The Foundational Scientific Commitments of the Biblical Science Research Center

The Biblical Science Research Center is committed to the disciplined investigation of the created world under the authority of Holy Scripture.
We affirm the value of observation, experimentation, measurement, mathematical analysis, engineering investigation, historical reconstruction, and logical reasoning. We also recognize that scientific activity never occurs in a philosophical vacuum. Every scientific interpretation depends upon prior assumptions concerning reality, knowledge, causation, history, order, and truth.
For this reason, the Biblical Science Research Center seeks to practice science consciously within the worldview revealed in Scripture.
Our purpose is not to reject science, but to restore its proper foundation.
We believe that science is possible because the universe was designed, created, ordered, and continually sustained by the God revealed in the Bible. Human beings can investigate creation because they were made in the image of God and placed within an intelligible world governed by divine wisdom and providence.
The following principles guide the research, teaching, publications, and scientific evaluation of the Biblical Science Research Center.

1. Science Is a Human Investigation of God’s Creation

Science is a disciplined human effort to observe, describe, measure, classify, model, and understand the created world.
Science does not create truth.
It seeks to discover truths concerning realities that already exist independently of the investigator.
The natural world is not produced by scientific theories. Scientific theories are human attempts to describe and explain aspects of the natural world.
This distinction is essential.
Reality must not be confused with the models used to represent it.
Scientific knowledge is therefore real and valuable, but always creaturely, limited, and subject to correction.

2. Science Is Possible Because Creation Is Intelligible

Scientific investigation assumes that the universe possesses genuine order.
Scientists expect that:
• physical events have causes;
• natural processes display regular patterns;
• mathematical relationships correspond to real features of the world;
• repeated observations can yield meaningful knowledge;
• human reasoning can recognize patterns;
• and the same creation can be investigated by different observers.
These assumptions are not produced by science itself.
They are necessary before scientific investigation can begin.
The biblical worldview provides a coherent foundation for them.
Creation is intelligible because it originated in the wisdom of a rational Creator.
The human mind is capable of discovering real features of creation because human beings were made in the image of God.
Science is therefore possible because there is a correspondence between the ordered creation of God and the rational capacities God has given to humanity.

3. Scientific Investigation Is Never Worldview-Neutral

No scientist approaches evidence without prior commitments.
Every researcher brings assumptions concerning:
• what exists;
• what kinds of causes are possible;
• whether purpose is real;
• whether divine action may occur;
• how the past should be reconstructed;
• what counts as an adequate explanation;
• and which authorities may be admitted into scientific reasoning.
These assumptions influence the questions researchers ask, the explanations they consider, the models they construct, and the conclusions they accept.
Therefore, scientific disagreement does not always result from disagreement over observable data.
Researchers may agree on the same measurements, fossils, structures, chemical reactions, or astronomical observations while interpreting them within different worldviews.
The distinction between evidence and interpretation must therefore be maintained carefully.

4. There Is No Autonomous or Religiously Neutral Science

Science is often presented as though it operates independently of theology, philosophy, or moral commitment.
In practice, however, every scientific framework rests upon ultimate beliefs.
Naturalism excludes divine creation, revelation, purpose, and supernatural action before evidence is evaluated.
Biblical science begins with the conviction that the triune God is the Creator, Lord, and interpreter of all reality.
Both approaches contain foundational commitments.
The central question is therefore not whether science has presuppositions, but whether its presuppositions are true, coherent, and capable of accounting for scientific knowledge.
The Biblical Science Research Center rejects the claim that naturalism is religiously neutral.
Naturalism is a philosophical commitment concerning the nature of reality.
It must be examined rather than silently treated as the necessary definition of science.

5. Scripture Provides the Ultimate Framework for Scientific Interpretation

The Bible is not a modern scientific textbook, nor was it given to provide technical descriptions of every natural process.
Nevertheless, Scripture reveals truths that are foundational to all scientific thought.
It identifies:
• the Creator of the universe;
• the origin of matter, life, and humanity;
• the distinction between Creator and creation;
• the order and purpose of the created world;
• the historical Fall;
• the entrance of corruption and death;
• the global Flood;
• the unity and dispersion of humanity;
• the continuity of divine providence;
• and the final destiny of creation.
These truths establish the historical, metaphysical, and theological boundaries within which scientific evidence must be interpreted.
Scripture does not eliminate the need for investigation.
Rather, it provides the worldview that makes disciplined investigation meaningful.

