Proof Young-Earth Creationists Don’t Care What the Bible Says

Proof Young-Earth Creationists Don’t Care What the Bible Says September 3, 2015

icr-christ-references-quote

The Institute for Creation Research recently shared the above image on Facebook, claiming that Jesus quotes from Genesis more often than any other book in the Old Testament. That claim is verifiably false.

This is a clear example of them (1) assuming that what is central to them simply must have been important to Jesus, (2) not bothering to actually check, (3) asserting as truth what they have not in fact investigated, and (4) not knowing the Bible well enough to have avoided making this mistake in the first place. This sums up the characteristics of young-earth creationism as a whole very well.

Joel Duff blogged about this recently. RJS also has a nice post on the Jesus Creed blog which discusses this in more detail. It included this nice list of the quotations and allusions to the Jewish Scriptures found on the lips of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew.

The Biblia blog also has a top 4 list.


Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Progressive Christian
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Darach Conneely

    (5) Assuming because Jesus quotes a verse he’s interpreting it the same way they do.

    • histrogeek

      Well, since they are interpreting them the ONLY POSSIBLE CORRECT way, that follows.

    • otrotierra

      This! Young Earth fundamentalists confuse their opinions with God, when in fact they are quite regularly polar opposites. In this sense, it could be argued that Young Earth Creationism is thinly veiled self-worship.

  • Tim

    Institute for Creative Rubbish.

  • histrogeek

    And of course most of the Genesis references are from sections that have nothing to do with creationism. They’re pretty much all from the patriarch narratives, mostly by just name-checking the patriarchs, not even citing verses.

    • Bible as Myth

      Not to mention a lot of the tales told in Genesis are just re-appropriated myths from Mesopotamia.

  • Phil Ledgerwood

    I don’t think “reference to a character or event described in” ought to count as “quoting from.”

  • Alan Christensen

    Seven out of 47? That’s about half, isn’t it?

  • arcseconds

    Far out.

    Anyone can make a mistake, even an embarrassing one. But this isn’t some brain fart that happened to be captured in a quickly-written twitter or anything. According to Duff’s piece, it’s a quote from a supposedly peer-reviewed (even though that only means ‘peers in AIG’) book.

    Often the snarky comments one sees (or even makes oneself) have a degree of hyperbole and are perhaps a bit uncharitable, not to say this isn’t deserved. But here it’s really hard to see how to read this as anything other than, well, they don’t know their bibles well and they don’t really care.

    Also, it’s just plain sloppy, even for something you don’t really care about too much.

    I do not claim any expertise in the Bible, but my vague recollection is that Jesus does not quote from Genesis very much at all (and lo, my recollection looks like it matches reality). It would not occur to me to make a statement quantifying how much Jesus quotes from a particular book, but if such a thought did cross my mind I’d do some kind of checking before putting it in even a blog post. Or at least I’d couch it uncertainly. And obviously many people here know the area well enough to just be unable to massively overestimate how much Jesus quotes from a particular favourite book.

    It seems to me that this is pretty clear proof that the ideology is really what’s primary, and what they say about scripture is entirely driven by that, even to the point of making glaringly obvious basic errors. And it all must be entirely unreflective: it can’t have occurred to them that they could be wrong about this. Presumably everyone just read this and nodded.