Changes

===Negative===

===Negative===

Organizations that accept evolution and oppose biblical creation, such as [[The BioLogos Foundation]],<ref name="Biologos">{{cite web | last1=Davidson | first1=Gregg | last2=Duff | first2=Joel | last3=Wolgemuth | first3=Ken |title=A Geological Response to the Movie "Is Genesis History?" | url=http://biologos.org/blogs/guest/a-geological-response-to-the-movie-is-genesis-history | date=March 1, 2017 | publisher=The BioLogos Foundation | accessdate=August 22, 2017}}<br>See also:

Organizations that accept evolution and oppose biblical creation, such as [[BioLogos|The BioLogos Foundation]],<ref name="Biologos">{{cite web | last1=Davidson | first1=Gregg | last2=Duff | first2=Joel | last3=Wolgemuth | first3=Ken |title=A Geological Response to the Movie "Is Genesis History?" | url=http://biologos.org/blogs/guest/a-geological-response-to-the-movie-is-genesis-history | date=March 1, 2017 | publisher=The BioLogos Foundation | accessdate=August 22, 2017}}<br>See also:

*Walker, Tas (June 22, 2017). [https://creation.com/biologos-fails-with-is-genesis-history-critique Biologos fails with Is Genesis History critique]. ''Creation Ministries International''. Retrieved March 9, 2018.</ref> [[Reasons To Believe]],<ref>{{cite web | last1=Zweerink | first1=Jeff | title=Thoughts on Is Genesis History? | url=http://www.reasons.org/blogs/impact-events/thoughts-on-is-genesis-history | date=February 24, 2017 | publisher=Reasons To Believe | accessdate=August 22, 2017}}</ref> and [[The Gospel Coalition]],<ref>{{cite web | last1=Ortlund | first1=Gavin | title=‘Is Genesis History?’: Revisiting an Age-Old Debate | url=https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/is-genesis-history-revisiting-an-age-old-debate | date=May 5, 2017 | publisher=The Gospel Coalition | accessdate=August 22, 2017}}</ref> gave the film negative reviews. According to Gregg Davidson, Joel Duff, and Ken Wolgemuth of Biologos, despite the "excellent" cinematography of the film, "the narrative that accompanied the rich display of God’s amazing creation fell far short of reflecting what we actually find revealed in nature."<ref name="Biologos"/>

*Walker, Tas (June 22, 2017). [https://creation.com/biologos-fails-with-is-genesis-history-critique Biologos fails with Is Genesis History critique]. ''Creation Ministries International''. Retrieved March 9, 2018.</ref> [[Reasons To Believe]],<ref>{{cite web | last1=Zweerink | first1=Jeff | title=Thoughts on Is Genesis History? | url=http://www.reasons.org/blogs/impact-events/thoughts-on-is-genesis-history | date=February 24, 2017 | publisher=Reasons To Believe | accessdate=August 22, 2017}}</ref> and [[The Gospel Coalition]],<ref>{{cite web | last1=Ortlund | first1=Gavin | title=‘Is Genesis History?’: Revisiting an Age-Old Debate | url=https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/is-genesis-history-revisiting-an-age-old-debate | date=May 5, 2017 | publisher=The Gospel Coalition | accessdate=August 22, 2017}}</ref> gave the film negative reviews. According to Gregg Davidson, Joel Duff, and Ken Wolgemuth of [[Biologos]], despite the "excellent" cinematography of the film, "the narrative that accompanied the rich display of God’s amazing creation fell far short of reflecting what we actually find revealed in nature."</ref>[[BioLogos]]</ref>  

Paul Nelson, who was interviewed for the film, later published an article stating that the film distorted his arguments and presented "a false dichotomy" between naturalistic evolution and young Earth creationism while omitting other viewpoints.<ref>{{cite web | last1=Nelson | first1=Paul | title=New Film Is Genesis History? Presents a False Dichotomy: I Dissent from My Role in It | url=https://evolutionnews.org/2017/02/new_film_is_gen/ | date=February 23, 2017 | publisher=Discovery Institute | accessdate=August 22, 2017}}</ref> Thomas Purifoy, the film's director and producer, responded with a blog post entitled ''A Tale of Two Dichotomies'' in which he presented the full film interview with Nelson as evidence to the contrary of Nelson's statements, and Purifoy stated that "as a philosopher, Paul seemed to be shifting back to viewing things from a philosophical perspective. The film, however, was not about comparing two different philosophies, but two different&nbsp;''histories''."<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://isgenesishistory.com/tale-two-dichotomies/|title=A Tale of Two Dichotomies – Is Genesis History?|date=2017-06-13|work=Is Genesis History?|access-date=2017-08-30|language=en-US}}</ref>

Paul Nelson, who was interviewed for the film, later published an article stating that the film distorted his arguments and presented "a false dichotomy" between naturalistic evolution and young Earth creationism while omitting other viewpoints.<ref>{{cite web | last1=Nelson | first1=Paul | title=New Film Is Genesis History? Presents a False Dichotomy: I Dissent from My Role in It | url=https://evolutionnews.org/2017/02/new_film_is_gen/ | date=February 23, 2017 | publisher=Discovery Institute | accessdate=August 22, 2017}}</ref> Thomas Purifoy, the film's director and producer, responded with a blog post entitled ''A Tale of Two Dichotomies'' in which he presented the full film interview with Nelson as evidence to the contrary of Nelson's statements, and Purifoy stated that "as a philosopher, Paul seemed to be shifting back to viewing things from a philosophical perspective. The film, however, was not about comparing two different philosophies, but two different&nbsp;''histories''."<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://isgenesishistory.com/tale-two-dichotomies/|title=A Tale of Two Dichotomies – Is Genesis History?|date=2017-06-13|work=Is Genesis History?|access-date=2017-08-30|language=en-US}}</ref>