Reasons Creationists Critique Evolution

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen 

Many years ago, I asked someone to criticize an article I had written. He replied, "No, but I will critique it." Then I learned that criticize has a connotation of negativity, but a critique can be positive and constructive.

The term constructive criticism is often mere criticism and not constructive. While a critique is most commonly known for art and literature, it is also useful when discussing science and writing papers. Critiques help determine if claims are supported or where the material is lacking. Creationists critique evolutionary material.

There are misotheists and evolutionists who complain that creationists only take cheap shots at evolution. That is false, and there is much more to it. We review and critique.
Pexels / fauxels (seriously?), modified with FotoSketcher
In my article on debate challenges, I emphasized some things learned from Dr. James R. White. In a true debate, there is structure and some amount of graciousness. Debaters work on the material presented instead of taking cheap shots at the people. (I'll allow that it's very difficult to remain clinical when discussing deceivers and vitriolic anti-creationists.) Universal common ancestor evolution gives creation scientists a great deal of material.

Kite image from Unsplash, eagle from Pexels

Critiquing is an established tradition in academia. It is also biblical. (I have had articles critiqued and reviewed before publication, and I have learned from those experiences.) One of the goals of apologetics is to present unbelievers a kind of mirror to reflect their worldview back to them. Atheism is irrational and incoherent, and only the biblical worldview (beginning from Genesis) makes sense of human experience. Also, the mind, logic, mathematics, and even science are impossible without God, and cannot exist if atheism were true.

There are people who claim that creationists simply tear down evolution. In reality, there are only two possibilities for the existence of the world: everything created itself from nothing, or an omnipotent and omniscient intelligence was involved. Dismantling evolution is the beginning of showing that the God of the Bible is the ultimate first cause.

It also helps keep Darwinists honest, since they know they are being watched. Every little bit helps.

Evolution is not about evidence alone, but is a spiritual matter (as I have discussed several times before). There are professing atheists who have said that even if evolution were disproved, they would still not accept God as Creator, nor would they worship him (based on misrepresentations and misunderstanding the Bible). Some have said that refuting evolution does not prove that God is the Creator. While it contains an element of truth, creation is the only other logical possibility. Also, we have his written Word that explains creation and redemption through Jesus Christ.

There are misotheists who say that we never present evidence for creation, the Genesis Flood, and so on. When it is pointed out that we have done so repeatedly, some refuse to examine it because they rely on the genetic fallacy: If it comes from creationists, it is worthless. But they cannot show flaws in the material, so they attack people. This does not make evolution and atheism any less false, but it's who they are and what they do. So, yes, creation science ministries show that not only are evolution and deep-time uniformitarianism inadequate to explain what is observed, but that recent creation, the Genesis Flood, and other things are the rational conclusions.

Once again, I have an article to show you which was a springboard for what you just read.

Sometimes we receive negative feedback along the lines of “You only ever criticize evolution”—in other words, we only engage in negativity and this is not a productive methodology. But over the 40 years of CMI’s ministry, such ‘negativity’ has borne tremendous fruit!

First, these attacks come from opponents, or those who are listening to opponents. We would expect these types of comments from skeptics and evolutionists, who are naturally perturbed at the thought there might be genuine evidence for creation. It is rare that we receive such a comment from a genuine, concerned supporter, but when we do, they often explain that their concern is about evolutionists taking offense! The fact that people complain about criticism should not automatically make us stop.

To read the rest, see "“If you can’t say something nice …”? Why evaluating opposing arguments can lead to salvation".