Here are two further reasons why believing and teaching Creationism is scientific [For Part One click here]:
3. Creationism is as scientific as evolution and we believe much more so. The belief in creationism and the belief in evolution stand upon similar foundations. To a considerable degree they are faith based beliefs.
If we think that this is not true about evolution then observe some words which appear in the introduction to one edition of Darwin's Origin of Species:
The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded upon a unproven theory - is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, have been capable of proof. [Found on page xi of the Introduction to an edition of The Origin of Species, by Charles Darwin, published in 1971 by J.M. Dent & Sons]
These are the words of Dr Leonard Harrison Matthews [1901-1986], who was a British zoologist and a Fellow of the Royal Society. He was especially known for his research and writings on marine mammals. He was no believer in creationism!
These are the words of Dr Leonard Harrison Matthews [1901-1986], who was a British zoologist and a Fellow of the Royal Society. He was especially known for his research and writings on marine mammals. He was no believer in creationism!
Sir Fred Hoyle, the popular agnostic who wrote Evolution from Space (1981), proposed that the odds on evolution happening were: One chance in 10 40,000 (same as the probability that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard could assemble a Boeing 747).
Many years ago a Harvard University biochemist and Nobel Laureate named George Wald, maybe unwittingly, highlighted just how ludicrous this whole position on evolution is when he declared: One has to only contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet we are here - as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation.
What is scientific about these professions of faith in evolution?
Malcolm Muggerridge, no friend of Biblical Christianity and literal six day creation, had this to say some years back: I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it's been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.
A frog turning into a prince by an instant kiss is a fairy tale, nursery rhythm, people read to their children. A frog turning into a prince over 300 millions years of gradual change, random processes, blind chance and genetic mistakes is classed as evolution, and the height of scientific discovery, by many scientists.
Instead of the Christian being laughed at, who believes in an Eternal God who has originally created all and has revealed Himself to us in the Bible, it is the fool who believes that we have arrived where we are today by gradual change, random processes, blind chance and genetic mistakes that deserves derision. Imagine believing that a frog could turn into a Prince! Albeit via 300 million years.
4. Only Creationism truly explains the world around us. There is a moral and spiritual dimension to our existence in this world that is not explainable by evolution. Some may deny these aspects of life but they exist nevertheless.
i. The existence of good and evil in the world. We are too aware of the existence of moral evil in the world. Sadly we often have to face up to and live with the reality. Man is a rational creature responsible for his actions. He is not just a step up from the brute beast with mere instinct. He is answerable and accountable to his fellow man and ultimately to God Himself on the day of judgment.
Where does evil come from? The Christian believes that God is not the author of evil, rather the devil is. What is the evolutionist's argument? If according to them, man is no better than the brute beast and our evil actions are just instincts, then why hold anyone accountable for the crimes they commit? Were they not just acting out their instincts? When society rightfully does hold the evildoer accountable they are acting according to a creation model of the world and not an evolutionary one!
ii. The seed of religion in all human beings across the world. This is especially worth observing where western society and Christianity haven't yet reached. Take primitive tribes in remote places of the earth and when missionaries, and others from developed societies, reach them they find them worshipping something. Sometimes it is dead ancestors and/or just sticks and stones. But they worship something! They are naturally religious beings without being influenced by others.
ii. The seed of religion in all human beings across the world. This is especially worth observing where western society and Christianity haven't yet reached. Take primitive tribes in remote places of the earth and when missionaries, and others from developed societies, reach them they find them worshipping something. Sometimes it is dead ancestors and/or just sticks and stones. But they worship something! They are naturally religious beings without being influenced by others.
We are born with an innate knowledge that there is a God. However, because of mankind's Fall into sin that knowledge of God is corrupted and distorted but still only exists to a limited degree. Enough of it exists, within each and every one, to teach all that there is a God. The Bible is needed to teach us the truth character of that God and restore the knowledge that was lost.
Atheists are not born, people choose to become an atheist in later life. Atheism is the willful rejection of belief in God. People determine to rebel against that inner witness of the reality of God's existence. The columnist Peter Hitchens some years ago in the International Express had this take on the issue:
The BBC teased religious leaders by asking them if they believed in the literal truth of the great bible stories. I would like to ask BBC chiefs and the rest of our secular establishment if they believe in the literal truth of evolution. Evolution is an unproven theory. If what its fundamental supporters say is true, fishes decided to grow lungs and legs and walk up the beach. The idea is so comically daft that only one thing explains its survival - that lonely, frightened people wanted to expel God from the universe because they found the idea that He exists profoundly uncomfortable.iii. The reality of a sense of right and wrong in us all. To some degree in us all there is a sense of right and wrong. Some people may call it a sense of 'natural justice' or it may be classed as the 'court of public opinion'. These terms all bear witness to a sense of right and wrong within us all.
This stems from the fact that we have been created with a 'conscience'. Initially upon that conscience was written the moral law of God. Again, the Fall has corrupted that knowledge to a vast degree. However, there still remains some evidence of its existence. The sense of right and wrong is the evidence of our creation in this way.
While our conscience is evidence of God creating us in this way no one can completely trust their conscience. As a result of the Fall our conscience is seared. It is does not act and function properly. Again it needs the Word of God and ultimately the grace of God to direct it and correct it.
For these reasons we believe it is entirely right and proper to believe and to teach Creationism as true science.
No comments:
Post a Comment