I’m going to try to discuss this without triggering you. I don’t know if I will be successful.
Let me start with a joke: A creationist, an evolutionist, and God walk into a bar. Which one of them was around when the universe started?
Okay, maybe that’s not a joke. But there is a point to that question, and maybe you can pick up on what that point is.
Creationism vs. evolution is characterized as a conflict between Bible thumpers and scientists. On one hand, we have those who believe that the earth is 6,000 years old with God creating Adam and Eve and all the different types of plants and animals at the beginning. On the other hand, we have those who believe the universe is 14 billion years old, that matter, energy, life, and humanity came about through naturalistic processes and God was not involved.
But that oversimplifies reality. This conflict is a kaleidoscope of ideas encompassing science, philosophy, and theology. Many different models have been put forth to try to make sense of science, philosophy, and theology. Young earth creationists believe the earth is six to ten thousand years old, that the universe was created with apparent age. Others hold to the gap theory: God created the universe in the distant past; a disaster occurred between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, and the six days of creation that followed was actually God “terraforming” earth—and that happened about six thousand years ago. There’s the day-age theory: each of the six days of creation was not a literal day, but an age of uncertain length. Some have used Einstein’s Theory of Relativity to argue that the earth is simultaneously thousands and billions of years old, depending on your frame of reference. Some believe in theistic evolution—that God oversaw the evolutionary process as His method of creation. And some, of course, believe that God was not involved.
Which one is true?
I don’t know. Like the two of the three in the bar, I wasn’t there. Are any of them true? Or is there another explanation that we haven’t thought of that more accurately tells us what really happened? Again I don’t know.
Don’t misunderstand me. I believe in God. I believe in the Bible. I believe the Genesis account is true, but I’m not 100% sure how it should be understood.
And the purpose of this post is not to try to settle that question. Instead, I want to talk about what this conversation says about us as human beings, what it says about our culture.
Are you familiar with the idea of positioning? Positioning is a marketing term. It means controlling how other people think about you, your ideas, your products, your business. Positioning is what allows one person to charge $50,000 for a coaching session while another person—dispensing the exact same advice—has trouble collecting $5.
Elections are all about positioning. Political parties and candidates work very hard to position themselves in your mind as capable, caring, competent, and so on, while trying to position their opponents as dangerous and/or bumbling idiots.
The naturalistic evolution folks have done an incredible job with positioning. They’ve managed to position themselves as “science” and therefore factual, reliable, true—and to position creationism as “religion” and therefore a myth, a fantasy, a feel good story that has nothing to do with reality.
This is why evolution is taught in public schools and creationism is not. One is “science.” The other is “religion.”
The idea is that you can hold to this schizophrenic worldview that evolution is true on a scientific level and creation is true on a religious level.
Yeah.
A while back I looked up “creationism” on Wikipedia. The first line? “Creationism is a pseudoscience.” In other words, it’s a false science. It’s a myth. It’s a fairy tale. It’s what intellectually inferior people believe.
Stop. Pause. “Pseudoscience”—what is that? It’s name calling. It’s not an argument. It’s not a proof. It’s not a carefully thought out premise with evidence behind it. It’s just name calling.
And name calling is not science. It’s positioning.
You may or may not be aware of this: There are scientists who are young earth creationists. There are scientists who are old earth creationists. And yes, they’ve looked at the science, and yes, they have scientific reasons for believing what they believe.
There are scientific arguments for creationism, but those arguments are systematically withheld from you. They’re not allowed to be taught in public schools because—remember—evolution is science, and creation is religion.
Why are these arguments and ideas—why is this science not allowed at the table?
Because those who control the narrative don’t want it there. Why don’t they want it there? Two reasons: (1) The most frightening thing for an unbeliever is the idea that he or she will stand before God at life’s end and need to explain to Him why they lived their life the way they did. While it may be an unconscious priority, it is, I think, the #1 priority in their lives—removing God from the universe. Naturalistic evolution is a tool for removing a troublesome God. (2) Their power and influence rides on their narrative. If their narrative fails, their power and influence dies. And humans, above almost anything else, love to cling to power.
This is the point you must understand. Controlling the narrative controls the positioning. It keeps people in power who want to stay in power.
Of course, this applies to much more than creation and evolution.
We are supposed to live in a nation with a First Amendment right to freedom of speech. But we don’t have freedom of speech. Certain ideas are restricted, not allowed, prohibited by those who hold power and influence.
For example, a close relative suffered a stroke. His doctor hinted that a much touted medical procedure may have caused that stroke.
Why can’t I tell you what that procedure was?
Because I don’t have freedom of speech. Neither do you.
In our culture we talk about DEI—diversity, equity, and inclusion. You may have your own thoughts about that. But let me say this: Here’s where we DON’T have DEI: in the world of ideas. Certain ideas are dismissed, marginalized, ridiculed, and banned.
Why?
Because they’re wrong? No, not necessarily. Instead, because they don’t match the narrative that those in power want to preserve.
Can I shake you awake?
Do you have any idea how dangerous this is? Controlling how people think is the essence of totalitarianism. It leads to—and already has led to—the criminalization of political dissent. It will destroy our nation if we don’t find the courage to stop it.
Minority ideas must have a place at the table. They must be openly discussed so that we all can look at them and see if they have any merit. And we all need to teach ourselves to think so we aren’t conned by whoever comes along that’s good at positioning.
How has the church responded to all this?
I’ve seen two responses, and I’m not excited about either one.
First, some Christians have become combative. They know that they know that they know that the earth was created 4,004 BC and so on, and their approach is: It’s my way or the highway.
In my view, that’s arrogance, just like claiming that God had nothing to do with creation is arrogance. We are, after all, human beings. And human beings don’t know very much.
Second, and in some ways more disturbing, the church has retreated, surrendered. Today’s church is almost exclusively focused on seekers and spiritual infants, and, out of fear, there are certain topics—like this one—that are not discussed because the thinking is: Let’s just get them to Christ. Let’s get their ticket to heaven settled. We can deal with these other issues later.
But later never comes.
So yeah, I don’t think creationism vs. evolution is really about religion vs. science. I think it’s about arrogance, control, positioning, marketing, fear, and clinging to a narrative we desperately hope is right.
###
This is a little different than my normal post, but it has been swimming around in my mind, and I felt like God wanted me to share it.
Much love from my home to yours!
Dwight
