The illogic of anti-creationism
Over a century ago, astute anti-Darwinian apologist G.K. Chesterton1 (1874–1936) explained what had returned him “back to orthodox theology.”2 Surprisingly, the culprits were the leading christophobes of his day. Their attacks on Christianity were so irrational that they contradicted each other:
“As I read and re-read all the non-Christian or anti-Christian accounts of the faith … a slow and awful impression grew gradually but graphically upon my mind—the impression that Christianity must be a most extraordinary thing. For not only (as I understood) had Christianity the most flaming vices, but it had apparently a mystical talent for combining vices which seemed inconsistent with each other. It was attacked on all sides and for all contradictory reasons. No sooner had one rationalist demonstrated that it was too far to the east than another demonstrated with equal clearness that it was much too far to the west.”
On the one hand, they ‘proved’ Christianity was “a thing of inhuman gloom”, but then they proved that Christianity “was a great deal too optimistic.” Christianity supposedly caused overpopulation by “Go forth and multiply” (Genesis 1:28), but then it was supposedly anti-sex. Another of Chesterton’s examples was:
“Or, again, certain phrases in the Epistles or the marriage service, were said by the anti-Christians to show contempt for woman’s intellect. But I found that the anti-Christians themselves had a contempt for woman’s intellect; for it was their great sneer at the Church on the Continent that ‘only women’ went to it.”
So Chesterton concluded that either Christianity was very wrong indeed, if mutually incompatible objections can be hurled at it—or it was the one right belief system with the proper balance.
We see the same attacks today against consistent Christianity—creation as Christ proclaimed.3 For example, creation is ‘unscientific’ because “the basic proposals of creation science are not subject to test and verification.”4 But in the same breath, the critics tell us “scientists from many fields have examined these ideas and have found them to be scientifically insupportable.” But how could creation have been “examined” (i.e. tested) if its ideas are “not subject to test”?4 Also, atheists claim that we should accept only scientifically testable claims—but that claim is not scientifically testable.
On this line, many evolutionists claim that no true scientist believes in biblical Creation or doubts goo-to-you evolution. Creationists often counter with someone with high scientific qualifications and important contributions to science who does believe in creation and disbelieves evolution (such as Dr Ainsley Chalmers, pp. 35–37). But then the evolutionist iterates, “But no true scientist doubts evolution”, which even deserves the name, the “No True Scientist Fallacy”.
Then evolutionists accuse creationists of ‘lying’, without evidence. Yet they go on to proclaim that lying is the result of evolution (see “Lying and more as a survival strategy”, pp. 16–18). Many evolutionists also claim that all belief systems should be explained by evolutionary survival, so we can dismiss their truth claims. But then, their own evolutionary belief system should also be explained by evolution, not by its own truth claims.
Evolutionary belief leads to contradictions of its own: we evolved by survival of the fittest, in a ruthless struggle for existence, eliminating our competitors. But then we should care for endangered species—who are our losing competitors (see “Answering fool’s folly”, pp. 14–15).
As Creation magazine prepares to enter its 36th year, we can look back on its years of exposing evolutionary contradictions and defending Christianity. As we look forward, we pray that it continues in this task in the 100+ countries it goes to.
- Cosner, L., G.K. Chesterton: Darwinism is ‘An attack upon thought itself’, J. Creation 23(1):119–122, 2009; creation.com/chesterton. Return to text.
- Chesterton, Orthodoxy, ch. 6, ‘The Paradoxes of Christianity’, 1908. Return to text.
- Wieland, C., Jesus on the age of the earth: Jesus believed in a young world, but leading theistic evolutionists say He is wrong, Creation 34(2):51–54, 2012; creation.com/jesus-age-earth. Return to text.
- Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science, p. 55, National Academy of Sciences, 1998; see refutation, Sarfati, J., Refuting Evolution, ch. 9, 1999–2012. Return to text.
Except for what comes from their imagination…
“But they have walked after the imaginations of their own hearts” Jeremiah 9:14
…evolutionists cannot tell us how life began. There is not one experiment that has ever spontaneously produced life from chemicals.
