Evolution has become the dominant answer for the question of man’s origins, at least among the more intellectual and educated. The wealth of data supporting it as well as its sheer popularity has proven a compelling force for many.
Yet, the creationist movement remains strong and vibrant. Supporters begin with the belief that the Protestant cannon, the 66 books that make up the Holy Bible, come from God and that the history presented in the first couple chapters of Genesis, the opening books of the Bible, is historically accurate, being divinely originated. If it says that God created the world in six literal days, then the world was created in six literal days.
Now, those who challenge a literal six-day creation for an evolutionary history will bring up the idea that the Genesis account does not propose a scientific answer to the origins of man. The intent of Genesis, it is said, is to provide a history for Israel. Or for some other intent. This argument of intent is right. Genesis is not a scientific book and does not provide a purely scientific answer to the beginnings of man and his purpose on earth and it is not meant to.
The question then is whether or not man should live by purely scientific means. The great weakness of science is that it is incapable of providing morality for man, the guidelines that determine what actions a man should and should not take.
Take rape for instance. Science can provide incredible amounts of information about what happened, and it can even offer a psychological motivation, but it cannot answer the most important question. Is rape morally wrong?
This is the great advantage that the biblical account of creation has over the scientific answer of evolution. It provides a moral answer where evolution offers only scientific information. Science can only say that man evolved from previous stages of life and that at one point there were males and females who mated and produced offspring. What it cannot give is a moral basis for determining whether or not man should or should not kill his fellow-man or whether or not a male should force himself sexually on a female. Stating that God made man in His image and then gave him woman and marriage, as the Bible does, provides a clear basis for moral answers to such questions.
Science is a great gift to man, but it cannot be the basis for his existence. A creation account does not have to be scientifically accurate to be right because it is more interested in a moral answer. Man needs a moral foundation to life, not a scientific foundation. Creationism, having life founded on the biblical account of a six-day creation, even if it is mythical, provides the moral foundation man needs to live. Because of that, evolution will remain an untenable answer for man’s existence here on earth.