The sentiment in today’s world is that the evidence for evolution is so strong, so incontestable that any talk of Creationism is abstraction from reality by religious folks. Creationism is cast as a belief system for people who are unwilling or unable to confront the strength of the scientific evidence in favor of evolutionary theory.
The sentiment that Evolution is truth and Creationism is abstraction from reality is not grounded in facts. It is exactly what it is, sentiment.
First and foremost, evolutionary theory is outcome of deductive reasoning over available evidence. Evolution never has been scientifically observed, as such evolutionary theory is not fact but interpretation of evidence. Given Creationism also is interpretation of evidence, validity of Creationism cannot be conditioned on an alternative interpretation of facts conveniently termed Evolutionary Theory. You see Evolutionary Theory suggests to you you are master of your own destiny. Evolutionary theory is sexy terminology. Creationism smacks of dependence on a Creator. The reality? Within context of Christian Creationism, we are masters of our own destiny. God just helps us get in touch with who we really are so our efforts, plans, and desires are focused in right directions.
Creationism and Evolutionary Theory both are interpretations of evidence. Neither can be proven to be fact contemporaneously. If we, however, discount historical, scientific, and archaeological evidence and focus only on contemporaneous evidence, it is easy to see Creationism trumps Evolutionary Theory hands down. When the embryo of an extinct goat is placed in the genomic shell of a mountain goat, this is Creationism not Evolution because the Scientist acts in capacity of a creator. The outcome is not chance, it is planned, it is creationism.
It is intellectual laziness or fraud for either of the Creationist or Evolutionist to abstract away from the historical, scientific, and archaeological evidence. If Creationism as theory of life possesses any validity, it must generate interpretations consistent with the scientific evidence, interpretation that remains dichotomous to interpretations of evolutionary theory.
The fact of the matter is Creationism generates interpretations of evidence consistent with scientific, historical, and archaeological evidence.
Creationism and The Scientific Evidence
First, if we allude to the biblical account, which is the richest account of Creationism of which I am aware, Planet Earth already existed prior to creation of intellectual man (Genesis 1:1), prior to placement of Adam on Earth by God. Genesis Chapter One does not get into how long the Earth already had been in existence. It suffices, however, that the biblical account allows for a Planet Earth that was already millions of years old at the time Adam was created. The Biblical account then is consistent with estimates that Planet Earth is millions of years old. Check One for Creationism’s consistence with scientific evidence.
Second, all historians and archaeologists agree intellectual man, man who possesses capacity to read and write is no more than 6,000 years old. The Bible places Adam on Planet Earth about 6,000 years ago. Note the Biblical account was written well before man developed capacity for carbon dating, this is established without any doubt whatsoever, meaning the Bible could not have plagiarized the scientific evidence to date Adam as created about 6,000 years ago. This is an extremely important point. In so far as presence of an intellectual man on earth is concerned, both the Bible and the scientific evidence agree on a time frame of no more than 6,000 years. Check Two for Creationism’s consistence with scientific evidence.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, historical and archaeological evidence both agree all of mankind — White, Black, Dark Skinned, Asian, Hispanic, African, Scandinavian etc. — all are descendants of, wait for it, one literal man and one literal woman. You probably are wondering whether I am kidding you at this point. I promise you, however, I kid you not. I did not make this evidence up. The scientific evidence proclaims the concept of an original Adam and Eve is consistent with the scientific evidence. Check Three for Creationism’s consistency with scientific evidence.
How then do we reconcile the scientific evidence for earlier forms of man such as Australopithecus, which did not read or write, with history of intellectual man?
In my book, In Jesus Name, which delves into more detail on consistency of Creationism with scientific evidence, I summarize the matter as follows (HWE is acronym for History of the World: Earliest Times to the Present Day, Hall, J.W., and J.G. Kirk, eds. World Publications Group, East Bridgewater, MA USA).
The following excerpt is from pages 175–176 of my book, In Jesus Name.
We now know that modern man, Homo sapiens, has existed in his present form for at least 40,000 to 50,000 years and that the present disparate populations of mankind form a single species — Pilbeam, D., Emergence of Man (pg. 10), HWE.
“Regardless of the aggregate time frame of 50,000 years, historians and archaeologists provide a time frame of no more than 6,000 years for intellectual activity on earth, with the most reliable evidence dating back no more than 4 ,000 BC (Laffan, W.M., The Ancient Near East (pgs. 26–29), HWE). This is exactly the same time frame that is implied in Biblical accounts of the history of man.
Is it possible all of the supposed predecessors of man were created by some other principality attempting to prove a point to God, with God commencing His own creative agenda about 6,000 years ago?