6. The Creator Possesses Exhaustive Knowledge

God knows creation completely because He designed it, brought it into existence, and continually sustains it.
Human beings know creation partially.
This difference is fundamental.
Divine knowledge is original, exhaustive, and independent.
Human knowledge is derivative, limited, and dependent.
Scientific investigation must therefore be conducted with humility.
Human beings may discover genuine truths, but no researcher possesses a complete perspective on reality.
Every scientific theory simplifies, selects, and models only certain aspects of the created order.
Because the Creator’s knowledge is perfect, His revelation has final authority over every human reconstruction.

7. Design Precedes Creation

The Biblical Science Research Center affirms that divine design logically precedes the bringing of creation into existence.
God did not create through ignorance, experimentation, trial and error, or accidental discovery.
He created according to His eternal wisdom and purpose.
This principle may be summarized as:
Design precedes creation.
Before an engineered object is constructed, its purpose, architecture, materials, relationships, constraints, and functions must first be conceived.
In a far greater and perfect manner, the created order reflects the prior wisdom of God.
Scientific investigation should therefore remain open to:
• purpose;
• function;
• design intention;
• coordinated architecture;
• information;
• hierarchy;
• optimization;
• and systems integration.
These categories are not foreign to science. They are indispensable in engineering and highly relevant to the investigation of biological and physical systems.

8. Creation Displays Functional and Systemic Integration

Natural structures rarely operate as isolated components.
Biological organisms, atmospheric systems, ecological relationships, molecular mechanisms, and astronomical structures function through interacting networks.
A wing does not function independently of the skeleton, muscles, feathers, respiratory system, nervous system, circulation, metabolism, and environment.
A cell does not operate through one molecule alone, but through coordinated pathways involving membranes, proteins, genetic information, energy conversion, transport, regulation, and repair.
The Biblical Science Research Center therefore emphasizes systems-level analysis.
A structure should be investigated not merely by asking what it is made of, but also:
• What function does it perform?
• What other components does it depend upon?
• What components depend upon it?
• What environmental conditions are required?
• What larger objective does it serve?
• How is information transmitted and controlled?
• What happens if one part is removed?
• Does the system reveal coordinated purpose?
Functional coherence and interdependence are scientifically significant evidence.

9. Engineering Analysis Is Essential to the Study of Creation

Engineering asks questions that are often different from those emphasized in descriptive science.
It examines:
• function;
• performance;
• efficiency;
• structural strength;
• stability;
• control;
• energy requirements;
• environmental limits;
• failure modes;
• load distribution;
• material properties;
• and system integration.
These categories are especially valuable in the study of living organisms.
Biological systems may be analyzed through principles drawn from:
• aerodynamics;
• fluid mechanics;
• structural mechanics;
• thermodynamics;
• control theory;
• biomechanics;
• information theory;
• systems engineering;
• materials science;
• and optimization.
Engineering analysis does not replace biological investigation.
It adds a necessary functional dimension.
It asks not only how a structure appears, but what it is capable of doing and under what conditions it can perform its intended function.

10. Purpose Is a Legitimate Scientific Category

Modern naturalistic science often attempts to explain natural structures exclusively through efficient causes: the physical processes immediately producing an event.
Biblical science affirms the importance of efficient causes, but it also recognizes formal and final causes.
A complete explanation may include:
• what a structure is made from;
• how it was produced;
• how its parts are arranged;
• what function it performs;
• and what purpose it serves.
Purpose is not merely a subjective human projection.
In designed systems, purpose is an objective feature of the system.
The function of a heart, wing, eye, lung, seed, or regulatory mechanism cannot be explained adequately without reference to the larger goal it serves.
Biblical science therefore treats teleological investigation as scientifically meaningful.

11. Natural Laws Describe God’s Ordinary Governance

The term “law of nature” refers to consistent patterns observed within creation.
These laws do not govern creation as independent powers.
They describe the regular manner in which God ordinarily sustains and governs the world.
Gravity, chemical bonding, conservation relationships, aerodynamic behavior, biological reproduction, and other recurring processes remain reliable because the Creator is faithful.
Natural law should therefore not be treated as a substitute for God.
Nor should divine providence be treated as a competing physical mechanism.
God’s providence is the ultimate foundation of the regularity described by scientific laws.

