Why is the issue of creation vs. evolution such a big deal?

Evolution is fact.  Why make such a big deal of this issue?  Aren’t you just stirring up unnecessary controversy?

Censorship, prejudice, intolerance, arrogance, religious zealotry and ignorance.  Those seem like the only terms left in our society that everyone agrees are sins.  Each one of those words describes the evolution model of origin, not the creation/biblical model.  Let me explain.

Evolution survives on censorship, not science.  Of course, evolution is not fact.  Both evolution and creation are just reconstructions of unobserved history.  How can any event in the past be referred to as absolute fact?  Evolution is assumed, not proved.  Creation is denied, not refuted.  Darwinian evolution requires mutations and natural selection and millions of years in order to survive.  Do the textbooks explain that mutations are actually the enemy of evolution?  Were you taught creationists believed in natural selection before evolutionists (but not as a means of evolution)?  Did you realize the evidence in science supports a young earth, not an old one?  Probably not.  Why?  Because of the preconceived ideas (prejudice) that scientists bring to textbooks and to the public under the guise of being “unbiased” and neutral. 

Many scientists are intolerant to the creation model because they claim it is religion and evolution is science.  Religion is “a cause, principle or system of belief held to with ardor and faith.”  Empirical science is what we see and observe, what is testable and demonstrable with our five senses.   Therefore, by definition, evolution cannot be science.  In fact, what is seen in nature is better explained by the creation model of a completed, supernatural process.  When we look at the fossil record it is exactly what we would expect if there were a supernatural creation.  We can use science to support our model.  Evolutionists tend to manipulate science to their own advantage.  After all, scientists are constantly under the gun for grant money, tenure, etc.  They spend your tax money and mine and years of research trying arrogantly prove hypotheses that are based on the only politically correct presupposition that everything is the result of a continual, natural process.  

Evolution means that everything in nature is independent, rather than dependent on God.  That is the message of atheism and humanism.  The Humanist Manifesto says that evolution is fact. Richard Bozart, an atheist, understands this well: he says, “Christianity has fought and still fights, and will fight science [by this he means “naturalism”] to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary.  Destroy Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the son of god.  Take away the meaning of his death.  If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing.”  American Atheist, February 1978, pp. 19,30.  

Thus, evolution is a religion and a religion of the worse sort.  It is one that depends on the suppression of others instead of toleration of others.  Therefore, it is in fact, religious zealotry. 

The topic of evolution provides a socially acceptable platform to viscously and personally attack Christians as ignorant, religious zealots.  Both evolution and creation have the same facts but the conclusions are different (assumptions->facts->conclusions).  Both models produce conclusions that are logical based on their beginning assumptions, but logic is an imperfect tool.  The creation model assumes the facts are explained by a supernatural, completed process.  The evolution model assumes the facts are explained by a continual, natural process.  However, we are taught that the evolution model and its assumptions are the only logical explanations.  Thus, intelligent debate about the starting point turns into name-calling.  That is, Christians are dismissed as ignorant fundamentalists rather than reasonable citizens with a right to stand for their beliefs.

Finally, this is a foundational issue and one deserving of controversy.  Walter Martin, founder of the Christian Research Institute said, “controversy for the sake of controversy is sin, controversy for the sake of truth is a divine command.”  More importantly, the Creator of the universe, Jesus Christ said, “Do not think that I will accuse you before the father; the one who accuses you is Moses (author of Genesis), in whom you have set your hope.  For if you believed Moses you would believe Me; for he wrote of Me.  But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe my words?” (John 5:45-47).   Why do we need any other reason to think this is a relevant issue?

1/1/2000
Page 1

Table of Contents      Next Article

Home Page


Perhaps you could get my column in your local paper, too! Have your newspaper editor contact me. Also, feel free to email me with any of your questions, comments or disagreements.

©Tom Carpenter
Originally published in the Rockdale/Newton Citizen