A couple weeks ago I wrote two articles on how Answers in Genesis (AiG) and other Young Earth Creationist (YEC) organizations often use deception in the promotion of their ministry (you can find those articles here part 1 & part 2). Since I wrote those articles I have seen two more sensationalized social media posts from AiG that represent different types of deception from those highlighted in my previous articles. As I said in those previous articles my intent is not to condemn all those who hold to a YEC reading of the Bible and/or belief system. My only goal is to highlight how AiG uses deception to promote their ideas and make their perceived opponents look bad. I believe that since the Bible repeatedly speaks against “bearing false witness” it is for a Christian organization to use deception to further their ends. And so I want to highlight these tactics in the hopes that AiG (and all organizations that use similar tactics) will be held to account.
Baseless Speculation
Another frequent deception these groups use is to attribute motives to their opponents without any evidence. Arguments like this follow the pattern of presenting a fact, asking the audience why that fact is so then purposing a theory. An example of this is
Fact: for an artifact to be classified a fossil it must be at least 10,000 years old.
Why do you think scientists classify objects as fossils as 10,000 years old or older?
AiG rationale: Because YECs say the earth is no older than 10,000 years old and these scientists are materialists and so they want to belittle the YEC claim.1
AiG is making a very strong claim in this exchange, one that they are being directly attacked by the scientific establishment. And if we listen to them we are likely to believe the conspiracy theory they want to sell that all conventional science is plotting to make YEC look bad. But what did AiG not do? They did not provide any evidence to support their opinion. Instead, they simply spoke badly about opponents without evidence. This is according to the Bible a false witness, the Bible repeatedly says that if we speak something that we do not know to be true we are spreading lies about others. The truth is the line at 10,000 years separates the Pleistocene epoch and the Holocene epoch and marks the transition where bones are mineralized. Thus, the definition of a fossil is based on a bone being mineralized, and this makes sense. Does it have anything to do with conventional scientists wanting to undermine Creationists, no. This means AiG’s speculation that the conventional dating of fossils is to combat YEC beliefs is wrong. The fact that they have individuals on staff with PhD’s in the sciences makes it extremely unlikely that they would not have access to the information that it took me a few minutes to find after watching their video. There is simply no excuse for such a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. As with many of these deceptions, how many Christians are going to take the five minutes to research whether AiG’s claim was true? Most will simply accept that this “Christian ministry” said it so of course they would not lie.
Intentionally poor logic
Of all of the deceptions I have talked about to this point this is the one that most upsets me because AiG used this lie against fellow Christians. In the video linked below AiG attacks Biologos an institution dedicated to having thoughtful Christian dialogue around a number of issues related to faith and science.2 I readily admit I enjoy much of what Biologos3 does and have learned a great deal from the organization and so to see them attacked is irritating. However, I am big enough to allow for legitimate criticism. Instead, AiG then CEO Martin Iles uses a logical fallacy known as a false dilemma to disparage the organization and its views. Iles makes a claim that for Biologos (who does promote theistic evolution) to be accurate the Biblical authors would have had to write about theistic evolution and we do not see that in the Bible therefore Biologos is wrong. However, Iles is completely wrong and is misrepresenting the views of Biologos. And just as I said AiG has PhD’s who should know enough about science not to misrepresent the sciences, they are a Christian organization and should not misrepresent other Christians. And as a longtime follower of Biologos I know that AiG has turned down requests from Biologos to engage in conversation. Meaning AiG is intentionally spurning Biologos and intentionally misrepresenting the institution. But how?
Iles’ comments rest on the assumption that the Bible must be providing a literal historical and scientific account of the world. Therefore if an organization like Biologos teaches theistic evolution they then must read that into a literal historical understanding of Genesis 1-11. Now obviously it is impossible to read Genesis 1-11 as a literal historical account of God using evolution. But there are far more interpretations of Genesis than AiG’s literal historical approach.St. Augustine and early Christians read Genesis allegorically, and recently John Walton and other scholars are proposing different ways of reading more in line with ancient Israel’s cultural settings. Yet AiG claims Biologos must read Genesis as a literal historical text. Further, AiG knows that the individuals in Biologos do not read scripture this way. They have written about John Walton’s approach to scripture and his is one of the approaches represented in Biologos’ beliefs.4 So AiG definitively knows they are misrepresenting Biologos’ beliefs to their audience. There is no doubt that they are intentionally using this false dilemma in an attempt to lie about the beliefs of fellow Christians. It is one thing for AiG to disagree (even strongly) with other Christians about their reading of Genesis,but it is another thing entirely to misrepresent their interpretation and use logical fallacies to poison people’s minds against them. I know some will think those are overly harsh words, but the Bible takes lying very seriously and that is what AiG is doing and their own articles show that.
So far I have given seven different ways AiG and other Creationist ministries are using deception to promote their ideas. And I know there are other areas that I have not pursued.5 I also admit that I am very passionate about this issue at times. The reason is that when i see lists of the reasons individuals give up on Christianity issues of science and faith are always in the top five. Further, many cite that specifically the hard line these YEC organizations take and the false information they promote as factors in leaving Christianity behind. As I read information from groups like AiG I see the complaint. [Again I’m not speaking about YEC beliefs themselves.] How am I not to feel for individuals who discover such deceptions. And if Christian organizations have to stoop to such deception to survive it is better they die.
- Here is a link to the video where they make precisely this claim https://x.com/AnswersCanada/status/1924528629108613176 ↩︎
- https://x.com/AnswersCanada/status/1923441931750723887 ↩︎
- For those interested in Biologos you can find our more at biologos.org ↩︎
- AiG’s article on Walton’s book https://answersingenesis.org/the-word-of-god/genesis-in-ancient-near-east/?srsltid=AfmBOopl0I7alMktmaZNJ3hpC8WWXAl4zVqYpSiDCE7lYaovnWoXq0xB ↩︎
- I think of the frequent claims I used to see (and still see in smaller YEC outlets) of modern dinosaurs or dinosaurs depicted in art. Thankfully, many of the larger groups recognize these are fruitful paths to follow. And credit where it is due Creation Ministries International released an article just a couple weeks ago debunking several of the modern dinosaur claims here. I genuinely hope this is a step toward more honesty from these groups. ↩︎
Squinting in the Light 
Leave a comment