|
Feedback archive → Feedback
2009
Are young-earth creationists irrational knuckle-brains?
Christianity and evolution really are in conflict
Published: 21 November 2009(GMT+10)
There’s no room for fence-sitters in the “tug-of-war” between Christianity and evolution. One is either for or against (cf. Proverbs 12:17, Matthew 12:30, John 8:44–45)—there’s no room in the middle. (Photo istockphoto)
This week’s Feedback highlights two letters expressing strong disagreement
with CMI’s stance on evolution. First was USA correspondent Sam W., whose
letter is first printed in its entirety, then Lita Cosner
responds point-by-point below. Then Antonio C., also of
the USA, wrote a blunt paragraph, to which
Gary Bates responds.
Sam W.: Dear Creation.com
I continue to be fascinated with this concept of young earth or creationism. I find
it entirely irrational. Now, understand where I am coming from—I am a chemistry
major and Doctor of Pharmacy student. I have enough of an understanding of science
to understand and interpret the arguments for and against evolution. There are a
few things that have been bothering me:
Proponents of creationism more often than not look for evidence to support an outcome
or conclusion. This “fact-fitting” is disturbing and more akin to the
methodology of a conspiracy theorist than an educated person. Science, often the
target of creationists, weighs evidence and then forms a conclusion. Unlike “fact-fitting”,
science is open to further elaboration as it seeks truth.
Where in the Bible is it stated that Christianity is to be based off of the Bible
alone. Furthermore, what about the history of the Bible. The Bible was written once
upon a time by human hand. It was not created and left for us to find. The Church
was founded and then the bible was written.
Also, let’s say evolution is proved true, what would it matter? I have picked
my brain and I can not find the conflict between Christianity and evolution. Contrary,
my admiration and wonder with the natural world and all its processes strengthens
my faith.
“Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.”—Albert
Einstein
Seeking truth, finding religion, finding beauty,
Cheers,
Sam
Sam. W.: Dear Creation.com
I continue to be fascinated with this concept of young earth or creationism. I find
it entirely irrational. Now, understand where I am coming from-I am a chemistry
major and Doctor of Pharmacy student.
Lita Cosner responds:
There are many chemists on our
List of Creationist Scientists.
I have enough of an understanding of science to understand and interpret the arguments
for and against evolution. There are a few things that have been bothering me—proponents
of creationism more often than not look for evidence to support an outcome or conclusion.
This “fact-fitting” is disturbing and more akin to the methodology of
a conspiracy theorist than an educated person. Science, often the target of creationists,
weighs evidence and then forms a conclusion. Unlike “fact-fitting” science
is open to further elaboration as it seeks truth.
One would have thought that someone so advanced in his science education would have
known that this is a tired old stereotype of science. The idea of the disinterested
scientist is as mythological
as the tooth fairy. Evolutionist scientists are just as biased for their
view as creationists are, and fit the facts to their view. Some of the articles
in our Science Questions and Answers page
might also be relevant.
The idea of the disinterested scientist is as mythological as the tooth fairy.
Where in the Bible is it stated that Christianity is to be based off of the Bible
alone.
People have written whole books on the subject of sola Scriptura, so forgive
me if my answer doesn’t seem in-depth enough (see articles below for more
information).
First, we believe that the Bible is God’s Word. This makes it uniquely reliable
as a guide for belief and practice.
Second, we believe in what’s called the “sufficiency of Scripture.”
This means that we don’t need any other guide for belief or practice,
because the Bible has given us all the information we need. This does not mean that
every possible situation has been covered in the Bible; rather, it means that the
principles in the Bible can guide us in any situation.
Third, we believe in the “perspicuity of Scripture.” This means that
Scripture was written to be understandable; we don’t need anyone to interpret
Scripture for us. Now, this is one where we have to be careful, because Scripture
was written to be understandable to people at the time the particular book was written.
