A Southern View of Young Earth Creation


Recently, in a forum thread populated by self-professing members of the “Alternative Right”, the question was raised as to whether or not Young Earth Creationists could be considered part of the Alt. Right. Seeing as how racial realist and biodiversity literature is built on evolutionary paradigms, how could someone be both Young Earth and a racial realist? More importantly, how can we see black people as made in the image of God?

I’ve argued before that it’s easy to be a Young Earth creationist if we simply recognize and highlight the underlying materialist bias inherent in modern academia, especially the hard sciences. These people are often philosophically naive and as “fundamentalist” in their sentiments as any snake handling West Virginian. Presbyterian philosophy is helpful in this sort of deconstruction, utilizing similar arguments as those used by postmodernists, leading some commentators to the absurd conclusion that Cornelius Van Til, himself, was a postmodernist. He most certainly was not. Van Til utilized Presbyterian theology to develop postmodern-style criticisms of anti-Christian academia, while providing (with his other hand, as it were) a solid “Revelational Epistemology” on which to ground all the necessary preconditions of scientific inquiry.

Still, a new scientific paradigm has emerged on the popular scene – the so-called “Flat Earth” theory. Without a solid epistemological foundation, the scientific community is simply floating through cultural hegemony and become little more than snake-oil salesmen for their particular bias; they have little ability to combat these alternative paradigms. As a side note, economists are often described in similar terms – as simply being fancy polemicists for their chosen political ideology, practicing a “science” that has little to do with the objective world. Practitioners of the “hard sciences” balk at being described that way.

It seems that if we use postmodern arguments to wrench open the door for Young Earth creationism, we have to leave it wide open enough for any sort of “absurd” theory (like the Flat Earth) to slip in. If that happens, then it’s a free-for-all and we’re in danger of losing all Scientific theorizing. If anything goes – if we can come up with any answer to any scientific question – then we really have no answers at all.

So really, the entire question (as I see it) is one of what Christians refer to as: “ultimate authority.” Without it, we must arbitrarily keep out all the “uncool” paradigms, or take the more honest approach and let every one of them in. Most materialist scientists take the first option. They hold to some form of naive realism, preferring to simply suppose philosophical preconditions arbitrarily and get on with their work, while using their bully pulpit to keep out all the views they find distasteful. This seems fine until we realize that it’s impossible to play the game consistently. If such a man, let’s say a geologist for example, were to play the game consistently, he might empirically study a rock and tell us that it has a certain ratio of potassium and argon. But when he begins speculating about the age of the rock based on this data, he’s violating the rules of the game by bringing in all sorts of metaphysical and (dare I say it?) “theological” assumptions. They want to pretend to be philosophically neutral while slipping in (through the backdoor) their pet ideals.

Some Christians, unfortunately, are impressed with this game and tend to be glamorized by current reigning viewpoints. As a result, they try to merge their theology and their reading of Scripture with pop-paradigms. We get “theistic evolutionists” for example. Of course, the only way to be a theistic evolutionist is to accept the self-proclaimed philosophical neutrality of the oh-so-impressive academic institutions; barring that, there’s no real reason not to read the Bible in its very literal, fairy-tale-like style…and to believe every word of it.

But to the point: how can one read the Bible in this way and also be a racial realist? Setting aside the various theories of racial realism among Young Earthers (like, for example, the special creation of the black race as a result of the cursing of Ham’s line; or, the gradual creation of races after the linguistic break-up at Babel)…we ought to realize that, at its essence, the Young Earth model promotes “staying put” in one’s created place, where the evolutionist model promotes “progress” – even eternal progress.

And the Southerner has always been the enemy of “progress”; at least, “progress” in its malicious form, meaning, progression away from traditional life and towards a new, rationally-planned mode of living. I have a hard time figuring out how the theistic evolutionist, who believes God utilizes His system of second-causes over a long period (fitting with secular evolutionary narratives) to bring about the modern world, can turn around and argue that certain modes of living ought to remain unchanged. Any “progress” on his view, ought to be seen as God continuing to work out His will for Creation. Perhaps, on this view, white people ought to be genocided out of existence to make way for a new, racially homogeneous world of peace; peace because of a one-world language, culture, and single mega “tribe” that has no “other” with which to antagonize? I can’t see how these theistic evolutionists, for example, have any grounds to oppose the so-called “transhumanist” movement, which is little more than evolutionary “eschatology”. Man, on this view, reaches rational self-consciousness and is able to take charge of his own evolutionary destiny – creating new bodies for himself, merged with nano-tech. computers, and wireless communications.

But on the Young Earth view, we can see that God specially created humans, warts and all, and means for us to take dominion within the bounds He’s set for us. “This far and no farther.” On this view, races exist and will continue to exist, even if we’re all given robot bodies; this, because racial categories are not defined by one’s genetics (a model which leads to savage counter examples), but rather, are defined by a divine person. Consider the marble example. Suppose there is a group of 20 identical marbles. They’re divided into 4 groups of five. The person dividing them can name each of the groups and think of them however he likes because he’s the one imposing meaning on their groupings. In the same way, in some hideous dystopian future, where we’re all uploaded into identical robotic machines, there’s still be “race” – as long as we exist as individual persons – simply because God has imposed meaning on particular groups of men. Yes, yes, there are phenotypical and genotypical realities as a result of these groups, but the “spiritual” grouping precedes the physical realities.

Much more can (and will) be said about this sort of “spiritual” view of racial categories, but my aim here is to highlight some of the benefits of a Young Earth position that, if adhered to, has the potential not only to strengthen the alternative right…but maybe to save it as well?

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to A Southern View of Young Earth Creation

  1. Well written.

    The question of ‘why do you want to believe in Theistic Evolution’ is always the best thing to ask a TE. ‘To show that Christians can be scientific too’ is the common answer. That or some other kind of inclusivism for others or for themselves.

    By the time they answer thus they have already given up the reality to the enemy. It is hard to tell where to start with the number of errors in that short sentence.


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s