This post is a response to Young Earth Creationist: Ignorance Of What You Dispute, a post featured today on WordPress‘s home page.
God is a Young Earth Creationist (“YEC”). He knows the earth was created in six days. He was there. In fact, He did the creating, making Him the very first YEC. But while the author of this article (“BGH”) seems ignorant of the inherent limitations of the physical sciences, and while his article seems to have multiple personalities, he does manage to make a good point (almost).
Logical Flaws
First and foremost, BGH does not acknowledge the God of the universe. Were everything else about his article beyond reproach, his misplaced starting point would lead him always into error.
Next, the author seems to have a hard time defining what he wants to talk about. The article’s title, intro, and conclusion decry the “young earth creationism” theory of the origin of the planet. Clearly, he’s starting-out defending the various dating techniques used for determining the age of our planet. Yet all of his bullet points (comprising the middle half of the article) seek to distance evolution – not the age of the planet – from other fields of study.
Another error in BGH’s logic is his choice for first scientific field he distinguishes from evolution: cosmology, which BGH defines as “the field that explains the origins of the universe”. It’s funny that he’s specifically excluding the age of the universe from the discussion, when it’s the age of the planet that is being discussed.
An Interesting Point
However, I must agree with BGH’s critique of the logic of many “YECs” that engage evolution in the public sphere. When the Word of God is cast as merely one’s “belief” as opposed to God’s Truth, no logic can bail-out the argument. If the YEC grants non-Biblical beliefs equal value with God’s Word, there is no point in continuing the debate. The YEC has then forfeited any right to influence either the person they’re debating or those watching from the sidelines.
The job of the Christian is not to debate science on scientific terms. To do so is to grant science the authority to be the arbiter of truth. It also implies acceptance of science’s physical limitations for the debate, a debate that is fundamentally about the existence of a spiritual God.
Instead, our arguments must begin as does the Bible, and as creation itself began: “In the beginning, God…”