My view on this divisive subject is adapting. In many ways, I see ambiguity where I once thought the evidence gave certainty. In a different manner, I feel more confident in my creationist stance, as I shift my footing to more selective grounds for my argument. In all of this, I’m learning that specific positions aren’t the critical matter to faith I once believed them to be… yet I’m even more convinced this is a discussion the Church needs to initiate with humility and tact.
Let me start from the beginning: in high school, evolutionary theory played a key part in my skepticism. This isn’t because any mention of natural selection must stand opposed to Christian belief-- that is a false dichotomy, and I knew even then that many people reconciled the two in their worldview (guided, theistic evolution). Rather, what made evolution significant was the broader intellectual challenge behind it; is believing in a Creator necessary if we solved the miracle of complex life, and can Christians respond in a reasonable way?
From my experience until then, the answer for both questions seemed to be “no”. My peers didn’t see a need to seriously consider Christianity, so I assumed God had become optional and without witness. As for reason… as much as I love my parents and thank them for their steadfast example, they were not armed to fairly answer my questions. Too often, faith was established as a tyrant over reason, so that we would rather attribute the fossil record to God testing us.
Things changed when I came into Clovis Christian’s youth group. There, Jerad taught and discussed Christianity as something which could withstand testing. The Bible became surprisingly coherent, and Christian apologetics presented an argument of logic for Earth defying our expectations. With that stronghold of doubt in my mind demolished, Jesus’ Love through His people drove out the darkness and created a holy space in my heart.
But while the result was undeniable good - seeing the potential for reason and faith in cooperation - the limited understanding it left me with was not. I believed the narrative that many apologetic articles implied-- the evidence matches up perfectly with what we’d expect from the Bible, and secular scientists miss this only because they’re stupid to begin with, willfully ignoring it, or else blinded by Satan. I thought my skeptical friends were brainwashed, just as they thought me brainwashed, and therefore our dialogue was never fruitful.
Let me tell you where I’m at today. I’m still just as much in favor of the young-earth creationist position. However, I realize that people aren’t going to agree with me simply through reading articles; many resources attempting to defend God’s Truth end up compromising honesty in that process (quoting opponents out of context, strawmanning, propagating hoaxes, etc.) and forget that this controversy is not based on evidence alone. Rather, the two sides are split by a core difference in worldview-- some people prefer a naturalistic explanation which assumes our planet changed slowly, while others invite the complications of supernatural acts, divine revelation, and a catastrophic past.
Note, those who view the world from a Biblical lense have no need to bash or reject the reality of natural laws. Even the staunchest young-earth proponent must admit evolution within the taxonomy of “kinds”, or else our present biodiversity could never be explained from the origin of a single ark. The questions, then, should not be against evolution itself - which is a rational theory and always occurs on some level - but for how much natural selection can possibly account for.
Dog breeds? That’s artificial selection, but it definitely produces change. Insects and weeds, especially as we create pesticides and herbicides against them? Yeah, we can observe that happening too.
Complex structures such as wings and eyes? Hm… that does seem hard for me to imagine, but biologists have proposed models. The idea that random mutations became advantageous, and gradually led toward further complexity as they aided survival, is conceivable even if unlikely or against my views.
Life itself from the very first cell, DNA and cell membrane? That’s outside the bounds of evolution to answer, and remains a mystery even if proteins can form from lightning and primordial goop. The jump from unicellular to multicellular, or asexual to sexual reproduction? We really don’t know. What about at the very end of the evolutionary tree, where humanity stands: rational, moral, creative, and empathetic? Some of those qualities may be too abstract to examine in this way, yet symbolic language remains as a distinctive and intricate physiological capability of our species.
The anti-evolution arguments are by no means foolproof, yet there is a limit for how much the theory as its very best can comprehend.
The creationist defense is by no means capable of answering every question, but there’s enough theology to engage our minds for how mystery and miracle do not have to be arbitrary.
Perhaps, as cliche as it might be, God really has designed creation so that faith in Christ unlocks its secrets, where empirical investigation cannot. At the same time, I think much of our world’s peculiarities need to be understood as radical reshaping following a corruptive fall and cataclysmic flood (both for reviving the planet and reordering the boundaries of nations)... and even for modern skeptics, a distorted view should reveal some measure of Truth (the relative eternity we’re framed in by the secular timescale, along with the lingering stain of a survival-of-the-fittest nature groaning for redemption). These aren’t compellingly persuasive ways to look at it, but at least they try to attach purposes beyond God breaking the rules.
All that said, I also don’t know, and I am sorry.
I won’t feign certainty when we’re talking about the planet’s origin so long ago, since I lack a confident rebuttal for radiometric dating and I realize the primary purpose of Genesis is so much greater than a weapon versus evolution. I believe what I do based on how Christianity has convinced me in personal experience, and then upon Jesus making interesting mention of Genesis: in His practical teaching for marriage plus the days He prophesied will precede His second coming.
And either way, I am genuinely apologetic, because I know a lot of Christian creationists fall short of humility and good reason. I did too, until recently, and I’m worried this close-mindedness on such a secondary subject played a part in pushing those people away. I’m sorry, and I hope my presentation Tuesday serves to unravel some of that deception and establish gracious (if awkward) conversation in its place.
No comments:
Post a Comment