|
Fr. George Lemaitre proposed the theory of the expanding universe. |
I was aware
of the Bill Nye/ Ken Ham debate last night, but I didn’t watch it, and I won’t.
I’ve heard generally positive things and that it was conducted well, so good
for them. Hopefully it was made clear that young earth creationism is a small
minority within Christianity. But I disagree with the entire premise, so I’m
trying to avoid looking too much into what went down.
It’s
difficult for me to talk about young earth creationism, because the subject
quickly leads me to saying uncharitable things. I believe Bill Nye was in the
wrong for accepting this debate in the first place. It validated young earth
creationism as a model compatible with modern scientific theories, and it
reinforced the idea that there is dichotomy between religion and science. I
understand why Bill Nye wanted the publicity and the opportunity to address the
issues, but I think giving Ken Ham such a platform lent his theories too much credence.
I’ve seen
the statistics that say around 46% of the U.S. population believes in a
6-literal-day creation and 6,000-year-old earth. I know that being in the Bible
Belt means that stat is probably higher around here. But honestly, my reality
says differently. Yes, I know some young earth creationists, but I would say
that they do not account for anywhere close to half of the people I interact
with daily. Is there some sort of segregation at play where I just don’t run
into these people? They seem like such a tiny, shrill, extremist group, that
giving them any attention seems to magnetize their importance, politically and
especially theologically.
The reason I
get frustrated and uncharitable over young earth creationism is not the bad
science. If one chooses to live a life ignorant of evolutionary processes, I’m
alright with that. My problem is that the ultra-literal interpretation of the
Bible is bad theology, and it’s keeping people away from God. There are answers
in Genesis, but they are much different than Ken Ham’s conclusions. To say that
Adam and Eve had to literally exist and eat a literal fruit for original sin to
exist is absurd. To say that Genesis and Kings and Matthew and Revelation must
all be read in the same manner and must all be equally factual for any of it to
be true is such an extreme absolute, I can only assume a Sith came up with it.
I respect my
religion’s sacred texts too much to have them reduced to biological textbooks. To
ignore the context and typology of scripture and insist on fact-checking and
shoe-horning insults my faith. The Bible is not the foundation of Christianity;
Christ is. The traditions of the Church he founded led to the formation of the
Bible. It is our text for instruction and inspiration. It is sacred. It
explains man’s relationship with God. It contains Truth. But it is not the
beginning and end of the faith. And it cannot be read apart from its setting and
purpose.
By creating
a violent divide between the physical study of the world and the spiritual
understanding of the world, young earth creationists force people to choose
between two things that aren’t comparable. When forced to pick a side, people
(at least of Western tradition) are more likely to pick the one that uses the empirical
method, that claims objectivity, and that is generally agreed upon as a valid
way to investigate the world. They reject God under the false premise that
belief in God means a rejection of reality. While part of me wants to be
tolerant and let people believe as they do, another part of me feels the need
to combat this. This false battle between science and faith is doing unwarranted
damage to my religion. It is preventing people from God’s love; it is putting
others’ salvation at risk. So it is difficult for me to tolerate this vocal
minority. Young earth creationism deserves to be theologically and
scientifically refuted and corrected. And then forgotten. I’m still not even
sure I want to give it 700 words of my attention, even to refute it.