The Current State of Creationism

In his article entitled “Quo Vadis?: Some Reflections on the State of Creationism,” Hans Madueme expounds on the current state of creationism. Madueme approaches creationism from the standpoint of theological studies. He examines the current state and the future of creationism.

The following article is a summary of “Quo Vadis? Some Reflections on the State of Creationism,” by Hans Madeume, and of the surrounding discussion and research pertaining to it. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of New Creation.

Personality Quirks

If you have met more than one or two creationists, you have likely encountered at least one with a quirky personality. After years of swimming against the stream, they developed thick skin. They learned to be combative, sticking up for their beliefs against all opposition. Some creationists have become so entrenched in their views that they consider everyone who differs even slightly from their views, even fellow creationists, as the enemy. While a prickly personality is forgivable, creationists as a group should not be known as odd ducks. Their primary trait should be a calm, cheerful passion about their theological views. This is because they have truth on their side. 

Madume goes on to distinguish between eccentric and awkward. Eccentric creationists add colorful diversity to the field. Awkward creationists, on the other hand, are those that do not play well with others. This kind of awkwardness creates division among creationists. There is a remedy. Creationists should make an effort to engage in friendly interactions with those they disagree with.       

Peace amongst Creationists

The next topic that Madume addresses is closely related to the first. Like individual creationists,  creation ministries tend to hold tightly to specific beliefs. Large organizations that present creationist material to lay people have carried the creationist movement for decades. They are good at what they do. But, because they operate at a lay level, they are not always equipped to enter the scientific arena. Instead of absorbing new scientific discoveries in creationism, they can tend to hold to their older views and consider creation scientists as the enemy if they present new and differing ideas. This can cause antagonism between creation ministries and creation scientists.

Madume suggests that instead of fighting between the two groups, it is better to recognize that each functions in a unique role. Creation scientists should continue to further the scientific aspects of creationism, while creation ministries should continue to present creationism at the lay level. There is an opportunity for great harmony between the two categories of creationists. Although there may be disagreement, creationists should not tear down other creationists. 

New Creationism

Amongst conservative American Christianity, there has been a certain skepticism of academic pursuits. University-trained scientists and even theologians are sometimes seen as having been tainted by the system. While universities often promote anti-biblical views, anti-intellectualism throws out the good with the bad in secondary education. If creationists wish to further creationism as a science they must become educated in an aspect of science such as biology, geology, etc. In the past, creationism has centered on a lay-level presentation of science that is typically strongly influenced by theology. And, while theology-driven creationism within creationist ministries certainly serves an important purpose, it has grown stagnant. This is where New Creationism comes in. Madume recognizes seven key traits of New Creationists:

1) They tend to engage in gracious conversation with other creationists and with non-creationists. 

2) They are likely to be involved in academia.

3) They use an academic approach when tackling questions.

4) They are comfortable with saying, “I don’t know,” and working to find answers to the questions for which they don’t have an answer.

5) They are driven by curiosity and a desire to build creationist models consistent with both scripture and science.

6) They are willing to accept principles that are foundational to evolution if there is good evidence for them.

7) They neither fear nor discourage new discoveries.

New Creationists are the future of creationism. Instead of poking holes in evolution from a distance, they engage with evolutionists on their own turf. They diligently study and perform scientific research to build solidly scientific models of creationism. 

Epistemology

Epistemology is the study of knowledge. How do we know things? Most creationists, and conservative biblical scholars in general, start with the word of God as the foundation of knowledge. In simplified terms, this can take the form of: “the Bible is true. We don’t need to trust mainstream scientists because their work is not founded on God’s word.” However, this is a false dichotomy. Just because the word of God is true, it does not necessarily follow that everything else is false. Non-christians can discover truths about the universe. In doing so, they are discovering something of God, because God is the author of truth.

Creationists do not need to be afraid to accept the scientific findings of secular scientists as truth. However, they should also be cautious, since the very nature of science makes it a work in progress, and not everything presented by a scientist is necessarily true. Creationists can assume that any scientific discovery that is directly contrary to God’s Word must be incorrect. However, a scientific discovery that is contrary to a creationist’s interpretation of Scripture or a creation model may be correct and the creationist’s interpretation may be wrong. 

Missing Theologians

The New Creation movement has brought a wave of exciting work among creation scientists. Creation theologians, on the other hand, are noticeably absent. Most theological creationism falls to the realm of creation ministries. Most of this work is published in magazines that appeal to lay-level readers. Academic theologians are unlikely to take such articles seriously if they happen to come across one. Academic theological journals, on the other hand, are seriously lacking when it comes to creationism. Perhaps this is because theologians view the issues of creationism as settled, with nothing new to discuss. But Madume argues that there are untouched rich depths in creation theology. He urges creation theologists to step up and bring creationism to the academic arena in theology. And some are. The newly-formed Creation Theology Society is dedicated to just this.       

Conclusion

Madume concludes with a reminder that creationism is hard. A lot of creationists are hard to get along with, and there are tensions between creation ministries and creation scientists. And, there are challenges in searching for truth and in linking creationism with theology. But we must overcome creationism’s challenges, because the best days of creationism are yet to come.