Creation, ID and France

One of the things that kind of punches you in the stomach here is that belief in a six-day-created, young-earth is pretty scarce is France. Imagine a pastor's conference where the speaker is asked "So can one be a creationist and honest ?" I was there. The speaker graciously evaded the question but the implication was clearly no.

Now I believed in six-day creation before I started reading the Bible, encouraged by the discussions we had in my sixth-form Biology class. During my Biology degree I continued to believe in a six-day creation and I began to read the Bible. I was not surprised to find that the Bible sometimes challenged my belief, sometimes reinforced it and sometimes refined it. It does that.

I met people who believed in theistic evolution but most of the Biology students who were Christians were six-day creationists. I don't know any that were not. Incidentally this was in the time when Richard Dawkins' The Selfish Gene was first published. Yes, I am that old !

Now I draw my belief in creation from two sources, from the Bible and from my observation of the world. But the Bible comes first. God spoke and he didn't tell us lies. When we look at the world we can study it, discuss it, debate it, refine our understanding, suggest explanations, see them disproved, change our minds - and of course we must. When we look at the Bible of course we can get a better understanding of it, too. But the Bible doesn't change.

Now then. ID. I don't go much for ID, except that it could be a step on the road to faith for some people. The problem I see with ID is that it does not include the Bible in the discussion. Let me explain by means of the awful programme Through the keyhole, where Lloyd Grossman used to explore someone's house and draw conclusions about the person from the decor and the stuff he saw. The goal was to identify the person from the home they had made.

Imagine a programme of Through the keyhole where they come to my house - but while I am there.

They explore the kitchen.

Grossman: "This person obviously likes chocolate and drinks a lot of tea. Who could have a kitchen like this"

Excuse me - it's me. This is my kitchen...

Then the living room.

Grossman: "Two flutes, a saxophone, a trombone and a keyboard. A small television with British DVDs. Lots of books. Whose room could this be?"

Uh, hallo ! Here I am, speaking to you...

In the office.

Grossman: "Look at this. Theological books. And do I see some in English, French, Welsh and is that Spanish ? Whose office could this be ? And a computer on the desk."

Will you just listen to me and I will tell you !

Now the discussion ensues. From the data they propose various people, but let's face it - they're not likely to know me, so they're not likely to choose me ! Meanwhile I am at the side of the set trying to gain their attention, in vain.

If they ignore me and what I have said, well for one thing that's rude ! Don't we smart from being discussed in the third person in our own homes ?

For another it's ignoring the most important evidence possible - my self-revelation when I speak. I know who I am ! I don't have to try and guess from the stuff around me. Not yet, anyway...

The worst thing it that they risk getting it dramatically wrong. And getting it wrong about God, proposing deities that are not the living God, is not just to lose a game show. It's to lose the ground of your being. It's idolatry.

p.s. You could change this to have me leaving a note ... which they ignore ... the effect is the same.