In terms of initial plausibility, which is more likely: that the vast majority of the world’s scientists (including many Christians among them) who have helped provide insight into and treatments for countless diseases, to say nothing of other innovations, are all conspiring to spread a lie from the pit of hell, or that a congressman’s statement about evolution being a lie from the pit of hell is a lie from the pit of hell?
(Broun describes himself as a “scientist” in the video. He is a medical doctor, which is a laudable and impressive profession but not the same thing as being a scientist).
Unlike Greg Mayer, I am not surprised that Broun would turn his sights on embryology as well. Indeed, it is high time we saw a young-earth creationist with that sort of consistency. The Bible depicts God as knitting us together in our mother’s womb. Saying that DNA does it instead is clearly a secularist lie from the pit of hell – just like secular meteorology, which says that it is not God that sends the rain on the just and the unjust, and I am confident that Broun will continue to be consistent and will turn his opposition there next.
Broun’s statements about the Bible being his guide to public policy worries me as much as, and perhaps more than, his statements about science. What else is he referring to? Which texts does he have in mind? Why do I suspect that he will ignore the Jubilee law and anything related to social justice, and promote all sorts of “unbiblical” laws while perhaps even believing that he is being biblical?After all, if his misunderstanding of science is anything to go by, I wouldn’t have much confidence in his ability to understand the Bible.
I assume that any Christian who watches sports would prefer an umpire or referee who knows the rules of the game but is an atheist, to a Christian who doesn’t know them or doesn’t care about their being applied fairly and accurately. So why do Christians vote for people who pander to their faith, while telling lies about science, to be on a science committee?
I want to conclude by sharing an image from the blog Unreasonable Faith with a quote from Carl Sagan:
I’m not sure whether the image depicts the closing or the opening of a book as representing the quest to know and not merely believe in a manner uninterested in truth, evidence, or anything else that matters. But either way, it is crucial not to just limit oneself to a single book, but to open many, and to do so often. The Bible doesn’t address embryology, or the Big Bang, or evolution. Those issues and perspectives weren’t even around yet. And to suggest that the Bible provides scientific information, or public policy guidelines for a democracy, are all lies from the pit of hell.