The Evolution of Answers in Genesis and the Future of Young-Age Creationism

I was interviewed for the Recovering Evangelicals podcast (my third time I believe) a few week ago and about the latest developments in the Young-Age Creationist (YAC)* world and now that episode has just been released.  You can find the episode, titled “#159 – Answers-in-Genesis are getting a new leader …. and a Tower of Babel theme park!?”, at any of your favorite podcast platforms or at the website for the podcast HERE. I and my hosts look at the dynamics within Answers in Genesis (AiG) and their ever-expanding influence in North America. This podcast episode allowed me to discuss several critical issues surrounding AiG and its impact on both the scientific and Christian communities. I provide a brief overview of the topics touched upon in the podcast.

Key Highlights from the Discussion

  1. Introspection and Identity: We first discussed my recent posts about my personal identity, core theology, and the mission behind my blogs and videos. This is crucial in understanding why I am so invested in examining AiG and Ken Ham, who dominate the YAC landscape as the “ten-ton gorilla in the YACist game.”
  2. Financial Empire: We discussed AiG’s financial success. In 2022, they reported $62 million in annual revenue and $112 million in assets, positioning them almost at par with significant Christian publishers like Zondervan. This financial muscle raises questions about their priorities and expenditures, including even ideas of building a replica of the Tower of Babel.
  3. Lack of Qualified Experts: Despite their substantial financial resources, AiG does not employ qualified scientific experts to support their claims. This gap underscores a significant flaw in their approach to promoting young-age creationism, as genuine scientific expertise aligned with a YAC worldview is practically non-existent.
  4. Engaging Criticisms: One anecdote I shared was about how a colleague humorously turned an AiG post against itself. By replacing the word “flat” with “young,” he transformed a critique of Flat Earthers into a cogent argument against YACism. This story illustrates that AiG is not entirely oblivious to the criticisms they face, yet they persist in their disputed views.
  5. The Evolution of YACism: I and my hosts explored the historical roots of young-age creationism, its introduction in the 1800s, and its enduring popularity. AiG’s primary motivation appears to be combating the Theory of Evolution, which they view as the root cause of societal problems such as homosexuality, abortion, crime, and corruption.
  6. Current Trends and Future Prospects: We also touched on the current state of young-age creationism—its growth or decline. While the overall numbers might be dwindling, the fervor among the remaining adherents is strong. We discussed how AiG is adapting by developing educational curricula and recruiting young ambassadors, though this process sometimes leads to these individuals embracing Evolution and leaving young-age creationism, occasionally rejecting Christianity entirely.
  7. Leadership Changes: As Ken Ham ages, the future leadership of AiG is a pressing question. We talked about the addition of Martin Iles to replace Ken Ham.
  8. Personal Interactions with Young-Age Creationists: Finally, we considered how to navigate personal interactions with young-age creationists, whether they are family, friends, or colleagues, offering practical advice for these often challenging conversations.

I think this would be a good listen for anyone interested in the ongoing developments within the YEC movement and how it shapes contemporary discussions on science and faith.

* I alternate between using YEC and YAC. Young earth creationism (YEC) is not doubt the most common name for Ken Ham-type creationism but many YECs prefer the descriptor young-age creationists because it more accurately reflects that not only is the earth young but the entire creation is young. As such I do want to acknowledge that preference at times and help to bring some brand recognition of sorts to that term for them.

Comments or Questions?

Up ↑