Are the days of creation real or are they periods?

[Bill_II]

@MikeBoll

Surely you don’t truly believe that scientific investigation is void of assumptions,

The assumptions don’t control the outcomes as the assumptions in Biblical interpretation do. That is why you can take the Bible and end up with hundreds of different conclusions. Each conclusion started with slightly different assumptions.

@MikeBoll

that “consensus” means there is no disagreement by other scientists,

Yes there are disagreements between scientists and sometimes those disagreements end up with new science. I have never seen a Calvinist convince an Arminian they were wrong, or vice-versa.

@MikeBoll

that historical sciences can make predictions that can be empirically tested,

Depends on what you mean by “historical sciences.” Geology is certainly one historical science and yes it does make predictions that are tested all the time. Otherwise geologists wouldn’t never be able to find oil and gas.

@MikeBoll

I tried to bring up the collapse of the Big Bang Idea (not a scientific theory by any stretch of the imagination) in my last thread,

You might want to take a look at this and see why the Big Bang Theory counts as a scientific theory.

1192×120 24.6 KB

Note: This post was originally published on February 21, 2013. It is part of the series "Evolution Basics", which is the most comprehensive resource on evolutionary science in our entire library, written specifically for those without advanced training in science. In this article, Dennis Venema addresses confusion over the scientific definition of the word "theory", which fuels many misunderstandings about the science of evolution. For those who want an in-depth look at the building blocks of m…