12. Natural Processes Are Real but Not Autonomous

Biblical science affirms the reality of natural causes.
Rain may be studied through atmospheric physics.
Disease may be studied through biology and medicine.
Flight may be studied through aerodynamics.
Geological structures may be studied through physical processes.
However, natural causes do not operate independently of God.
They exist, possess their properties, and continue in their activity because God sustains them.
To explain how a process occurs does not explain why the process, its materials, its laws, and its ordered environment exist.
Scientific explanation remains incomplete when it treats creation as self-originating or self-sustaining.

13. The Present Is Not Always a Sufficient Key to the Past

Scientific study often assumes that processes observed today operated in the same manner, at the same rates, and under the same environmental conditions throughout all past history.
Such assumptions may be useful in limited contexts, but they must not be treated as universally self-evident.
Past conditions may have differed significantly from present conditions.
Examples may include differences in:
• atmospheric pressure;
• atmospheric composition;
• temperature distribution;
• geological activity;
• hydrological systems;
• ecological conditions;
• radiation exposure;
• biological limits;
• and catastrophic events.
The present may provide evidence concerning the past, but present conditions must not automatically be projected backward without critical examination.

14. Operational Science and Historical Science Must Be Distinguished

Operational science studies phenomena that can normally be observed, measured, tested, and repeated in the present.
Examples include:
• chemical reactions;
• aerodynamic testing;
• medical trials;
• material stress analysis;
• electrical behavior;
• genetic processes;
• and laboratory measurements.
Historical science seeks to reconstruct events and conditions that are no longer directly observable.
Examples include:
• the origin of the universe;
• the origin of life;
• the formation of geological strata;
• the history of fossils;
• past climates;
• and the development of biological populations.
Historical science uses real evidence, but its reconstructions depend more heavily upon assumptions concerning initial conditions, past environments, rates of change, causal sufficiency, and chronology.
The distinction does not imply that historical research is meaningless.
It means that its conclusions must be expressed with appropriate epistemic humility.

15. Present Evidence Does Not Interpret Itself

A fossil is real evidence.
A rock layer is real evidence.
A genetic sequence is real evidence.
A biological structure is real evidence.
A measurement is real evidence.
Yet none of these announces its own complete historical interpretation.
Evidence must be placed within a model.
Models connect observable data with proposed causes, events, conditions, and timelines.
Different models may explain the same evidence in different ways.
The quality of a model must therefore be evaluated according to:
• its consistency with the evidence;
• its explanatory scope;
• its internal coherence;
• its assumptions;
• its predictive value;
• its ability to integrate multiple disciplines;
• and its consistency with revealed history.

16. Scientific Models Are Provisional

Scientific models are indispensable tools.
They simplify complex systems, organize data, generate predictions, and allow comparison between possible explanations.
However, a model is not identical with reality.
All scientific models contain assumptions, approximations, exclusions, and limitations.
The Biblical Science Research Center therefore distinguishes among:
• direct observation;
• measured data;
• mathematical calculation;
• inferred mechanism;
• reconstructed history;
• theoretical model;
• and philosophical interpretation.
These categories must not be confused.
A proposed model should be stated as a model.
A hypothesis should be stated as a hypothesis.
An estimate should not be presented as a direct observation.
Confidence levels and uncertainties should be acknowledged wherever they are relevant.

17. Quantitative Analysis Is Essential

Biblical research must not be satisfied with general claims when quantitative analysis is possible.
Scientific models should, where appropriate, include:
• measurable variables;
• clearly defined units;
• equations;
• boundary conditions;
• assumptions;
• sensitivity analysis;
• uncertainty ranges;
• and comparison with observable data.
For example, a claim concerning flight should consider:
• body mass;
• wing area;
• lift coefficient;
• air density;
• velocity;
• drag;
• power requirements;
• stability;
• and structural limits.
A claim concerning atmospheric conditions should consider:
• pressure;
• temperature;
• composition;
• gas density;
• oxygen partial pressure;
• heat transfer;
• and biological tolerance.
Quantitative analysis helps distinguish physical possibility from rhetorical assertion.

18. Assumptions Must Be Stated Explicitly

Every scientific calculation depends upon assumptions.
These may concern:
• initial conditions;
• material properties;
• environmental conditions;
• geometry;
• rate constancy;
• measurement accuracy;
• biological capacity;
• closed or open systems;
• and the applicability of specific equations.
Unstated assumptions can create false confidence.
The Biblical Science Research Center therefore seeks to identify assumptions clearly and evaluate how changes in those assumptions affect the conclusion.
Where several assumptions are possible, multiple scenarios should be considered.

