Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Christianities in the Trans-Atlantic World ((CTAW))

  • 169 Accesses

Abstract

Huskinson explains the problematic nature of the term “creationist,” and lays out its varieties of meaning to different groups at different times. Most importantly, this chapter uses primary source materials to demonstrate how far American creationism succeeds in its social function—the policing of “orthodox” boundaries—and explains why those outside the evangelical market have difficulty perceiving this function at work. Huskinson provides a detailed account of the social identity of creation science proponents and how they themselves perceive the world outside of their community. By examining the insular environment of creation science proponents, this chapter offers an explanation for the continued efficacy of American creationism as a social function within the evangelical market. It sets out the internal consistency of the creation science approach, refuting popular notions regarding the motives of the creation science leadership, and offers a compelling explanation for the persistence of creation science.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Henry M. Morris, History of Modern Creationism (Santee: Institute for Creation Research, 1993), 424–427.

  2. 2.

    See Callum Brown, Postmodernism for Historians (New York: Routledge, 2005), 60.

  3. 3.

    For ICR’s efforts to export American creationism for Islamic audiences, see Taner Edis, “Cloning Creationism for Turkey,” Reports of the National Center for Science Education 19, no. 6 (November/December 1999): 30–35, https://ncse.com/library-resource/cloning-creationism-turkey.

  4. 4.

    See commentary by Justice Potter Stewart in Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 184 (1964).

  5. 5.

    Wayne Spencer, “Why Recent Creation?” Answers in Genesis, June 16, 2009, https://answersingenesis.org/why-does-creation-matter/why-recent-creation/. See also Ken Ham, The New Answers Book 1 (Green Forest: Master Books, 2006). Chapter 8 excerpt available at https://answersingenesis.org/days-of-creation/could-god-really-have-created-everything-in-six-days/.

  6. 6.

    Lita Cosner, “Did Jesus believe Genesis?” Creation.com, July 11, 2015, https://creation.com/jesus-genesis.

  7. 7.

    Ps. 139: 13–14 (NRSV).

  8. 8.

    For example, see John Piper, “Ten Reasons Why It Is Wrong to Take the Life of Unborn Children,” desiring God, April 7, 1989, https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/ten-reasons-why-it-is-wrong-to-take-the-life-of-unborn-children.

  9. 9.

    For discussion on Genesis and evolution, see Peter Enns, The Evolution of Adam: What the Bible Does and Doesn’t Say about Human Origins (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2012).

  10. 10.

    “Creationism, a Biblical Definition,” Bible Science Newsletter, no. 9 (1989): 10.

  11. 11.

    John C. Whitcomb, Jr. and Henry M. Morris, The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1961) and Bernard Ramm, The Christian View of Science and Scripture (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1954).

  12. 12.

    William J. Bryan, The Last Message of William Jennings Bryan (New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1925), 51.

  13. 13.

    John D. Morris, “What Is the Connection between Homosexuality and Evolution?” Acts and Facts 19, no. 5 (1990), http://www.icr.org/article/what-connection-between-homosexuality-evolution/.

  14. 14.

    Mark A. Noll, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1994), 189.

  15. 15.

    Henry M. Morris, “The Fall, the Curse, and Evolution,” Acts and Facts 27, no. 4 (1998), https://www.icr.org/article/837/. See also Michael Ruse, “A Few Last Words—Until the Next Time,” Zygon 29 (March 1994): 78.

  16. 16.

    Os Guiness, Fit Bodies, Fat Minds: Why Evangelicals Don’t Think and What to Do About It (Ada: Baker Books, 1994), 116.

  17. 17.

    For religious self-identification of Americans, see “America’s Changing Religious Landscape,” Pew Research Center, May 12, 2015, http://www.pewforum.org/files/2015/05/RLS-08-26-full-report.pdf.

  18. 18.

    Julie J. Ingersoll, Building God’s Kingdom: Inside the World of Christian Reconstruction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 127.

  19. 19.

    Ken Ham, Six Days: The Age of the Earth and the Decline of the Church (Green Forest: Master Books, 2013), 47.

  20. 20.

    Duane Gish, Evidence against Evolution (Carol Stream: Tyndale House, 1972), 13.

