The Creation/Evolution debate
The origin of our universe has never been about facts and evidence as such—we all have the same world, the same evidence, the same facts. It is the philosophical framework within which facts are interpreted which differs and philosophical frameworks are based on axioms (presuppositions, or starting beliefs). The scientific conclusions of Darwinism are squarely based on anti-biblical (naturalistic) axioms, while those of creation are based on biblical axioms. In any discussion on origins, the axioms need to be openly ‘on the table’, and it should be realized that one can discuss them in a secular setting without teaching religious doctrine as such, but without hiding or running away from the implications. The evidence concerning origins can be discussed through a critical comparison of axiom-based models (see below) without fostering the secular myth of ‘neutrality,’ i.e., that evidence ‘speaks for itself’ in some mysterious way.
There are creation and flood stories in most cultures that bear strong similarity to the Biblical accounts: ‘Why not then teach e.g. Australian Aboriginal creation and flood stories in science lessons?’ One could ask such objectors whether they are aware of any origins or flood teaching outside of the Biblical narrative which:
- Claims to be absolute revelational truth from the Creator in documentary form
- Has been held and believed consistently for many centuries in essentially its modern form.
- Has been held to offer a serious historical explanation for all of reality including the origins of man and the universe and the reason why there are millions of dead things buried all around the world.
- Is supported by a significant group of qualified scientists and other intellectuals who are convinced that it does indeed explain the data at least as well as evolution/long ages.
Extract from an article by Dr Carl Weiland: CMI’s views on the Intelligent Design Movement http://www.creation.com