Since then, a lot of information about the biblical world has drifted out of common
knowledge. Bible scholars research the cultural context of Scripture, among other
things, and bring out the meaning of the text for laypeople. So study is still needed,
but even today, most Scripture is readily understandable, to the point where a 5-year-old
can understand the basics of salvation.
Furthermore, what about the history of the Bible. The Bible was written once upon
a time by human hand. It was not created and left for us to find. The Church was
founded and then the bible was written.
The Bible was written by humans. I get to see this very clearly myself
when I study the New Testament in Greek; Paul’s style is very different from
Matthew’s or Luke’s. Each author uses the expressions and grammatical
constructions that are natural to him. But we also believe that Scripture is inspired
by God. The Holy Spirit worked in cooperation with the mind of the human author,
using the author’s own vocabulary and way of expressing himself, to ensure
that the Scripture was entirely accurate and communicated what God wanted. So the
Bible can truly be said to be authored by both God and humans, but the
result was what God wanted.
Also, let’s say evolution is proved true, what would it matter? I have picked
my brain and I can not find the conflict between Christianity and evolution.
If you had searched the site as the feedback rules require, you would have known
what we say about the conflict between Christianity
and evolution.
Contrary, my admiration and wonder with the natural world and all its processes
strengthens my faith.
The intricacy of things in the natural world is one of the things that convinced
me that evolution couldn’t possibly be true. While creation is fallen, it
still bears testimony to its Creator. Ph.D. chemist Jonathan Sarfati’s latest
book, By Design, talks about
many of the evidences of design in the natural world.
“Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.”—Albert
Einstein
I am suggesting neither. The point at which we differ is whether science or the
Bible (religion is a far too general term for this argument) will be our starting
point when we are looking for truth.
Seeking truth, finding religion, finding beauty,
Cheers,
Sam
Sincerely,
Lita Cosner
Information Officer
Creation Ministries International
Photo istockphoto
Antonio C. Only the good Lord knows what he was doing
when he handed out brains to you guys. Maybe you were near the end of the line,
if not actually there … Seriously, one can believe in the fossil record and
evolution and still be a faithful Christian. Maybe you guys think about religion
the same way you think about politics—knuckle-brain like.
Gary Bates responds:
Hi Antonio,
Thanks for your email. No, truly, because it actually inspires us to fight the good
fight and hold to the authority of God’s Word instead of man’s fallible
opinions. This is because your email did not proffer one example of how our interpretation
of the fossil record is incorrect. You make an opinion but do not have any information
to support it. Nor could you ever possibly know what our political views are. Such
views are outside of our ministry mandate.
With regard to the fossil record, if you had done any proper research on our position
on such things (like viewing some of the 7,000 plus articles on our website) you
would realize that such evidence does not speak for itself, but is interpreted according
to a set of presuppositions that one brings to the evidence. You are clearly displaying
this trait, but seem unaware that you do so.
They can then engage in meaningful debate as opposed to cheap shot mudslinging
Your comments are not only insulting, but also not the fruit of one who claims to
be a Christian (thereby adding doubt on the veracity of your statement anyway, so
your comment on what defines a Christian could also be based upon ignorance). But
such ignorance about the limits of scientific understanding with regard to historical
or past events is probably not your fault because more than likely you have only
ever been exposed to one particular interpretation of the facts due to your schooling.
That’s why we are motivated in our efforts to be a good source of information
and encourage people to revisit the evolutionary brainwashing they have been exposed
to under the guise of “science”. Hopefully then they will learn “how”
to think about the evidence, not just “what” to think, and also not
just blithely accept sweeping assumptions. As such, and as is our experience, they
can then engage in meaningful debate as opposed to cheap shot mudslinging, which
is unfortunately what you displayed here.
Have an open mind? If so, do yourself a favor and take a look at the Q&A
section on Creation.com.
Gary Bates
CEO
Creation Ministries International (US)
Related articles
Further reading
|
