"Research published by the Barna Group in January 2018 showed that atheism among Generation
Z—those born between 1999 and 2015—is double that of the general population. The researchers discovered that in addition to many teens embracing relativism and/or agnosticism about what is true and, particularly, what is true about God (His existence, how to acquire eternal life, etc.), nearly half of teens—and ‘millennials’ (a.k.a. Generation Y, those born between 1980 and 1999)—said they needed factual evidence to support their beliefs. When asked what they considered to be the greatest barriers to accepting the Christian faith,
Barna found that two of the most common answers given by non-Christian young people, especially millennials, is
(1) that science refutes too much of the Bible and
(2) refusal to believe in ‘fairy tales’.
So, many non-Christian young people think that the scientific evidence does not support belief in the Bible. One reason for this is the constant stream of pro-evolution propaganda. Importantly, though, most (whether indoctrinators or the indoctrinated) fail to make the distinction between facts and their interpretation.
The late famous palaeontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science Stephen Jay Gould correctly noted: “Facts do not ‘speak for themselves’; they are read in the light of theory. … [Science is] not a mechanized, robotlike accumulation of objective information, leading by laws of logic to inescapable interpretation.”
An evolutionist looking at the fossil record (i.e., the observable fact), ‘sees’ (actually, interprets) it as a record of the evolutionary history of life from a universal common ancestor over billions of years. However, a creationist interprets the same facts as largely representing a vast sequence of rapid burial by a complex, cataclysmic global Flood. One can evaluate the validity of either creation or evolution by considering whether there are any observable facts that cannot be consistently interpreted within the worldview in question. If there were, for example, fossils crossing through multiple layers of rock supposed to have formed over millions of years, or fossil organisms found out of sequence of their supposed evolutionary history, or soft tissue found in the remains of organisms which supposedly died out ‘millions of years ago’, then the observable fossil record would be inconsistent with the evolutionary worldview (though such observations would be consistent with the creationist worldview).
Scripture tells us to be ready with answers to questions and objections about Christianity ...but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.
1 Peter 3:15."
CMI
Barna found that two of the most common answers given by non-Christian young people, especially millennials, is
(1) that science refutes too much of the Bible and
(2) refusal to believe in ‘fairy tales’.
So, many non-Christian young people think that the scientific evidence does not support belief in the Bible. One reason for this is the constant stream of pro-evolution propaganda. Importantly, though, most (whether indoctrinators or the indoctrinated) fail to make the distinction between facts and their interpretation.
The late famous palaeontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science Stephen Jay Gould correctly noted: “Facts do not ‘speak for themselves’; they are read in the light of theory. … [Science is] not a mechanized, robotlike accumulation of objective information, leading by laws of logic to inescapable interpretation.”
An evolutionist looking at the fossil record (i.e., the observable fact), ‘sees’ (actually, interprets) it as a record of the evolutionary history of life from a universal common ancestor over billions of years. However, a creationist interprets the same facts as largely representing a vast sequence of rapid burial by a complex, cataclysmic global Flood. One can evaluate the validity of either creation or evolution by considering whether there are any observable facts that cannot be consistently interpreted within the worldview in question. If there were, for example, fossils crossing through multiple layers of rock supposed to have formed over millions of years, or fossil organisms found out of sequence of their supposed evolutionary history, or soft tissue found in the remains of organisms which supposedly died out ‘millions of years ago’, then the observable fossil record would be inconsistent with the evolutionary worldview (though such observations would be consistent with the creationist worldview).
Scripture tells us to be ready with answers to questions and objections about Christianity ...but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.
1 Peter 3:15."
CMI