So it’s a bit rich for them to say, “But no true scientist doubts evolution” when all they can do is invent lies and fables…
“Truly, this only I have found;
That God made man upright,
But they have sought out many inventions.” Ecclesiastes 7:29
…to prop up their fatally flawed theory/fantasy.
Hear, hear Dr. Sarfati. This contradictory aspect of evolution is symptomatic of its inherent God-less nature, which is driven by its dependence on the wistfulness of man—NOT by science. I believe this is one of the major reasons why evolutionary explanations on any particular subject change so much and so often.
Makes me think the term “evolution” is a euphemism for the word “contradiction”. I say this because ever since man has been recording his thoughts, no other theory opposes itself and stands so regularly in contra-position to science than the chameleon-like-ostrich-head-in-the-sand theory of evolution.
Although at its heart the support for evolution is really a spiritual matter, in that men loved a lie (so as to deny God) rather than the truth (that exalts God), this article may help one who is beginning to respond to God’s Spirit.
The evolutionist will give a calculation of light speed and equate it with age, but if a creationist mention light may have been faster in the past they foam at the mouth. Yet, they fail to see that their big bang model relies on ‘inflation’ which has things going faster than the speed of light in the past!
The evolutionist says that our minds are just chemical reactions, but they get upset if those so-called ‘chemical’ reactions veer towards a God!
The evolutionists have mutations as their high priest of biological progress, yet they would not dare tell a doctor or nurse to leave a mutation in a patient, with the reasoning that, evolution will solve the ensuing problems!
There are so many inconsistencies of evolution, but in the end they are what God said they will be lovers of a lie rather than the truth.
2 Timothy 3:13 “… evildoers and impostors will go from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.”
Thanks for the article. I'll join the (anticipated) chorus of “Me, too!” voices, as many of us have experienced similar irrational attacks by the uninformed.
For a period of about 15 years, I put God on the shelf. Interestingly, it was attacks by atheopaths on the Bible and creationism that helped be begin my return journey. And, like Chesterton saw, the attacks were irrational and contradictory.
Today, I am very involved in online creationism. Friends and I see that anti-creationists are extremely illogical, using name-calling and unsubstantiated assertions as well as practically every logical fallacy (and combinations thereof) to bolster their fundamentalist belief in evolutionism. They cannot refute the science that creationist scientists present, nor can they logically support their fundamentally flawed worldviews.
Attacks on me and my project cause me to dig in and keep on preaching the truth.
I really enjoyed reading Dr Sarfati’s informative article. I read yet another article the other day by an evolutionist claiming we have no free will—and something profoundly affecting occurred to me:
Evolutionists (especially cosmologists, for some reason!) want to tell us we have no free will. Yet one of the chief arguments I get from atheists against the existence of God is the old death and suffering question: If He’s there, why does He allow it? What popped in my brain (and hurt for a second!) was the fact that these people want it both ways. They want to blame God for not taking away free will (so murderers and rapists go on doing evil things), but they claim we have no free will anyway. Just one more chink in the armor of illogic! Thanks for listening, and for all you do at CMI. God bless!
Let’s also add how they blame religion for most wars but then turn around and say that its the product of evolution. If God does not exist and evolution is true then they should blame evolution because after all,evolution for some reason wanted to ‘trick’ one organism into believing they were created.
Indeed, I found out the same thing as Chesterton and Cowboy Bob S. in my own online apologetic debates with compatriot christophobes: their lack of logic in their attacks towards Christianity borders irrationality!
On the one hand, they say that Christianity makes people as meek as sheep, on the other hand they say that its biggest default is to give people a too high opinion of themselves.
On the one hand they say that Christianity is for white people, on the other hand they say that it is remarkable that there are so many Christians in Black Africa.
On the one hand, they say that Christianity is intolerant because it doesn't allow any pagan belief, on the other hand they say that Christianity is a mixture of pagan beliefs.
I’m not even mentioning all the equivocations, non sequiturs, elephant hurlings and other dishonest debate tactics they use: their goal is not to prove their position right but to ridicule the Christian faith of the participants at any cost. It would be laughable if it wasn't revealing of the awful state of growing apostasy in my country.