How old is the earth?  

That single question has carved a chasm between mainstream church attendees and others with scientific backgrounds.  Many are confused and even wounded by the arguments that erupt between biblical and scientific interpretations of nature’s attributes.   

I too was wounded and began grappling with these issues over 40 years ago.  As a Ph.D. research geologist/chemist, and an elder in the church, I developed a series of lessons to address the arguments. The lessons include key scriptures and technical data and are now compiled and form the “Science and the Bible” course—attended by over 2000 church members.  Although still teaching, I am now sharing the course material through this blog series.  

Science is our friend, not our enemy.  It reveals the very nature of God as declared in the Bible (Psalms 19: 1,2 and Romans 1:18-22).   I pray that your questions will be addressed, and your faith and confidence in the God of this universe will be magnified.

Here is the course outline:

• Introduction – What is Truth?
• The Nature of God (as Revealed Through Science with Scripture)

— His Omnipresence

— His Omnipotence

— His Omniscience

• The Matter of Time
• Intelligent Design (The Evidence of God Within His Creation via Astronomy, Physics, and Earth Sciences)
• Evolution Examined (Micro vs. Macro, the “Origins” Question, Fossil Record)
• A Review of Six Creation Models (Accuracies and Inaccuracies Examined and Discussed)

Justification

On one hand we have God’s written Word, the Bible.  Its life-changing verses reveal truth about God’s universe and His unfathomable love for mankind.  Some claim it teaches that the universe and Earth are only a few thousand years old, and that science must be regarded with suspicion.  

On the other hand, we have science.  The complexity, diversity, and beauty of God’s creation as revealed through science are overwhelming.  The intricacy of life and nature’s inter-relationships are unfathomable.  They reflect design; they point to a Creator.  

Many believe there is only one choice—the concept of “science and the Bible” is a dichotomy.  But is it?

My Background.  As a five-year-old boy fascinated with rocks, I would drag home pieces of sandstone and plead with my mother to explain their shiny specks (minerals—mica).  I loved chemistry and mixed and heated unhealthy concoctions of solutions attempting to grow crystals as a third grader.

I also believed in God.  My mother insisted that we attend church on a consistent basis, and I never questioned His existence or power.  I had read most of the Bible before entering high school.

Twenty years later, I received my Ph.D. in geochemistry and spent most of my 35-year career as a research scientist in the oil industry.  I also served five-year terms as an elder in two different churches (one was a megachurch) and developed and taught numerous Bible studies.  Perhaps the most significant is an 11-week series named “Science and the Bible.” 

This Contribution.   As and elder, I listened to vehement arguments over dinosaurs and “Young Earth vs. Old Earth” philosophies.  In most cases, they included incorrect and/or incomplete technical data and scripture.  These arguments birthed the “Science and the Bible” lessons that were eventually integrated into a formal course.  I’ve taught it for about 15 years, and twice a year for over six years at a mega-church in southern California.

Today, we live in central Tennessee.  I’m retired but still teach Science and the Bible—a remote teaching option via Zoom is now available. My daughter encouraged me to transcribe each lesson as a resource for my grandchildren, and I’m sharing the papers (as “blogs”) with those interested.  The first blog describes how God worked through a storm to dramatically grip this 16-year-old boy.  

I hope and pray that these papers address your questions about God and His creation.  May they also ignite a passion for God within you as nature reveals His character through science (Romans 1:18-22).

*If you intend to post this work on another website please credit the author.