The Case Against Creationism

One of the entertaining dimensions of the atheist onslaught against Christianity is that it is an unwinnable argument.  Either they address people like me who believe in evolution (and depart from the atheist position on other points that don't seem to be debated) ... (apparently I'm unintentionally being fooled by fundamentalists because they are the true representatives of Christianity - so much for solidarity amongst radicals!) ... or else they address fundamentalists who will never be persuaded by science on principle.

1. Early creationism started in the 1920s in the United States.  It was a left wing movement based upon the belief that German aggression was inspired by the survival of the fittest.  It has to be said this is a not unreasonable concern and my earlier post outlines my concerns about the term.  This was the earliest manifestation of anti-evolution of which I'm aware; overall the churches have not had any real problem with the theory.  The view re-emerged in the 1950s as the right wing ideology we all know.

2. This new fundamentalism is particularly deceitful because it pretends to use scientific arguments to make a case against evolution.  Creation science and intelligent design are two examples of pseudo-scientific arguments against evolution.  It is likely this approach was directly inspired by the materialism of many scientists and their claims that evolution disproves the existence of God.  It doesn't.  The tragedy is that after several decades the myth that evolution and the Christian faith are somehow opposed is held by many Christians and non-Christians.  The mainstream churches have allowed extremists on both sides to run away with the argument.  These myths about Christianity have I am sure contributed to many people's abandonment of the Christian faith and many other's lack of confidence about it.

3. This debate will not be resolved by materialist scientists and / or pseudo-scientists.  Their horns are locked. The debate is a theological one and the fundamentalists have successfully persuaded many it is scientific.  Their case is based upon a mischievous and deliberate misreading of the early chapters of Genesis; the product of people of faith from a particular time, whose cosmology was out of date by the time of Jesus.  There are many creation narratives in the Bible - take a look at the early verses of John's gospel and tell me how that contradicts modern science.

The earliest manifestation of anti-evolution was at least honest in its attempt to interpret the Bible and science from the perspective of the marginalised.  Modern right-wing fundamentalism grew out of the pietistic pro-slavery communities of the American south.  If you are pro-slavery, the social gospel is a non-starter, pietism is a much safer option.  The roots of the social Gospel are in the early chapters of Genesis where God creates the whole of humanity in God's image.  Creationism is a flight from the Gospel towards science.  A flight necessary for those who cannot face up to a God calling them to love of their neighbours.  And need some science, any science, to bolster their faith.