Contesting Faith,Truth, and Religious Language at the Creation Museum: A Historical-Theological Reflection

Abstract

The Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, attempts to demonstrate the flaws in contemporary science and to offer an alternative explanation of human origins and biological complexity rooted in a specific reading of the biblical narrative. This effort, however, is paradoxically rooted in the worldview of modern science and the Enlightenment. This article will examine the Creation Museum's definitions of faith, truth, and religious language and will compare these definitions to those of mainline Protestant Christianity to uncover the historical and theological presuppositions of Creationist and mainline Protestant engagements with contemporary science.     

Theological Implications of Young Earth Creationism and Intelligent Design: Emerging Tendencies of Scientism and Agnosticism

Abstract

Creationism is a worldview that does not accept the undirected formation and development of life but requires intelligent (supernatural) intervention. We analyzed texts representing Young Earth creationism (YEC) and intelligent design (ID) for their theological content and implications by assessing their position in central issues of systematic theology. YEC proponents emphasize the young age of the Earth and the necessity of literal interpretation of Genesis as prerequisites for the Fall and redemption. ID accepts the geological age of the planet, but requires intervention during evolution. YEC maintained the traditional characteristics of the Christian God (omnipotence, omniscience, benevolence), while some ID authors refused to speculate on the nature of the alleged designer. YEC authors utilized reinterpretation of scientific data as evidence for creation and to legitimize their belief in the historicity of Genesis. This could be regarded a form of scientism. YEC theodicy concentrated on the Fall as the cause of evil and the eschatological resolution of suffering. In contrast, ID proponents attempted to solve theodicy by compensated benefits of, e.g., pain. ID did not take a clear stand regarding salvation and ecclesiology, but YEC authors considered the acceptance of evolutionary theory and Christian faith to be mostly inconsistent. YEC doctrine differed from major Christian denominations by accepting scientific evidence as a proof for the historicity of Genesis and showed signs of exclusivity regarding evolutionary proponents. In ID, no satisfactory theodicy could be observed and some ID theorists could be classified as agnostics because of doubting the identity of the designer and by limiting God's omnipotence and benevolence. Both YEC and ID demonized evolutionary theory and its proponents. Creationism seems to be on its way to becoming a new kind of denomination or an emerging novel religion.     

Anthropocentric Rhetorical Discourse in Popular Science Writing about Human Evolution

Discourse describing evolution in contemporary popular science writing often posits that humans evolved not from an ape, but from a merely ape-like or generalized primate. Contemporary fossil and genetic evidence, though, have revealed what can accurately be described as an extinct ape species as ancestral to the human lineage. The persistence of ambiguous terms in popular science writing may be interpreted as a form of anthropocentric rhetorical discourse. Nonetheless, while such discourse is often justified in terms of increasing the public understanding of science, it may also mitigate (whether consciously intended or not) religion-based resistance to evolutionary theory.     

科学划界:"猴子审判"案例分析

自上个世纪后期以来,20世纪哲学四大主题之一的科学划界研究陷入了进退两难的境地。该文从科学划界的视角出发,分析了科学家和创世论者在“猴子审判”这一著名案件中的辩护与反驳,揭示了特定的社会、文化和政治因素对科学划界标准的影响,并且指出在现实社会中研究有关的科学争论,从研究科学精英的科学观转向研究社会公众的科学观,可能是有助于摆脱这一困境的努力方向。     

Fishapod in the Rocks: Fossils and Biblical Creation Texts

Abstract

Genesis 1:20–25 speaks of God creating water and land creatures. The fossil record suggests that vertebrates on land evolved from vertebrates of the water. In this article about creation through evolution, the author discusses a progression of fossil discoveries pertinent to the evolution of tetrapods, keeping in view the detractions of a Young Earth creationist, and finishing with a biblical-theological perspective on the evolution of tetrapods. The author's work grows out of his interest in exploring how a specific science (paleontology)—as viewed through specific discoveries and a specific evolutionary lineage—might engage actively with biblical creation passages.     

