One of our favorite posts is Did Science Originate with Creationists?, in which we concluded that we owe science and the Enlightenment to the Greeks — the world’s first scientists — such as Aristotle, Archimedes, Hippocrates, Ptolemy, and Eratosthenes. It was Eratosthenes who determined the circumference of the Earth using geometry.
Today, for the first time that we can remember, we see a creationist outfit urging us to reject the Greeks. Who else would it be but the creation scientists at Answers in Genesis (AIG), the creationist ministry of Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the Australian entrepreneur who has become the ayatollah of Appalachia, famed for the infamous, mind-boggling Creation Museum.
AIG’s new essay is How Do Some Among You Say There Is No Adam? It was written by Simon Turpin, a name we haven’t encountered before. He’s described as “the general manager and speaker for Answers in Genesis–UK.” Most of his essay consists of scripture quotes. We can ignore those and most of his scripture references. We’ll give you only what we regard as the interesting stuff, with bold font added by us for emphasis. He begins like this:
The Apostle Paul often found himself in a cultural context in which he had to deal with many objections to the Christian faith. In 1 Corinthians 15, for example, the Corinthian congregation was questioning the future resurrection of believers: “How do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?” The Corinthians struggled with the idea of a bodily resurrection because it did not fit into their cultural worldview. The city of Corinth was permeated with Greek philosophy.
Egad — Greek philosophy! How horrible that must have been for Paul. Then Simon says:
The Greeks loved speculative philosophy and were proud of their intellect as they sought after and trusted in the “wisdom of men.” In their own wisdom, some of the Corinthians rejected the resurrection from the dead because of the Greek idea of the immortality of the soul apart from the body. Many saw the body (matter) as corrupt and not worthy of any form of immortality, and therefore mocked the idea that it would be resurrected.
Well, physical resurrection is a difficult idea to accept. Let’s read on:
Two thousand years later, not much has changed. Just as the culture in Paul’s day was permeated with Greek philosophy, so it is today. The worldview that undergirds Darwinian evolutionary thought is essentially Greek at its core. Many Christians are still integrating Greek philosophy into Christianity; however we have just given it the name science rather than philosophy.
They’re not synonyms. Science was originally called natural philosophy, because it was (and still is) limited to what we can observe in the natural world. Simon continues:
Whereas Paul specifically asked how the Corinthians could say there is no resurrection, today’s Christians must ask, “How do some among you say there is no Adam?” Because Greek thinking has been synthesized with biblical thinking, it is becoming increasingly popular among many evangelicals to reject a historical Adam.
Then Simon gives us several paragraphs and loads of scripture quotes explaining why Adam is an essential belief. We’ll skip that. Well, this paragraph is worth mentioning:
It is important to keep in mind that atonement involves a blood sacrifice, which implies violence and death. However, this surely makes no sense in a theistic evolutionary worldview where violence and death have been a part of God’s process of creation over millions of years. Accepting millions of years of human and animal death before the Creation and Fall of man undermines the teaching of the atoning work of Christ. Theistic evolution does not just undermine Genesis and the supernatural creation of Adam, but it also undermines the doctrine of the atonement.
Yeah, you gotta have blood atonement. Here’s one more excerpt:
If we reject the biblical revelation that God created Adam supernaturally, we have to reject that physical death came about because of his disobedience. Then there really is no need for the Cross, atonement, or a new heaven and earth.
It all makes sense — unless one has been corrupted by the philosophy of the Greeks. Skipping a lot more, we come to Simon’s conclusion:
Those who reject a historical Adam do so because they have elevated the wisdom of men over the revelation of God. However, Paul reminded the Corinthian church that human wisdom cannot benefit us before God, as He rejects all that rests on human wisdom. Instead, Paul reminded them that Christ, who is the wisdom of God is far superior to that of any philosophy. The wisdom of the Greeks could not recognize the most profound wisdom of all when they were challenged with it. The truth of the creation of the first man, Adam, embodies true wisdom — the wisdom of God, not the wisdom of the age.
So there you have it , dear reader — AIG makes it very clear. They want us to reject what we learned from the Greeks. But if we follow their advice, we’ll be tossing out everything of value in Western Civilization. That’s exactly what they want — it’s the ultimate goal of creationism.
Copyright © 2016. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.