CORRECTION: I spelled Ken Ham's name wrong throughout this post, and I've now corrected all of the misspellings--I hope.
Years ago, shortly after my conversion, I wrote a post defending theistic evolution. I have been what they call a theistic evolutionist all my life.
But more recently, I've been reconsidering theistic evolution. This is not because any of the scientific evidence actually supports a literally interpretation of Genesis. It is simply that defending theistic evolution may not very wise if one also intends to defend Christianity, tradition, or Western culture as a whole.
I have been a natural history buff almost from the the start. When I first heard about God, the being that created all things, as a small child, it didn't compute. Plants and animals aren't made; they grow. Only people make things. It was only through reading natural history books at the library and elsewhere, again before grade school age, did I realize that God was designing all things. The archeopteryx as a bird prototype was a prime, example, and I realized there was an intelligence controlling how life developed.
It never even occurred to me that "creation" meant God willing things out of nothing, nor that the Bible actually contained a creation story. I found out before third grade, and yes, I noticed a difference, and it did shake my faith that everything in the Bible was absolutely true. No, I didn't question God's existence, but therein still my lie the problem with theistic evolution.
Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis basically takes the position natural history is the root of what is causing Christianity and therefore Western civilization to decline. As I've stated before in this blog, Hamm has observed the churches of England slowly decline and shut their doors, and the same happening in America. THIS is his concern, so we might as well quit debating whether creationism is "scientific" or not. Ditto for evolution.
Ham is a culture warrior.
The problem he sees with natural history is, of course, that it fosters doubt. And it is doubt that is acting like a cancer on Western civilization. But is it really?
This post is not going to attack theistic evolution entirely, as at the time of this writing, the clock has swung back a bit. I have donated to Ham and AiG over the past few years. Why, since natural history has always been a passion of mine? The gut reaction when listening to creationist is that my very childhood is being attacked. So why would I support Ham?
The reason is very simple. Ham and I share a common foe: secularism.
Though I strive to be unbiased, I don't really think natural history is what is driving so many of today's young people away from the Lord. The real culprit in the culture war is very much more likely to the the cell phone. We've known about the true age of the earth, and about evolution since well back into the 19th century. Yes, we've found many more fossils since, and have a much better idea of how evolution works (and it's not natural selection alone, it's far more, giving all the more credence to an intelligence at work), but the steady falling away from Christianity has kept very good pace with the rise of technology and communication. First radio, then television, prompting the sixties cultural upheaval, then the Internet, then social media, each generation grows more and more secular.
In fact, I might as well make a statement to Ham right here and now: you've fingered the wrong culprit for cultural decline.
How to combat this I do not know--yet.
But back to the problem. It's an established fact that churches who stick to Biblical authority are thriving and growing, while the ones that have allowed them elves to be converged with secularism are dying, precisely the opposite of what Shelby Spong predicted in his book, Why Christianity Must Change or Die, a generation ago. Even Progressive Christian (actually Churchian) sects like that of Rob Bell have disintigrated for the precisely the reason that : Why believe Christ's death and resurrection at all, if it's not relevant to Social Justice causes? The core belief of the Christian faith is tossed aside.
Bell is no Christian. I was once hooked by the seemingly "nicer" picture of God Bell presented, and wanting to believe in a God who is ethical and fair.
The hell doctrine, much as I have a distaste for it, is NOT about ethics or justice. It is about maintaining the faith, which, it should obvious, is now in deadly peril.
This is where Hamm and I see eye to eye. Hamm may have fingered the wrong culprit, but he's fighting for our very civilization.
And here's the thing about natural history.
The people who are defending and generally share my own enthusiasm for natural history appear to be almost universially secular progressives. Atheistic evolution really does serve as base for all of their secular humanist beliefs and worldview, just as Ken Hamm argues. It is not just that most of them are atheists. They are very deliberately chipping away at one of the pillars holding up Western Civilization, namely the Christian faith. And their using natural history as one of their major tools.
The very existence of so-called Darwin Fish is proof enough of this.
Don't think for one minute that any of this about defending science education, as I once believed, and I do believe it is foolish for Christian theistic evolutionists to join with them on that ground. Most don't even want our help, still calling us irrational for believing in the death and resurrection of Jesus.
The battle for evolution to be taught in public school was won long ago. All that ended with Scopes Trial, despite failed attempts to smuggle creationist ideas in the back door. Homeschooling has now replaced those ill-fated efforts.
Why, oh why, are supposed defenders of science education protesting Ken Ham's Ark Encounter, then? They are already the victors, and creationists don't stand the faintest chance of promoting their beliefs mainstream?
The Ark Encounter is an apologetics museum, designed to instruct youngsters in the literal truth of the Bible. So what? Don't Christians have the right to instruct their own children how they see fit?
Apparently not, according to leading atheist activists. It appears that the true goal really is to get rid of Christianity and Christian tradition, mostly in the name of civil liberties. You can't have any more proof of this than the protest held outside the Ark Encounter, by the Tri-State Freethinkers, who should more accurately be called the Tri-State Social Justice Warriors. If you watch this, take note there is virtually nothing said in actual defense of the fossil record, and plenty about civil right and social justice issues, their true goals. We see now what this whole creation/evolution thing has been about from the start.
Here is the proof of the true face of anti-creationism:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIdd1SzmJE4&t=540s
If it were really about science, why would Donald Trump's name even come up?
Aronra, the leader of the freethinkers, BTW, is very well versed in natural history, and I've actually learned things by watching his videos, like how pterosaur wings are actually composed of muscle rather than skin.
No comments:
Post a Comment