  21. 21.

    Don Batten, “Why Do Atheists Hate God?” Creation 34, no. 1 (2012): 6.

  22. 22.

    For additional reading on in-group identity priming, see Kendra N. McLeish and Robert J. Oxoby, “Social Interactions and the Salience of Social Identity,” Journal of Economic Psychology 32, no. 1 (2011): 172–178.

  23. 23.

    Carl Kerby and Ken Ham, “The ‘Evolutionizing’ of a Culture,” in War of the Worldviews: Powerful Answers for an ‘Evolutionized’ Culture, ed. Gary Vaterlaus (Green Forest: Master Books, 2005), 9. See also Jurassic Park, directed by Steven Spielberg (Universal City, CA: Universal Pictures, 1993), and X-Men, directed by Brian Singer (Los Angeles, CA: Twentieth Century Fox, 2000).

  24. 24.

    Another notable “anti-Christian” was the late Stephen Jay Gould who, though he spent a great deal of his professional life attempting to carve out space for religious beliefs in light of evolutionary theory (non-overlapping magisteria), still posited the evolutionary model. Ken Ham saw fit to use the term in a dual obituary for Gould comparing him with Ham’s recently departed father. See Ken Ham, Answers Update 9, no. 7 (2002): 1–2. See also Stephen Jay Gould, Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life (New York: Ballantine Books, 1999).

  25. 25.

    “Gap Theory,” Bible Science Newsletter, no. 11 (1983): 10.

  26. 26.

    “Buyer Beware!” Answers in Genesis 3, no. 8 (August 1996): 7.

  27. 27.

    “Warning to Families,” Answers in Genesis 5, no. 2 (February 1998): 5.

  28. 28.

    Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis Monthly Support Letter (July 2001).

  29. 29.

    Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis 7, no. 9 (September 2000): 1–2.

  30. 30.

    Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis 8, no. 3 (March 2001): 1–2.

  31. 31.

    Ken Ham, Answers Update 9, no. 12 (2002): 1–2.

  32. 32.

    For example, see Carl Wieland, Ken Ham, and Jonathan Sarfati, “Maintaining Creationist Integrity: A Response to Kent Hovind,” Creation.com, October 11, 2011, https://creation.com/maintaining-creationist-integrity-response-to-kent-hovind.

  33. 33.

    Terry Mortenson, “Critique of Hugh Ross’s Creation Story,” Answers in Genesis, May 8, 2013, https://answersingenesis.org/creationism/old-earth/critique-of-hugh-rosss-creation-story/.

  34. 34.

    See “America’s Changing Religious Landscape,” Pew Research Center, May 12, 2015, http://www.pewforum.org/files/2015/05/RLS-08-26-full-report.pdf.

  35. 35.

    Kirk Hadaway and Penny Marler, “How Many Americans Attend Worship Each Week? An Alternative Approach to Measurement,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 44, no. 3 (2005): 307.

  36. 36.

    This also presumes that evangelicals attend church at the same rates as other faith adherents. The author is keenly aware that this is an imprecise methodology. However, it does give us a rough (and reliable) estimate for the scale of the target population relative to the US population as a whole.

  37. 37.

    “A Cult or Not a Cult?” Answers in Genesis 6, no. 9 (November 1999): 21.

  38. 38.

    Linda B. Blackford, “Founder of Creation Museum Banned from Convention,” Lexington Herald Leader (Lexington, KY), March 24, 2011, http://www.kentucky.com/news/state/kentucky/article44085801.html.

  39. 39.

    Noted “heretics” include the physicist, science communicator, and Anglican lay-minister Russell Stannard, as well as the faculty of Calvin College. See Ken Ham, Answer in Genesis Monthly Support Letter (December 2001), and Ken Ham, “Warning! Rampant Compromise—But Isn’t It Really Heresy?” Answers in Genesis, May 16, 2013, https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2013/05/16/warning-rampant-compromise-but-isnt-it-really-heresy/.

  40. 40.