The length of time it took for man to evolve in basic knowledge from 50,000 BC to about 7,000 BC and evolution of knowledge man has achieved in merely 6,000 years raise questions as to whether man has a different creator from all of the supposed antecedents such as Australopithecus (Pilbeam, D., Emergence of Man, HWE) etc.. The possibility of a purposeful creative agenda is manifest in that if man in his current form consists of a single species differentiated not by genetics but by culture (Pilbeam, D., Emergence of Man, HWE), this genetic homogeneity is more consistent with planned creation than unplanned genetic evolution. If we assume genetic evolution is part of some grand master plan, we arrive at evolutionary creation, as opposed to evolution by chance, such that the only difference between creationists and evolutionists is the nature of the creative process as opposed to the existence of a mastermind creator.
What can we conclude for a fact from the historical evidence in so far as the history of man is concerned?
Something happened on this earth about 6,000 years ago that accelerated man’s intellectual development. Within 3,000 years, this acceleration of intellectual development had resulted in man’s ability to write on cuneiform. The Bible says the event that occurred about 6,000 years ago was God’s creation of man in His own image.”
There are lots more relevant evidence to consider such as authenticity and factuality of history of the Jews, starting with kings such as Saul, David, and Solomon. The fact that the Jews are recorded in history outside of the Bible as one of the ancient civilizations. The fact that Mesopotamia, the ancient civilization in which Abraham of the Bible lived is considered the most ancient of civilizations. I could go on and on but if you seek to know more check out my book, In Jesus Name available for purchase on Amazon.com for a measly US$17.99 for the hard copy, or US$5.99 for the E-Book version. If you wonder why a book titled In Jesus Name delves into scientific evidence for Creationism, it is precisely because true spirituality always demands evidence prior to manifestation of faith. To not demand any evidence for reciprocity of faith is spiritual suicide. If we are intellectual beings, we cannot subscribe to spirituality that is not intellectual because that is intellectual suicide. To not demand evidence for adoption of a specific form of spirituality then induces both intellectual and spiritual suicide. If spirituality is not backed by any evidence, it is worthless, good for nothing, only fit for trashing.
If evolutionary theory merely is theory as opposed to fact, and if Creationism can be shown, as is the case in this post or my book In Jesus Name to be consistent with the scientific evidence, it is intellectual fraud or laziness for evolution to be taught as fact or truth.
It is intellectual fraud or laziness for evolution to be taught as fact or truth.
If we all who become enlightened on this subject will speak up, we can create a groundswell such that where necessary there are changes to school curriculums which ensure the scientific evidence is dichotomized from its interpretation in favor of Creationism or Evolutionary Theory. We owe no less to our children and future generations. You see, intellectual fraud or laziness never can produce intellectually superior descendants.
Intellectual fraud or laziness only can produce intellectual fraud or laziness. If we allow our children to be brought up within context of such fraud or laziness we only can create intellectually lazy or fraudulent descendants. The evidence suggests we already are well on our way.
Evolutionary Theory is not fact, it is mere interpretation of facts. Creationism cannot be proved to be fact, but can be shown to be consistent with the scientific evidence. Creationism is not a belief system for those who choose to bury their heads in the sand and ignore scientific evidence. Creationism is consistent with the scientific evidence. In an honest debate, Creationism can be shown to be more consistent with the scientific evidence than Evolutionary Theory. Add the fact that all of the contemporaneous evidence only is consistent with Creationism, and it is intellectual fraud for Evolutionary Theory to be taught as fact as opposed to an alternative interpretation of evidence. The fact for instance that for thousands of years gestation of a new human always has taken 9 months is evidence in favor of planned creation as opposed to creation that is outcome of statistical probability. In presence of statistical probability, gestation periods for humans either should be getting progressively shorter, progressively longer, or totally unpredictable. Static nature of gestation periods for thousands of years is contemporaneous evidence for planned creation.
But does man evolve? Absolutely!!!. We are intellectual exactly because we respond to whatever context in which we find ourselves. We attempt to shape that context, attempt to conform that context to our objectives and desires. This means of course that we adapt, we change, we evolve. All of this adaptation, change, and evolution is consistent, however, with planned creation. Perhaps more consistent with planned creation than evolution.
Creationism can be shown to be consistent with and rooted in scientific evidence. Why exactly is it then it appears as if Creationism is for the dim witted who shy away from contact with the scientific evidence? Does this not smack of some hidden non-intellectual agenda?
We owe it to ourselves and future generations not to allow evolutionary theory as interpretation of life on earth to go unchallenged. Let us make a vote for intellectual rigor in discussions of origins of life on earth.
For more discussion and evidence, I encourage you to purchase a copy of my book, In Jesus Name available for purchase at Amazon.com.