Perelman’s Pseudo-Argument as Applied to the Creationism Controversy

If you want to challenge or at least weaken the adhesion to a system of values, you can basically adopt two radically opposed rhetorical strategies. Either you will attack the system in a frontal way: for instance, fundamentalists or fascists deny any validity to democratic values and human rights. Or you will pretend to argue from within the system (by saying that you accept some of its basic premises), while subtly distorting the process of reasoning in order to get to your conclusions. If the audience is naïve or poorly informed, you will be able to defend positions that are fundamentally at odds with liberal-democratic values while seeming to argue from inside the system. I would like to show how such a process of “perverse” translation works in the context of the Darwinism/Creationism “controversy”. The attacks on the teaching of evolutionary biology began approximately one century ago. The way Creationists have argued and changed several times their rhetorical strategies seems very interesting to me, in that it exemplifies an important contemporary phenomenon, which I call “perverse translation” or “the wolf in the sheepfold”.     

Theologians Wanted! Some Reflections about the Creation/Evolution Debate

I plead here in favor of more frequent recourse to and input from theologians, in debates about the creationist crisis, not only in order to develop new aspects of theology concerning creation, but also to undertake a real theological diagnosis of this crisis. The task of theology is not simply to write catechisms or Summae, but it is much more to do with incompleteness, light and shade. Theologians must confront themselves with reality—like secular theology at the seventeenth century, but also natural theologies—without forgetting to pose limits: absolute power of God, reality of the evil, scientific discoveries that are negative for theology, etc. Theology is a work of revelation (apocalypse).     

Subjective judgements influencing Christian beliefs about biological origins

Christians hold divergent views about cosmological and biological origins. Creationists read the early chapters of the Biblical book of Genesis literally, postulating a young earth and a limited role for mutation and natural selection in the development of biological diversity. Theistic Evolutionists accept current scientific accounts of biological evolution, seeing these processes as the mechanisms of God’s creative purpose. Advocates of Intelligent Design doubt whether the complexity and fitness-for-purpose of many aspects of the physical and biological world could have come about without the intervention of a Designer.

Examining the basis of these positions could help their adherents to be less zealous and divisive. Creationists could accept that their beliefs arise not principally from science, but from their hermeneutic stance, and that this stance is not necessarily correct, nor integral to receiving the Bible's theological teaching. Theistic Evolutionists could accept that excluding the possibility of God directly intervening at points in prehistory is illogical, given their belief in the incarnation, miracles and the efficacy of prayer.

The Creationist and Theistic Evolution positions share a strong desire to defend God’s honour and a sense that they more comfortably fit an authentic picture of God. These powerful affective judgements, while not irrational, do not constitute compelling logical arguments. A dispassionate evaluation of their validity and strength could be of much benefit. Advocates of Intelligent Design could admit that scepticism about the adequacy of current scientific explanations does not logically entail an insistence that direct intervention by a designer must have occurred: the explanatory power of science has been underestimated before. All parties are encouraged to accept that a detailed account of biological history is inaccessible and likely to remain so. A due humility is commended.     

Semantic Externalism and Presentism

Abstract

In this paper I discuss an unconventional form of presentism which, I claim, captures better than all other versions of the doctrine the fundamental notion underpinning it, namely, the notion that ‘only what is present is real’. My proposal is to take this maxim as stating, not the rather uncontroversial view that past things are not real now, but the more radical idea that they never were. This rendition of presentism is, I argue, the only one that is neither trivial nor absurd. I examine this proposal by considering it against a sceptical hypothesis that bears similarities to it, viz., the hypothesis that the world was created five minutes ago. On this hypothesis, the past, all but five minutes of it, is unreal, in precisely the sense in which the presentism I discuss claims it is. I show that, assuming semantic externalism, this sceptical hypothesis cannot be sustained, but that a somewhat weaker hypothesis, the Creationist hypothesis that the world is 5,768 years old, cannot be refuted. Together, these conclusions enable a demarcation of those presentist intuitions that language and thought tolerate and those they do not.