    An extreme example is the ministry of the tax protester Kent Hovind (who has presented himself to audiences as Dr. Hovind despite his degree having been conferred by a small, unaccredited, family-run correspondence school). After spending years competing with larger creation science organisations on the debate circuit and through a small attraction in Florida, Hovind was convicted for failure to pay taxes on millions of dollars in merchandise sales, having claimed everything he had belonged to God. Hovind served eight years in federal prison and, since his release in 2015, has attempted to re-establish himself in the creation science sector. At the time of this writing, his website sells creation science materials, DVDs of Hovind’s old debates, and children’s books. The site also includes articles targeting the Federal Reserve as a component of a corrupt government. See https://drdino.com/shop/ and https://drdino.com/news/the-money-changers-at-the-federal-reserve-terrified-of-christian-uprising/. Hovind’s son Eric took control of Hovind’s business and domain name during the elder Hovind’s prison sentence, sparking a rivalry between the two. Eric Hovind was warned by the FDA in 2017 to cease advertising B17 Amygdalin and apricot seeds as a cure for cancer on the ministry’s website. See Letter from Office of Regulatory Affairs, US Food and Drug Administration to Eric M. Hovind, President of Creation Today, June 29, 2017, https://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2017/ucm568172.htm.

  41. 41.

    Peter Bowler, Monkey Trials and Gorilla Sermons: Evolution and Christianity from Darwin to Intelligent Design (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007), 4.

  42. 42.

    Christopher Toumey, God’s Own Scientists: Creationists in a Secular World (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1994): 83

  43. 43.

    Ibid., 88.

  44. 44.

    One example, again involving Kent Hovind, is his 2004 debate with Michael Shermer, in which he claimed that Shermer was not the enemy, he just “worked for him.” See “Kent Hovind vs Michael Shermer Debate,” YouTube video, 2:12:53, posted by “PolemicContrarian,” May 31, 2013, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9GJmFVcfys, 28:55.

  45. 45.

    “Bill Nye Debates Ken Ham—HD (Official),” YouTube video, 2:45:32, posted by “Answers in Genesis,” February 4, 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6kgvhG3AkI, 56:00.

  46. 46.

    See Henry Morris, The Long War Against God: The History and Impact of the Creation/Evolution Conflict (Green Forest: Master Books, 1989).

  47. 47.

    “Bill Nye Tours the Ark Encounter with Ken Ham,” YouTube video, 1:57:04, posted by “Answers in Genesis,” March 13, 2017, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPLRhVdNp5M, 11:40.

  48. 48.

    Ibid., 1:37:40.

  49. 49.

    Ibid., 1:53:10.

  50. 50.

    Ibid.

  51. 51.

    “AAAS Now Making Theological Pronouncements,” Bible Science Newsletter 8, (1982): 3.

  52. 52.

    Richard Dawkins, “Richard Dawkins’ Review of Blueprints: Solving the Mystery of Evolution,” New York Times (New York, NY), April 9, 1989.

  53. 53.

    Morris, The Long War Against God, 58–59.

  54. 54.

    Bertrand Russell, “Is There a God?” (1952), quoted in Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (London: Transworld Publishers, 2016), 75.

  55. 55.

    The myth of George Washington and the cherry tree was an invention of Washington’s biographer, Mason Locke Weems. As to the pilgrims, no contemporaneous accounts of the landing include a mention of Plymouth Rock. The first to make such a claim was Elder Thomas Faunce, 121 years after the pilgrims had landed. See James Thatcher, History of the Town of Plymouth: from its first settlement in 1620 to the year 1832 (Boston: Marsh, Capen, and Lyon, 1832), 30.

  56. 56.

    Advocates of the view that creation science was mostly defeated in the 1990s would do well to visit the new Ark Encounter in Kentucky.

  57. 57.

    Ingersoll, Building God’s Kingdom, 126.

  58. 58.

    The archives at Answers in Genesis display current subscriptions to many mainstream periodicals, including Science and Skeptic.

  59. 59.

    “In U.S., Belief in Creationist View of Humans at New Low,” Gallup News, May 22, 2017, http://news.gallup.com/poll/210956/belief-creationist-view-humans-new-low.aspx.

  60. 60.