19. Uniformitarian Assumptions Must Be Critically Evaluated

Uniformitarian reasoning assumes that present-day processes and rates are sufficient to explain past geological and biological history.
Certain forms of continuity are scientifically necessary. Water still possesses recognizable physical properties, gravity remains real, and chemical processes exhibit order.
However, methodological continuity must not be confused with historical uniformity.
The Bible records unique events and changing conditions, including:
• creation;
• the Fall;
• the Flood;
• post-Flood ecological transformation;
• and divine acts of judgment and redemption.
Scientific models should therefore distinguish between the stability of created principles and the possible variability of historical conditions.

20. Catastrophic Processes Must Be Taken Seriously

Present geological and biological structures may reflect not only slow and gradual processes, but also rapid, high-energy, catastrophic events.
Catastrophic processes can produce:
• rapid sedimentation;
• large-scale erosion;
• mass burial;
• ecological disruption;
• extensive transport;
• sudden environmental change;
• and significant geological restructuring.
The global Flood described in Genesis provides an indispensable historical framework for evaluating large-scale geological and paleontological evidence.
Flood-based models should be developed through careful quantitative research rather than vague appeal.
They must address mechanism, energy, timing, sediment transport, hydrology, tectonics, fossil distribution, and post-Flood recovery.

21. Death and Corruption Must Be Interpreted Theologically

The present world contains suffering, disease, predation, extinction, biological limitation, and death.
These realities must not automatically be projected into the original creation as though they were part of God’s first and unfallen design.
Scripture presents the Fall as a decisive historical event that brought judgment, corruption, and death into human experience and affected the created order.
The present condition of nature is therefore not necessarily identical with its original condition.
Scientific interpretation must distinguish among:
• original design;
• present function;
• degenerated condition;
• environmental limitation;
• adaptive capacity;
• and post-Fall or post-Flood modification.
A structure that performs poorly under present conditions may still preserve features associated with a different original environment or functional purpose.

22. Biological Structures Should Be Studied as Integrated Design Systems

Biological systems commonly exhibit multiple coordinated features operating toward a shared objective.
For example, avian flight involves the integration of:
• skeletal geometry;
• pneumatic bones;
• wings;
• feathers;
• flight muscles;
• lungs;
• air sacs;
• metabolism;
• balance;
• sensory control;
• and atmospheric conditions.
None of these components fully explains flight by itself.
The complete system must be evaluated.
When a non-flying organism retains many features associated with an integrated flight architecture, the researcher should investigate:
• whether the structure has been reduced;
• whether the environmental conditions have changed;
• whether performance limits prevent flight;
• whether the system preserves an earlier functional architecture;
• and whether present inability proves original incapacity.
Function must be assessed at the level of the whole system.

23. Similarity Does Not Necessarily Demonstrate Common Ancestry

Biological similarity is real and scientifically important.
Organisms may share structural, genetic, biochemical, or functional features.
However, similarity alone does not establish the historical mechanism that produced it.
Similarity may be explained by:
• common design;
• common functional requirements;
• shared environmental constraints;
• limited engineering solutions;
• variation within created kinds;
• or historical descent.
The preferred explanation must be determined by a broader analysis of evidence and worldview.
Biblical science recognizes that a common Creator may use recurring design principles across different organisms.
Shared design is not unexpected in a unified creation.

24. Variation Must Be Distinguished from Unlimited Transformation

Living organisms possess genuine capacity for variation, adaptation, recombination, selection, and population change.
These processes are observable and scientifically significant.
However, observable variation within living populations does not by itself demonstrate that all organisms share a universal common ancestor.
Biblical science distinguishes between:
• variation within created biological boundaries;
• adaptation to changing environments;
• genetic diversification;
• loss or modification of existing information;
• and claims of unlimited evolutionary transformation.
The extent and limits of biological change must be investigated empirically rather than assumed philosophically.

