Why do many Christians reject science (e.g., evolution, age of the Earth)?

Historical and Scriptural Foundations

Many discussions about the perceived incompatibility between certain branches of science and Christian belief often trace back to how Scripture is interpreted. Passages in Genesis present a clear description of creation, stating, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1). This foundational text shapes how many approach the universe’s origins. Going beyond individual verses, some Christians rely on genealogical records within Scripture—such as those in Genesis 5 and 11—to support a timeline of several thousand years rather than billions. Scholars like Archbishop James Ussher famously calculated a creation date around 4004 BC based on these genealogies, forming a conventional framework for those who hold a “young Earth” viewpoint.

Such believers often affirm that the Bible is internally consistent and entirely truthful. This high view of Scripture positions it as the ultimate authority on topics pertaining to human origins, the nature of creation, morality, and salvation. Consequently, if certain modern scientific theories (e.g., evolution, the ancient age of Earth) appear to conflict with the biblical account, many Christians side with Scripture as their foundational guide.

Different Approaches to Science and Scripture

1. Literal vs. Symbolic Interpretations

Some Christians maintain a strictly literal reading of the early chapters of Genesis. This approach arises from the belief that the Bible does not merely communicate spiritual truths but also conveys historical facts. Thus, they hold that God created the universe and everything in it in six literal days, as articulated in Exodus 20:11: “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them…” This literal approach influences how these believers view modern scientific models that propose long ages or evolutionary mechanisms.

Other Christians advocate for more symbolic or allegorical readings of Genesis. Even so, they continue to affirm that God is the author of creation. While they might accept an older age for the universe or the possibility of certain evolutionary processes, they still see Scripture as authoritative. In either case, believers are anchored by the conviction that God is the Creator and that Scripture reliably communicates divine truth.

2. Conflict of Worldviews

Some contend that there is more at work than simply science versus religion; it is a clash of worldviews. A naturalistic worldview assumes that nature is “all there is” and that everything can be explained purely by natural processes. By contrast, those who anchor themselves in Scripture assert the existence of a personal, eternal God who both created and sustains the universe.

The tension emerges when naturalistic interpretations of evidence conflict with a theistic (specifically biblical) interpretation. For instance, fossils, geological strata, and genetic research are often framed within evolutionary theory by mainstream science. Yet individuals who adhere to a young Earth perspective view these same data points through a different lens, looking for rapid geological processes (e.g., those possibly connected to a cataclysmic Flood), evidence of complex design, or sudden appearances of life forms that they believe align better with Scripture.

Reasons Behind the Rejection of Evolutionary Theory

1. Biblical Teachings on Creation and the Fall

Christians who reject evolution often emphasize passages like Romans 5:12, which states, “Just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men…” According to this scripture-based viewpoint, death and suffering entered the world through Adam’s sin. Evolutionary models propose millions of years of gradual development through the suffering and death of myriad life forms prior to humans. For many, this contradicts the understanding of how and when death originated.

2. Genealogies, Chronologies, and Theological Implications

The biblical genealogies (Genesis 5; 1 Chronicles 1) are viewed as historical sequence markers that anchor humanity’s origin. If humans evolved from earlier life forms over long periods, some argue that it undermines these genealogical records and the redemptive narrative that spans from Adam to Christ. The genealogies also highlight the direct lineage from the first human (Adam) to Jesus, which believers see as integral to the gospel message.

3. Scientific Critiques Emphasized by Some Christians

Within the Intelligent Design community (influenced by figures such as Dr. Stephen Meyer), certain scientific arguments raise doubt about the sufficiency of unguided evolutionary mechanisms. Instances like the Cambrian explosion—where many complex life forms appear relatively “suddenly” in the fossil record—are cited as evidence that major changes in biological complexity have not occurred through gradual, purely naturalistic processes. Similarly, some point to the discovery of soft tissues in fossils, suggesting that these remains might be more recent than commonly proposed. While mainstream science provides alternative explanations, Christians with a creationist viewpoint emphasize these anomalies as supportive of a younger Earth and special creation.

Views on the Age of the Earth

1. Ussher’s Chronology and Young Earth

By calculating biblical genealogies, Ussher arrived at a date of around 4004 BC for creation. Many still hold closely to this estimate, referencing not just genealogies but other biblical passages to affirm a universe that is thousands rather than billions of years old. This stance involves questioning or reinterpreting mainstream scientific dating methods, such as radiometric dating, which most scientists believe indicates an Earth approximately 4.5 billion years in age.

