There are so many close similarities between the biblical Flood account and the Mesopotamian accounts that many conservative scholars have concluded that the biblical and Mesopotamian flood accounts go back to a common tradition about the same flood. This means if we can locate the flood from the Mesopotamian accounts, we will have located the biblical flood.

In this video clip, Denis Alexander discusses the description of the Fall found in Genesis. Alexander suggests that the picture we might have of the story owes more to the imaginative expansion of the narrative as found in Milton’s Paradise Lost than what is actually present in the biblical text itself.

I do not believe, as Dr. Meyer asserts, that he is unqualified—quite the opposite. He is likely more qualified as a philosopher than I am as a scientist. [However], Dr. Meyer has ventured into my discipline, biology.

In late December, Darrel Falk sent a copy of his overview of Signature in the Cell to Stephen C. Meyer, the book's author, and asked for a reply. Today, we are happy to post Dr. Meyer’s unedited response.

I am asked all the time to explain, in a nutshell, why irreducible complexity is not a valid argument in favor of intelligent design. However, I have never heard anyone put it in a more cogent form than Oxford biophysicist Ard Louis in this video.

Before considering the scientific data, we must first determine a rough earliest probable date for the Flood. If the Flood is an actual historical event, it must touch down in the empirical data of history somewhere.

I’m a conservative evangelical. When I became a Christian fourteen years ago, I not only embraced profound new spiritual perspectives, but inherited a host of new scientific views: the earth was young, macro-evolution was false, and to affirm the contrary was to discredit the Bible and even the Gospel.

In this brief video, Physicist Ard Louis looks at two important aspects of time to consider when reading Genesis 1: chronology and the idea of “deep time”.

In Galileo Goes to Jail, historian of science Ronald Numbers states: “The greatest myth in the history of science and religion holds that they have been in a state of constant conflict.” As the founder and director of The Clergy Letter Project, I’m well aware of the power of both of the points made in Numbers’s book.

As author of The Fossil Hunter, I’ve found myself writing and speaking a great deal these days about the reconciliation of science and religion. But somehow I fear I’ve failed to make a connection with my own children as I’ve attempted to get this same message across.

In this video clip, Oxford University biophysicist, Ard Louis posits that one of the reasons Christians are hostile to evolution is that they latch onto a particular definition, which puts it in conflict with their theological convictions.

Why are we afraid of the facts of evolution, instead of drawn to the picture God paints with them? Pastors can keep their congregations fired up by indulging a culture suspicious of science, but denying the consensus of science on evolution does not glorify God.

I was raised to believe that evolution was a conspiracy to undermine faith in God and had no evidence to support it. Like many young people today, I thought of Darwin in the same negative way that I thought of Hitler—simply evil.

Christians have lost their ability to speak the “faith given to the saints.” The problem is that the historic faith has become fragmented.

Genesis 1 and 2 tell the story of creation, and it says things that are at odds with what modern people know to be true of the world and universe around us. One of those issue concerns the second day of creation (Genesis 1:6-8), where God made the "expanse" or the "firmament".

British author, pastor, and theologian Rev. Dr. N.T. Wright suggests that questions concerning Genesis and the historicity of Adam and Eve get caught up in contemporary cultural issues, and miss the larger story.

The work Meyer had been discussing that led up to that final dismissive statement about “cranks” on page 322, was that of Gerald Joyce and Jack Szostak. I sent a copy of my overview to all three of them and asked for a response that I would post on this site.

Until last week’s Nature publication, we didn’t know there were animals with backbones walking on land that early. This is 18 million years earlier than paleobiologists expected.

But what if somebody wanted to believe instead that the street, the house, the track, the chain-link fence, and the useless driveways were all designed and built just as they are today? In other words, what if these useless driveway-like structures were the result of deliberate planning rather than circumstance?

We sent biologist Francisco Ayala a copy of Stephen C. Meyer’s Signature in the Cell and asked him to respond to our reflections on the book.

We've been amazed by the depth of the discussions that have taken place in the comment sections of our posts. As our blog continues to grow, the need to keep comments civil, open, and balanced, and for commenters to demonstrate good manners is even more important.

2009 marked both the 400th anniversary of Galileo’s telescope and the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. With these scientific discoveries fresh in our minds – as well as the many new ones made this year – it is little wonder that many have also spent 2009 pondering how science relates to faith.

There were several interesting developments in 2009. For starters, the New Atheists set much of the agenda, aligning themselves against both creationism and religion in general.