Sometime, I need to list all the books donated to our church family, published by Master Books (Answers in Genesis). Perhaps, I will compile the list and place it in this thread.
The title of this post is taken from chapter 15 in the book, The New Answers Book (2006), general editor, Ken Ham.
Douglas W. Phillips, president of Vision Forum; John D. Morris, president of Institute for Creation Research; Ray Comfort, Living Waters Publications, and Dennis Rainey, president of FamilyLife provide endorsements on the page before the table of contents.
In chapter 15, Bodie Hodge tackles seven myths:
- Claim: Biblical Creationists Believe the Earth is Flat.
- Claim: Biblical Creationists Don’t Believe There Are “Beneficial” Mutations.
- Claim: You Can’t Be a Christian If You Don’t Believe in a Young Earth.
- Claim: Biblical Creationists Take the Whole Bible Literally.
- Claim: Biblical Creationists Don’t Have Any Evidence for Their Position.
- Claim: Biblical Creationists Believe the Earth Is the Same Now as It Was at the Beginning of Creation.
- Claim: Biblical Creationists Are Anti-Science and Anti-Logic.
Have you heard these claims before?
Jesus in Idaho Falls 
yes, I’ve heard most of them.
I don’t see how Hodge can actually dispel these “myths,” since if even a handful of biblical creationists believe them then they’re not universally myths. In other words, how can Hodge speak for all biblical creationists?
I suppose my comment was a bit obvious, so let me be more clear: Do I believe that biblical creationists are anti-science (“myth” #7)? Most of the times that I have gotten into debates on science with biblical creationists I have come away with that conclusion (whether they recognized it or not).
Brian, would there be any scientists of the past whom you respect that would hold similar theological views with the biblical creationists that you have conversed with?
It has nothing to do with their theological views, per se. Look at myth #3: the implication is that you can interpret data differently and still be Christian, right? The dispute I have is that many biblical creationists (that I have conversed with) pick and choose their science—and that, by definition, is not science. Any “scientist” who regularly did/does that, is not a scientist, in my opinion. But I would not necessarily have any beef with a scientist who believes that the world is 6,000 yrs old.