going to believe in something, why not in positive living, Then in other things that harm you body and soul. So many people hide behind societies unpopular virsion of those who have faith in God, its ok to be afraid, but you need to be open to all possibilities, and your heart will lead you where you need to be. To me it wouldn’t matter if science put ,what they believe to be proof that there is no God in my face I would still “KNOW” there is a God. I have felt his presence, . I have never seen 1 million dollars but I still know it exists, I have never seen God but I know he exists. Find the little bit of God inside you, you will not regret it. I promise.


  24. I think his creation was through Jesus Christ for us, so thinking he was about to create Adam and Eve, don’t you think he could suddenly make all the creation as he spoke? Example: let there be light, he made the sun, the moon, the stars, including the precise amount of energy to reach the earth immediately. I mean, if a star is millions of light years far from earth, he didn’t only create that star but also created the light it emitted right away. Or should he stay waiting for millions of years so this first beam of light arrives earth and that he could speak again and continue creation? What science sees is only the evidence that something was created, and speculates that only after something is created it starts working. No, that would be just like saying that Adam should be 0 days old when God created him. God created all as fully functional organisms, and in full operation.
    I liked the movie, but God’s word is to be taken as a small child, believe it through the Holy Spirit, not through human reason because men cannot explain God. That would be like a nail trying to understand his creator.

    Matthew 19:14
    “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”
    Luke 18:17 Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.”


    • Thanks for reading and commenting. In whatever way God did it, it seems that Adam could see the stars from the beginning, since their created purpose was “for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years” (Genesis 1:14-15).


      • Absolutely agree


  25. Thank God! Someone with brains speaks!


What do you think? Leave a comment. Please pray for the worldwide impact of the Bible-Science Guy ministry!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: