Creation Science is dead.

Pugnacious "creation scientists" like to inform their evolution-defending opponents that the debate isn't about science, it's about God. And yet, they continue to hide behind the science moniker, calling their profession "Creation science" and themselves "Creation scientists."

A fair number of Evolution proponents actually admit that it's about God; or, they used to. Now, it's simply assumed that naturalistic evolution is true, and that God is a fairy tale, a quaint custom, or at worst a pernicious lie.

Let me be clear: I believe that God created the universe and everything in it without help of any kind, and I reject naturalistic evolution as a theory and as an ideology. But, I will not align myself with Creation scientists. They're charlatans when it comes to science, and confused when it comes to the Christian faith. (As for the ID crowd, they're the worst of the lot, but that's another post.)

Creation science (or CS as I like to call it, for reasons of my own) is supposedly the application of the scientific method to prove the hypothesis that God created the world in six literal days. They look at the fossil record, the geological evidence, etc., "proving" that God created and that Charlie Darwin was just an atheist and a fool. As true as the assessment of Chuck Darwin may be, the CS crowd fails to acknowledge that the issue they champion isn't open for debate.

(They also fail to acknowledge that the tactics the evolutionists use are the same ones they use; evolution can't be proved, they say, but they expect us to believe that biblical creation can.)

The point of Christianity isn't to prove any of its claims from purely empirical grounds. To attempt to do so is to give in to the empiricism from which evolutionary theory emerged. Neither God, nor His mighty works, can be proved through mere physical evidence. If creation could be proved, why do we have the Bible? If Thomas Aquinas was right and man can know God through nature, why do we need direct revelation in the form of God's Word? To suggest either is to assume that to be a Christian is simply to intellectually acknowledge the truth of the Gospel....which can presumably also be proved through careful marshalling of facts.

It's a weird junction of Christian fundamentalist dogmatism and Enlightenment-fueled empiricism that has led to the oxymoronic "Creation Science" that purports to defend biblical truth against the advances of atheistic rationalism. The Gospel of Christ is our primary concern as Christians, not proving that the miracles of the Bible actually took place, or that Jesus really rose from the dead, or that God actually created the world from nothing. The CSers get it backwards: if someone trusts Jesus for salvation from sin, they'll trust His Word, and if they don't trust Him all the evidence in the world won't convince them. God saves, and that's the end of the matter.

People who spend all their time talking about how badly the Theory of Evolution has corrupted society are ignorant. First of all, it's a West-centric attitude that fails to account for Eastern origins theories. Secondly, evolutionary theory is an old idea, as old as Greek philosophy at the very least; Darwin was merely a popularizer and codifier, not an originator. But, more importantly, CSers aim their artillery against a symptom of sin, rather than against sin itself. Evolutionary thinking is a result of man's rebellion, not a cause of it. To say otherwise is to reject the Gospel.