2. Day-Age and Gap Theories

Other Christians propose interpretive frameworks such as the day-age theory, suggesting that each “day” in Genesis might represent a long era, or the gap theory, which proposes a time gap between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:2. Though more accommodating to an old Earth, these perspectives still maintain that Earth and life came to be by God’s specific design. Even among these alternative positions, God’s creative power and Scripture’s authority remain paramount.

The Role of Faith and Evidence

1. Scripture as the Final Authority

The conviction that “All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for instruction…” (2 Timothy 3:16) underscores why many Christians give special precedence to biblical statements over scientific consensus. They view the Bible as God’s revelation of truth not only about morality and salvation but also about the fundamentals of cosmic history.

2. Archaeological and Manuscript Support

Discoveries such as the Dead Sea Scrolls, which preserve portions of the Old Testament dating back to before the time of Christ, demonstrate a high degree of textual reliability. Beyond the Old Testament, thousands of Greek manuscripts attest to the New Testament’s transmission accuracy. This rigorous manuscript tradition leads many to trust the Bible’s claims on historical and existential matters.

3. Philosophical Considerations

From a philosophical angle, if the universe arose from purely natural processes, then meaning, purpose, and morality might be viewed as human constructs rather than divine ordinances. By contrast, Christians who hold to a biblical worldview assert that humanity’s chief purpose is to glorify God. This outlook informs every aspect of life, reinforcing a deep commitment to scriptural truth on creation, redemption, and the destiny of humankind.

Modern Engagement with Science

1. Intelligent Design Movement

Proponents of Intelligent Design (ID) suggest that the complexity and information-rich structures found in living systems point decisively to a Designer. Rather than purely random or naturalistic processes, ID argues empirical evidence aligns with the activity of a purposeful, intelligent agent. This perspective often resonates with believers who understand God’s creative handiwork through both Scripture and the natural world.

2. Faith and Scientific Inquiry

While some believers question evolutionary claims and an ancient Earth, this does not mean they reject scientific practice as a whole. Many Christians engage robustly in scientific fields, pursuing research and discovery under the conviction that studying nature uncovers the intricacies of God’s design. This attitude has led to the development of creation-based research institutions that seek to interpret data within a biblical framework.

3. Reconciling Observations and Beliefs

The conversation between science and Christianity is ongoing. Some experiments or findings may at first appear contradictory to Scripture, but over time, further investigation might produce new insights. Historic examples of reconciliation between scientific discoveries and biblical interpretation show that dialogue rather than outright dismissal can be fruitful. However, for those who adhere closely to specific biblical timelines and reject macroevolution, the primary commitment is to remain faithful to the text as they understand it.

Practical Implications

1. Faith Communities and Education

Some advocate for Christian schools and homeschool curricula that teach creation-based or Intelligent Design models. This reinforces the belief structure of these communities, emphasizing that their children understand not only the prevailing scientific theories but also an alternative view centered on biblical claims of origins.

2. Pastoral and Evangelistic Considerations

Leaders within churches often aim to provide clear teaching on creation to guard congregations from confusion over conflicting origin stories. Evangelistically, they may use creation apologetics to address questions from seekers, pointing to the evidence for design and the consistency of the biblical narrative. This approach can help clarify that rejecting certain scientific claims (like evolution) does not entail rejecting science as a method, but rather rejecting interpretations that conflict with cherished biblical convictions.

3. Community and Personal Conviction

For many, the commitment to a young Earth or to rejecting evolution is a centerpiece in their personal faith. They see it both as a matter of scriptural fidelity and a defense of key doctrines like the Fall, original sin, and redemption through Christ. Thus, maintaining a young Earth perspective or an anti-evolution stance is understood as preserving the coherence of the gospel message.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the reasons many Christians reject aspects of mainstream science such as evolution or an ancient Earth center on their reading of Scripture as an authoritative revelation from God, their interpretation of the biblical timeline, and a commitment to preserve core doctrinal truths. While not all Christians share a uniform view on these matters, those who embrace a younger Earth or reject macroevolution do so to uphold what they perceive as the plain meaning of Scripture.

At the heart of it all is the conviction that the same God revealed in the Bible—who raised Christ from the dead and offers salvation—authored the wonders of creation. Believers who question or reject certain scientific conclusions are not necessarily opposed to genuine scientific inquiry. Rather, they interpret scientific data through a framework that honors the Bible as the ultimate source of truth. As ongoing discussion continues, devoted readers of Scripture remain confident that the Word aptly declares God’s creative power and saving work: “By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God’s command” (Hebrews 11:3).