25. Information Is a Fundamental Feature of Life

Living systems depend upon organized information.
Genetic sequences, regulatory networks, cellular signaling, developmental pathways, error correction, recognition systems, and coordinated responses all involve information-rich processes.
Information cannot be reduced merely to the physical medium that carries it.
A DNA molecule has chemical properties, but the sequence of its bases also performs an informational function.
The study of life therefore requires attention to:
• code;
• sequence;
• regulation;
• communication;
• storage;
• retrieval;
• translation;
• redundancy;
• feedback;
• and correction.
These features are consistent with purposeful design and require adequate causal explanation.

26. Environmental Conditions Affect Biological Performance

Biological ability cannot be evaluated apart from environmental context.
A structure may possess a potential function that cannot be fully expressed under present conditions.
Performance may depend upon:
• atmospheric density;
• oxygen availability;
• temperature;
• gravity;
• humidity;
• water density;
• pressure;
• food supply;
• ecological relationships;
• and physiological limits.
The Biblical Science Research Center therefore distinguishes between biological architecture and environmental performance.
An organism’s inability to perform a function today does not necessarily prove that its architecture was never associated with that function.
The relevant question may not be merely whether the organism can perform under present conditions, but under what physically possible conditions its integrated architecture would become functional.

27. Interdisciplinary Research Is Necessary

Complex questions cannot always be resolved within one academic discipline.
The study of origins may require the integration of:
• biblical exegesis;
• systematic theology;
• Hebrew and Greek language study;
• history;
• philosophy of science;
• geology;
• biology;
• chemistry;
• physics;
• aerodynamics;
• engineering;
• mathematics;
• information science;
• and environmental analysis.
Each discipline contributes legitimate knowledge, but no single discipline should claim absolute interpretive authority.
Interdisciplinary research helps expose hidden assumptions and allows models to be tested from multiple perspectives.

28. Biblical Exegesis Must Be Careful and Responsible

Scientific theories must not be forced into Scripture.
Nor should biblical texts be used carelessly to support speculative claims.
Interpretation should consider:
• grammar;
• syntax;
• literary genre;
• historical context;
• canonical context;
• covenantal structure;
• biblical theology;
• and the analogy of faith.
The meaning of Scripture must be derived from the text rather than imported from a desired scientific conclusion.
Biblical authority requires responsible exegesis.

29. Scientific Language Must Be Used Precisely

Terms such as “proof,” “fact,” “law,” “theory,” “model,” “possibility,” “probability,” “evidence,” and “demonstration” should be used carefully.
A mathematical possibility is not automatically a historical certainty.
A correlation is not automatically a cause.
A computer simulation is not a direct observation.
A plausible mechanism is not necessarily the mechanism that occurred.
A majority scientific opinion is not identical with infallible knowledge.
Precision of language protects research from exaggeration and misunderstanding.

30. Peer Criticism Is Valuable

Scientific work benefits from careful criticism.
Researchers should welcome responsible examination of:
• calculations;
• assumptions;
• sources;
• experimental methods;
• interpretations;
• and conclusions.
Criticism should not be treated automatically as hostility.
It may reveal weaknesses, clarify arguments, improve models, and prevent error.
At the same time, criticism should be fair, evidence-based, and directed toward ideas rather than personal attack.
Biblical conviction and intellectual humility must operate together.

31. Scientific Consensus Is Not the Final Authority

Scientific consensus may represent accumulated expertise and should not be dismissed lightly.
However, consensus is not infallible.
The history of science contains many examples in which widely accepted interpretations were later revised.
Consensus may be influenced by:
• available evidence;
• methodological limitations;
• institutional assumptions;
• dominant philosophies;
• funding priorities;
• professional incentives;
• and cultural expectations.
Scientific claims must therefore be evaluated by evidence, logic, assumptions, explanatory power, and consistency—not merely by the number of people who accept them.

32. Negative Evidence Must Be Treated Carefully

The absence of currently known evidence does not always prove that something never existed or never occurred.
The geological record is incomplete.
Biological preservation is selective.
Historical records may be lost.
Environmental traces may be altered or destroyed.
Research methods may be limited.
Negative evidence can be significant, but its force depends upon whether the missing evidence should reasonably be expected to exist and be discoverable.
Arguments from silence must therefore be made cautiously.

33. Extraordinary Claims Require Responsible Argument

Biblical researchers should not accept sensational claims merely because they appear to support creation.
Claims concerning unusual fossils, artifacts, geological structures, ancient technology, biological abilities, or historical events must be evaluated rigorously.
Research must distinguish between:
• verified evidence;
• plausible interpretation;
• speculation;
• error;
• and deliberate fraud.
A claim does not become reliable simply because it appears useful for apologetics.
The God of truth is not honored by careless argument.

