Is That So?
January 14, 2013
The proliferation of communications media continues to cascade down upon us like a torrential rainstorm of books, magazines, TV programs, web pages, blogs, text messages, music, and videos. The Internet has redefined how we access information and now anyone with a computer may find answers to just about any question you might ask! But do all reports weigh truth accurately?
For instance, www.space.com recently posted an article called, “How Was Earth Formed.” Notice how it begins:
“There are two theories as to how planets in the solar system were created. The first and most widely accepted, core accretion, works well with the formation of the terrestrial planets like Earth but has problems with giant planets. The second, the disk instability method, may account for the creation of giant planets. Scientists are continuing to study planets in and out of the solar system in an effort to better understand which of these methods is most accurate.” 
It is important to note the word “theories” in the above paragraph. Sometimes those outside the scientific community accept statements in the news as de facto. After all, isn’t every “new scientific discovery” a reality? Perhaps we should pause and consider the word used above. More accurately, a theory is “a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation” or “an unproved assumption.”  Too often we take conjectures and turn them into factual truths.
Notice how the article continues: “Approximately 4.6 billion years ago, the solar system was a cloud of dust and gas known as a solar nebula. Gravity collapsed the material in on itself as it began to spin, forming the sun in the center of the nebula.”  If we are not careful to remember this is a proposed “model” for trying to understand the formation of planets, we might believe that there really are only two theories to explain the formation of our solar system.
Another theory, completely overlooked by this article and many scientists, is that, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1 NKJV). The growing evidence for a creation-model by a master designer in a short period of time continues to gain traction among scientists and other seekers. In reality, both creation and evolution are models that must be taken by faith. Both are theories that are built on assumptions. Creation assumes the Bible is a source of truth and that there is a God. Evolution assumes the Bible is not the source of all truth and that there is no God.
The next time you step into a blizzard of articles that “prove” evolution to be factual, think again. Pause and reflect on the evidence for different propositions for how the Earth was formed or how people came to be. A genuine search for truth looks at all sides of an issue. Have you honestly considered what the Scriptures say happened in the beginning?
 (“theory.” Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary: Eleventh Edition, 2003).
Amazing Facts is a non-profit, donor-supported ministry.
We greatly appreciate your prayers and financial support.
An Overview of Revelation: Apocalypse Synopsis, Pt 5