    One of the more prominent examples is the “faith healer” Peter Popoff, exposed by sceptic James Randi for using a wireless transmitter and earpiece to “divine” ailments of those in his audiences. See James Randi, The Faith Healers (Amherst: Prometheus Books, 1989), 10.

  61. 61.

    Data taken from IRS form 990 for Answers in Genesis for fiscal year 2014. Available from ProPublica at https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/.

  62. 62.

    Data taken from IRS form 990 for Institute for Creation Research for fiscal year 2015. Available from ProPublica at https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/.

  63. 63.

    Megan Schmidt, “8 Richest Pastors in America,” Beliefnet, http://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/christianity/8-richest-pastors-in-america.aspx?p=3.

  64. 64.

    Ibid.

  65. 65.

    Frank J. Sonleitner, “Winning the Creation Debate,” NCSE 24, no. 6 (November–December 2004): 36–38. See also Frederick Edwords, “Creation-Evolution Debates: Who’s Winning Them Now?” NCSE 3, no. 2 (Spring 1982): 30–42.

  66. 66.

    One major exception to this is the biologist Kenneth Miller. His 1981 debate with Henry M. Morris may be considered a master class on debate preparation. See “The Miller Morris Debate, Part 1,” YouTube video, 52:38, posted by “NatCen4ScienceEd,” September 2, 2010, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lfqBlR8qv4.

  67. 67.

    For example, see Don Batten, “15 Questions for Evolutionists,” Creation Ministries International, https://creation.com/15-questions-for-evolutionists and Jason Lisle and Mark Riddle, “What Are Some Good Questions to Ask an Evolutionist?” Answers in Genesis, December 2, 2014, https://answersingenesis.org/evidence-against-evolution/probability/what-are-some-good-questions-to-ask-an-evolutionist/.

  68. 68.

    For examples, see Philip Bell, “The Portrayal of Creationists by Their Evolutionist Detractors,” Journal of Creation 16, no. 2 (August 2002): 46–53, https://creation.com/portrayal-of-creationists, and Bodie Hodge, “Entertaining Evolutionists Everywhere,” Answers in Genesis, August 13, 2010, https://answersingenesis.org/logic/entertaining-evolutionists-everywhere/.

  69. 69.

    Francisco J. Ayala, Darwin’s Gift to Science and Religion (Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press, 2007), 6.

  70. 70.

    See https://answersingenesis.org/creation-scientists/profiles/.

  71. 71.

    Toumey, God’s Own Scientists, 113.

  72. 72.

    Bowler, Monkey Trials, 93.

  73. 73.

    Ibid., 125. See also David N. Livingstone, Dealing with Darwin: Place, Politics, and Rhetoric in Religious Engagements with Evolution (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2014), 155–156 and George M. Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 138.

  74. 74.

    George McCready Price, “Modern Botany and the Theory of Organic Evolution,” Princeton Theological Review 23 (1925): 65.

  75. 75.

    “1981 Debate Ken Miller Vs Henry Morris (“the father of modern creation science.) (Mirror),” YouTube video, 3:10:22, posted by “Belzer no,” June 19, 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDZ_qdEB39Q, 6:30.

  76. 76.

    “Intelligent Design/Evolution Debate,” YouTube playlist, 8 videos, posted by “IDQuest,” April 8, 2008, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7gZhksK9Sw&index=1&list=PLB76EDA3E866F4E4E, 8:15.P1.

  77. 77.

    Berlinski did not appear to have noticed that evolutionary proponents lost the Scopes trial. See David Berlinski, The Devil’s Delusion: Atheism and Its Scientific Pretensions (New York: Crown Forum, 2008), 186.

  78. 78.

    Kenneth R. Miller, Finding Darwin’s God: A Scientist’s Search for Common Ground between God and Evolution (New York: Cliff Street Books, 1999), 20.

  79. 79.

    “1981 Debate,” 39.00.

  80. 80.

    Miller, Finding Darwin’s God, 264.

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Huskinson, B.L. (2020). The Social Function of American Creationism. In: American Creationism, Creation Science, and Intelligent Design in the Evangelical Market. Christianities in the Trans-Atlantic World. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45435-7_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45435-7_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-45434-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-45435-7

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics