There are many misconceptions about creationism, some held by other Christians and some
intentionally advanced by opponents of this movement. This article is an attempt to provide
some clarification.
Misconception #1-that creationists are out to "prove the Bible."
This argument is sometimes used by other Christians who don’t understand creationism or who
think creationists have a faith problem.
The fact is that most creationists (hopefully ALL LSI members) first and foremost accept
Genesis as a literal account of the origin of life and the universe because it is the Word of God.
Even a non-Lutheran like Ken Ham has written, “If we were to try to prove the Bible with
science, we would be making science authoritative, whereas biblical theology is the ‘queen of
science’.” 1
However, what Christians have a right and even a duty to do is to “defend” the Bible when God’
s Word is under attack. This practice is known as “apologetics”, which has a long and
honorable tradition within the Christian church.
Misconception #2-that creationist scientists reject the idea of natural selection or
“survival of the fittest.”
Not only do creationist scientists not reject the concept of natural selection (also known as
“survival of the fittest”), but it was a creationist scientist who may have invented the idea. At
least creationist chemist/zoologist Edward Blyth (1810—1873) wrote about natural selection
before Darwin did.
Natural selection simply means that an animal or other organism may possess a trait that gives
it a better chance to survive in a given environment and pass its genes on to its descendants.
Natural selection is sometimes confused with what evolutionists call microevolution (as this
writer has done), but technically there is no such thing as microevolution. For microevolution to
occur in a creature, there would have to be at least minor additions of information to its genetic
code, something that has never been observed. Obviously, to an even greater extent, that
rules out molecules-to-man evolution or macroevolution.
Misconception #3-that creationists reject the idea of an Ice Age.
While evolutionist geologists often speak of several Ice Ages, creationist scientists now
generally accept the idea that there was one Ice Age. This Ice Age they believe was caused by
Noah’s Flood.
There is considerable evidence that ice once covered most of Canada, much of the northern
and central United States, northern Europe, northwest Asia, and the mountain ranges of
Eurasia. Ice sheets are not significantly melting or growing today, so what caused them to grow
and melt in the past is a matter of conjecture.
There is also evidence of extensive volcanic activity in the past. These volcanoes, say
creationists, were likely associated with the Flood. The volcanoes would have filled the
atmosphere with ash and gases which would have reflected much of the sunlight back into
space. The result would be considerable cooling, snow and glaciers over much of the earth. In
time, as the volcanoes died down, the earth would achieve its current state. 2
Misconception #4-that creationists are not qualified scientists.
This misconception, often used by anti-creationists who maybe know better, is an easy one to
counter.
In the first place, most of the successful scientists from the past were creationists such as Louis
Pasteur, Isaac Newton, Johann Kepler, Georges Cuvier, Michael Faraday, William Herschel,
Gregor Mendel, Robert Boyle, Carolus Linnaeus, and Lord Kelvin, to name a few.
Today the Creation Research Society has hundreds of members with advanced degrees in the
natural sciences. Both the Institute of Creation Research and Answers in Genesis have many
associates who hold doctorates in the natural sciences.
Also, what can one say about the many former evolutionist scientists who have become
creationists? Did they cease being qualified scientists the moment they converted?
What some evolutionists claim is that creationists do not use the scientific method and
therefore by definition cannot be considered qualified scientists. Besides being untrue, that
seems like a very arrogant thing to say.
Misconception #5-that creationists don’t believe in dinosaurs.
It’s hard to say how many Christians still hold to this idea which was more common many years
ago, but most likely some still do.
One cannot argue though with the numerous dinosaur fossils found all over the world unless
entertaining the ridiculous notion that God for some reason buried fake dinosaur fossils in the
ground.
Also, the dragon legends from all parts of the globe plus numerous ancient artifacts that
appear to depict dinosaur-like creatures testify to the reality of dinosaurs.
Even the Bible seems to describe creatures that sound like dinosaurs or other prehistoric
creatures. To many students of the Bible, the behemoth in Job, chapter 40, and the leviathan in
Job, chapter 41, are impressive monsters that do not closely resemble any modern animals.
Misconception #6-that creationists are narrow-minded and unwilling to change their
ideas in the face of new evidence.
True creationists will plead guilty to one belief on which they will not and cannot yield—that the
Bible including the book of Genesis is literally true and that evolution cannot possibly be true.
Otherwise they have shown a willingness to drop or change ideas when new evidence or
thinking is presented.
For many years, the theory that a water vapor canopy covered the earth before the Flood was
held in high regard. The collapse of this canopy along with the release of water stored
underground (“springs of the great deep.” Gen. 7:11. NIV) could have explained where all the
water for Noah’s Flood came from. However, more recently creationist scientists have pointed
out that to be practical, such a canopy would have made conditions on the ground unbearably
hot, would have made it difficult to see the moon and stars, and lacks an explanation as to what
kept the canopy from falling in the first place. Most creationists seem to have stopped talking
about a water vapor canopy although some suggest there may have been a partial canopy. 3
There are other ideas no longer used by many or most creationist scientists including the
suggestion that the layer of moon dust is too thin for the universe to be billions of years old or
that there are dinosaur and human footprints alongside each other at the Paluxy River in
Texas. Creationists are just as likely to debate their own theories as are the evolutionists.
This then is a review of some misconceptions about creationism held by both friend and foe, as
this writer sees it. It is important for Bible-based Christians especially to not knowingly use
wrong or outdated arguments in discussing the creation-evolution controversy with others. LSI
1. http://www.answersin genesis.org/home/area/feedback/2005/1028.asp.
2. Oard, Michael. Frozen in Time, Master Books, 2004.
3. http://www.lutheran science.org/2003-Vapor CanopyTheory1.html.
intentionally advanced by opponents of this movement. This article is an attempt to provide
some clarification.
Misconception #1-that creationists are out to "prove the Bible."
This argument is sometimes used by other Christians who don’t understand creationism or who
think creationists have a faith problem.
The fact is that most creationists (hopefully ALL LSI members) first and foremost accept
Genesis as a literal account of the origin of life and the universe because it is the Word of God.
Even a non-Lutheran like Ken Ham has written, “If we were to try to prove the Bible with
science, we would be making science authoritative, whereas biblical theology is the ‘queen of
science’.” 1
However, what Christians have a right and even a duty to do is to “defend” the Bible when God’
s Word is under attack. This practice is known as “apologetics”, which has a long and
honorable tradition within the Christian church.
Misconception #2-that creationist scientists reject the idea of natural selection or
“survival of the fittest.”
Not only do creationist scientists not reject the concept of natural selection (also known as
“survival of the fittest”), but it was a creationist scientist who may have invented the idea. At
least creationist chemist/zoologist Edward Blyth (1810—1873) wrote about natural selection
before Darwin did.
Natural selection simply means that an animal or other organism may possess a trait that gives
it a better chance to survive in a given environment and pass its genes on to its descendants.
Natural selection is sometimes confused with what evolutionists call microevolution (as this
writer has done), but technically there is no such thing as microevolution. For microevolution to
occur in a creature, there would have to be at least minor additions of information to its genetic
code, something that has never been observed. Obviously, to an even greater extent, that
rules out molecules-to-man evolution or macroevolution.
Misconception #3-that creationists reject the idea of an Ice Age.
While evolutionist geologists often speak of several Ice Ages, creationist scientists now
generally accept the idea that there was one Ice Age. This Ice Age they believe was caused by
Noah’s Flood.
There is considerable evidence that ice once covered most of Canada, much of the northern
and central United States, northern Europe, northwest Asia, and the mountain ranges of
Eurasia. Ice sheets are not significantly melting or growing today, so what caused them to grow
and melt in the past is a matter of conjecture.
There is also evidence of extensive volcanic activity in the past. These volcanoes, say
creationists, were likely associated with the Flood. The volcanoes would have filled the
atmosphere with ash and gases which would have reflected much of the sunlight back into
space. The result would be considerable cooling, snow and glaciers over much of the earth. In
time, as the volcanoes died down, the earth would achieve its current state. 2
Misconception #4-that creationists are not qualified scientists.
This misconception, often used by anti-creationists who maybe know better, is an easy one to
counter.
In the first place, most of the successful scientists from the past were creationists such as Louis
Pasteur, Isaac Newton, Johann Kepler, Georges Cuvier, Michael Faraday, William Herschel,
Gregor Mendel, Robert Boyle, Carolus Linnaeus, and Lord Kelvin, to name a few.
Today the Creation Research Society has hundreds of members with advanced degrees in the
natural sciences. Both the Institute of Creation Research and Answers in Genesis have many
associates who hold doctorates in the natural sciences.
Also, what can one say about the many former evolutionist scientists who have become
creationists? Did they cease being qualified scientists the moment they converted?
What some evolutionists claim is that creationists do not use the scientific method and
therefore by definition cannot be considered qualified scientists. Besides being untrue, that
seems like a very arrogant thing to say.
Misconception #5-that creationists don’t believe in dinosaurs.
It’s hard to say how many Christians still hold to this idea which was more common many years
ago, but most likely some still do.
One cannot argue though with the numerous dinosaur fossils found all over the world unless
entertaining the ridiculous notion that God for some reason buried fake dinosaur fossils in the
ground.
Also, the dragon legends from all parts of the globe plus numerous ancient artifacts that
appear to depict dinosaur-like creatures testify to the reality of dinosaurs.
Even the Bible seems to describe creatures that sound like dinosaurs or other prehistoric
creatures. To many students of the Bible, the behemoth in Job, chapter 40, and the leviathan in
Job, chapter 41, are impressive monsters that do not closely resemble any modern animals.
Misconception #6-that creationists are narrow-minded and unwilling to change their
ideas in the face of new evidence.
True creationists will plead guilty to one belief on which they will not and cannot yield—that the
Bible including the book of Genesis is literally true and that evolution cannot possibly be true.
Otherwise they have shown a willingness to drop or change ideas when new evidence or
thinking is presented.
For many years, the theory that a water vapor canopy covered the earth before the Flood was
held in high regard. The collapse of this canopy along with the release of water stored
underground (“springs of the great deep.” Gen. 7:11. NIV) could have explained where all the
water for Noah’s Flood came from. However, more recently creationist scientists have pointed
out that to be practical, such a canopy would have made conditions on the ground unbearably
hot, would have made it difficult to see the moon and stars, and lacks an explanation as to what
kept the canopy from falling in the first place. Most creationists seem to have stopped talking
about a water vapor canopy although some suggest there may have been a partial canopy. 3
There are other ideas no longer used by many or most creationist scientists including the
suggestion that the layer of moon dust is too thin for the universe to be billions of years old or
that there are dinosaur and human footprints alongside each other at the Paluxy River in
Texas. Creationists are just as likely to debate their own theories as are the evolutionists.
This then is a review of some misconceptions about creationism held by both friend and foe, as
this writer sees it. It is important for Bible-based Christians especially to not knowingly use
wrong or outdated arguments in discussing the creation-evolution controversy with others. LSI
1. http://www.answersin genesis.org/home/area/feedback/2005/1028.asp.
2. Oard, Michael. Frozen in Time, Master Books, 2004.
3. http://www.lutheran science.org/2003-Vapor CanopyTheory1.html.
Misconceptions About Creationism
by Warren Krug
by Warren Krug
| Published 2008 |