34. Christian Commitment Requires High Academic Standards

Submission to Scripture must never become an excuse for weak scholarship.
Christian researchers should demonstrate:
• accurate citation;
• responsible use of sources;
• reproducible calculation;
• honest presentation of data;
• clear distinction between observation and interpretation;
• fair treatment of opposing views;
• correction of known mistakes;
• and transparency concerning uncertainty.
Research produced under the name of Christ should reflect integrity, diligence, and respect for truth.

35. Science Has Moral Boundaries

Scientific capability does not automatically establish moral legitimacy.
The fact that something can be studied, engineered, modified, or produced does not mean that it should be.
Scientific practice must respect:
• the image of God in human beings;
• the sanctity of life;
• the dignity of the body;
• the moral order of creation;
• the welfare of communities;
• responsible treatment of animals;
• and stewardship of the environment.
Science must serve truth, life, justice, and love of neighbor rather than pride, exploitation, domination, or destruction.

36. Technology Must Remain Under Human and Divine Accountability

Technology extends human power.
It can relieve suffering, improve communication, advance medicine, strengthen education, and support responsible stewardship.
It can also magnify sin, surveillance, warfare, manipulation, dependency, and inequality.
Technological development must therefore be evaluated according to more than efficiency or profitability.
The central questions include:
• Does it honor God?
• Does it respect human dignity?
• Does it serve the neighbor?
• Does it protect truth?
• Does it promote responsible stewardship?
• Does it increase unjust control?
• Does it weaken moral responsibility?
Technology is never morally self-interpreting.

37. Science Should Serve the Church and Society

The purpose of biblical scientific research is not merely to win arguments.
It should strengthen the church, equip believers, educate students, support parents, assist pastors, encourage Christian scientists, and offer serious answers to intellectual objections.
It should also contribute positively to society through:
• accurate knowledge;
• responsible engineering;
• ethical technology;
• environmental stewardship;
• medical and humanitarian service;
• and honest public discussion.
Biblical science should be constructive, not merely reactive.

38. Scientific Research Should Produce Worship

The ultimate goal of science is not the glory of the scientist.
It is the glory of God.
The more deeply creation is studied, the more clearly its order, complexity, beauty, power, and coherence become visible.
Scientific discovery should lead to humility, gratitude, wonder, and worship.
Knowledge becomes distorted when it is detached from the Creator.
Knowledge reaches its proper goal when it returns in praise to the One from whom all truth comes.

Our Scientific Framework

The research of the Biblical Science Research Center is organized around five foundational realities:

These five realities may be summarized as:
Design → Creation → Order → Providence → Worship
This framework guides our interpretation of scientific evidence and expresses the central thesis of our research:
Science is possible only because the universe was designed, created, ordered, and continually sustained by the God revealed in Scripture.

Our Scientific Commitments

On the basis of these principles, the Biblical Science Research Center is committed to:

• conducting research under the authority of Scripture;
• distinguishing observation from interpretation;
• identifying philosophical presuppositions;
• using quantitative and engineering analysis;
• developing testable and clearly defined models;
• evaluating historical claims with epistemic humility;
• investigating biological systems as integrated designs;
• taking environmental conditions seriously;
• developing creation and Flood models responsibly;
• maintaining academic honesty;
• correcting errors openly;
• engaging opposing views fairly;
• serving the church and society;
• and directing all scientific work toward the glory of God.

Conclusion

The Biblical Science Research Center affirms that the created world is real, ordered, intelligible, and worthy of disciplined investigation.
We reject the false choice between serious science and faithful submission to Scripture.
The proper alternative to naturalistic science is not irrationality.
It is a more comprehensive scientific framework—one that accounts for the existence of order, law, reason, mathematics, information, purpose, and human knowledge.
Science does not stand above God’s revelation.
It operates within God’s creation.
The scientist is not an autonomous interpreter of an independent universe.
He or she is a creature investigating the works of the Creator.
For this reason, the Biblical Science Research Center seeks to practice science with conviction and humility, precision and wonder, courage and integrity.
We study creation because it is the work of God.
We pursue truth because God is truth.
We use reason because we bear His image.
We expect order because He is faithful.
We recognize design because He is wise.
And we offer every discovery back to Him in worship.
Science for the Glory of God.