Why the Issue of Creation Matters Far Less (and More)
Than Most Christians Think
As soon as an atheist
and a Christian get into a debate, one of the first questions that will arise
will be the issue of creation. Atheists consider this to be their ace in the
hole because there seems to be an overwhelming amount of scientific information
that points to the fact that the Big Bang really happened and that evolution is
the best explanation for how mankind wound up walking the earth. Christians, by
comparison look like simple minded fools screaming about the lies that science
wants to tell us, and as a result of this Christianity has lost some of its
credibility over the years. Another troubling thing seems to be that when it
comes down to the issue of creation itself, Christians divide and fall into
different categories still. Because of this seeming insurmountable obstacle the
discussion about what really matters to Christianity can fall by the wayside
and the issue seems to be more about who can throw more science at the other
party. I believe that the issue of creation is the single most important issue
that Christians must face, but that the way they go about defending it causes
them to lose face.
There are three
different Christian views about how the creation account in Genesis is meant to
be understood. The first view is called the 24 Hour View. This view asserts
that the days mentioned in the Genesis account of creation are meant to be
taken as literal 24 hour days and that it was in a one week period of these 24
hour days that God brought everything into the world. This view I think is the
one that many atheists believe that Christians hold and is indeed a popular
view among God’s people. God said that it took him 7 days, we should take that
on faith and trust that if He wanted to then he could have done it in 7 days.
Atheists will scoff at this and point to the myriad of evidence like tectonic
plate shifting, radio carbon dating, fossil records, and the expanding universe
theory. This view is becoming, I believe, more unpopular with the scientific
community who identify as Christians and there are certainly some underlying
issues with taking this point of view.
The second creationist
theory is called the Framework View and this view claims that the Genesis
account is designed to give us a framework for creation. It says that we are to
understand the account in Genesis as a figurative retelling about how the
universe came to be and that we are to look towards the language to understand
that it does not mean a literal day. This view points elsewhere in the Bible
where poetic language was used for a specific purpose and it says that this is
the case in Genesis. We are to look at the symmetry of creation and understand
that it is a framework for how God really created the universe. The third view
is similar to the second and it is called the Day-Age View. In this view
proponents will state that each day mentioned in the creation account is
supposed to be seen as a figurative length of time although it is meant to be
understood chronologically. They say that the events listed are consistent and
logical with the formation of a new planet and we can see that God didn’t mean
a literal 24 hour day but perhaps a millennia in which those processes of
creation took place. These last two views are more consistent with what we know
from science and especially in this last view atheists and creationists can
find common grounds. It would be easy to acknowledge some form of Big Bang as
that was the moment that the universe was brought into being and it would make
sense to say that since God works inside of a set of observable laws and rules
that we should be able to use the physics of the universe to find proof for the
start of creation there.
While I think that
evolution run contradictory to what the Bible teaches I firmly believe that
there are far more commonalities between the viewpoints about creationism and a
secular person’s view point about the creation of the world then an outsider
would at first assume. The problem is that since we are so focused on trying to
throw this theory and that theory at one another we have stopped talking about
the thing that really matters most, and that is, does God exist? Really that is
what the whole issue of creation should be about, we should be centered on the
fact that the universe seems to be so ideally suited for human life, that the
best possible explanation would be that it was designed for us. I think there
is room for a happy marriage between the scientifically minded and the
theologically inclined, but we have let other non-important issues cloud our
discussions and affect our judgment. We have failed to acknowledge one
important fact and that is this; we are called to place our faith in either
science or God and only one has never failed the test of time
There are such a
number of supposedly scientific theories that have been believed over the years
that have proved ludicrously wrong that no person in their right mind would
claim them as truth. Yet, despite this trend for time to prove some theory
wrong people seem unwilling to learn from history. They will instead cling to
the latest trends and vehemently hold that the latest and greatest theory is
undeniably correct and always will be. The thing is that we as followers of
Christ need to rise to the challenge, but that does not mean that we always let
them lead the conversation. We need to be scientifically literate, but we are
ultimately called to place our faith on the scripture as our first and last
line of defense. We need to make sure that we are clear on what the account in
Genesis really means and what it entails so that we will not appear foolish and
ignorant, but at the same time we need to understand that science can never
fully have all the answers.
One of the biggest crimes throughout this
debate is that we often fail to even bring up the name of Jesus, the single
most important character in the Bible and in our lives. The message of Christ
falls by the wayside and we fall to bickering about proofs that are anything
but. We need to remember that what we are called to spread is the message of His
love and mercy. If people can be humble enough to acknowledge him as Lord and
Savior over their lives then that should be the starting place for the merger
of faith and science.
