Genesis vs. Science

One of the first bits of Christian doctrine I abandoned was the literal interpretation of Genesis. This wasn’t too much of a big deal for me, as there are many Christians who view Genesis – particularly the first few chapters – as allegorical. However it cannot be denied that this view, particularly accepting evolution over creation as described in the Bible, somewhat weakens the idea of God, and his perceived control over the universe. I suppose this is why there are still so many Christians who cling to the literal interpretation even though it means they must turn a blind eye to what has been empirically proven by science in order to keep their beliefs. This often leads to creationists making ridiculous arguments such as this, which basically states that unless you believe in biblical creation, you cannot assume that the universe is logical and orderly and that it obeys mathematical laws that are consistent over time and space – and therefore cannot trust the conclusions that scientific methods point to. What this argument doesn’t consider, however, is why the scientific methods which can be trusted due to the uniformity of the “created” universe point to the conclusion of evolution.

Another story in Genesis which I was forced to abandon belief in pretty early on is that of “Noah’s Ark.” The main reasoning for this was simply the lack of evidence that such a thing ever happened (the implausibility of the story was secondary to this). However, once again there are biblical literalists who try desperately to argue for the historical accuracy of this story. One interesting example of this is here, which despite being found on the same site as the previous article (answersingenesis.org) gives a mutually exclusive argument, claiming that “to say that sediments have always accumulated in the past at the rates we observe today is an assumption. It’s an interpretation based on man’s ideas about the past and is not a proven fact.” Another example can be found here, detailing an extremely dubious claim of having located the Ark, not least because of the “discoverers” refusal to say exactly where it is...

All in all, early on in my journey from devout religiosity I realised that the book of Genesis was not a reliable historical account, but a collection of old stories/myths about how the world was created, how the snake lost it's legs and why there are rainbows. While this still allowed me to have some level of “faith,” the ridiculous, desperate and even moronic arguments put forward by some religious people only served to push me further from wishing to identify myself as a “Christian.”