Rethinking Dr. Todd Wood, Evolution, and Creation Science

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Restrain your equines. This child is not doubting biblical creation science. What follows has some personal material, including a confession and a bit of an apology to Dr. Todd Wood. There are several points to be made, and I hope I can spark your thinking a mite.

Modified from a "meme" floating around teh interweb

Background

Dr. Wood was one of the scientists in Is Genesis History?, a video I reviewed and recommended. I later purchased a set of additional videos from them that had several scientists giving lectures. Some time later, I learned that he said:

Evolution is not a theory in crisis. It is not teetering on the verge of collapse. It has not failed as a scientific explanation. There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well.

This really put a burr under my saddle. I wrote to Todd, but received no response. (After all, he's a busy guy and I'm not important. Those are simple facts.) I asked for responses from others of his association, mayhaps they could ask him for me, but was ignored or waved off. My concern about him grew because he also co-wrote a book with an evolutionist — which I had no intention of reading. Atheists were rejoicing that there was "an honest creationist" (read: all others are dishonest if they reject universal common ancestor evolution). Great, he's giving aid and comfort to the enemies of God!

Although I don't rightly recollect where, I read a post he made that he believes the Bible anyway. How can someone present evidence for creation and believe evolution? We know that evolution makes people into atheists. I came very close to deleting my article recommending Is Genesis History? and, because of the spate of people apostatizing, I was waiting for (and also dreading) the day that I read how Wood had renounced the faith.

I was having a crisis my ownself. No, not doubting the faith or biblical creation science (there are "gobs and gobs" of evidence refuting neo-Darwinism, as well as supporting both recent creation and the Genesis Flood). Instead, I felt I was wasting my time. After all, I am a nobody who is trying to glorify God and help equip the saints, but too many Christians are like atheists. How? By having bumper-sticker mentalities, not finding time to read, watch videos, listen to messages, get into the Word, get solid biblical teaching in general, and all that boring stuff when Young Sheldon is waiting for a binge-watch? My motivation to keep going was very low.

Finally some clarification

After leaving a somewhat testy comment on a video posted to YouTube, someone finally gave me some things in response that I could use. One was a link to the video embedded below, and some articles. Dr. Wood is not saddling up to ride with the Darwin brand. In fact, not only do I apologize to him for some comments and what I had been thinking, but I am embarrassed because I was not practicing all that I have preached in my articles. Yes, I tried to go to the sources and get clarification, but I did not do enough research. Todd is a creationist. In fact, he is still the president of the Core Academy of Science.

A problem of definitions

As we have seen in several posts right here, Darwin's disciples have used their naturalistic presuppositions to present material that is downright harmful to medical science, and they proclaim incomplete research as evidence for evolution fairly often. The ol' bait-n-switch happens where evolution is conflated with variation, speciation, modifications, and so on — things that are not a problem for creationists in and of themselves.

Dr. Wood may dislike "playing around with definitions", but because of conflation and connotations, people took his statements and ran with them to support atheistic interpretations of science. I fault him for lack of clarity because there are many definitions of evolution. (Also see "Creationism vs. Evolutionism" by Dr. John N. Moore, formerly an evolutionary professor of natural science at Michigan State University. He later became one of the founders of the Creation Research Society.) Creationists do not necessarily use evolution per se, but there are methodologies and systems that they use in the same manner of evolutionary scientists — without the naturalistic presuppositions. Creationists don't just say, "GodDidIt", but want to know how God did something, and what is happening in the natural world that may have cause something to occur.

The James White effect

Yes, this is relevant. Very much so. Dr. White had to deal with crowds armed with torches and pitchforks ready to burn down Castle AOMin because he was having public conversations with Islamic apologists. Another part of my embarrassment about how I reacted to Todd was from what I had learned from James. He has debates with people, but wants to get to know them as people; it is vital to learn what the other side believes and teaches in order to debate properly, and to treat people like people, not objects or potential trophies.

Wood was doing this "getting to know you" thing. The way I put what he says, he can see where someone is coming from. He can understand why they have their beliefs. Creationists try to accurately represent the views of neo-Darwinism and its informed adherents, although few want to return the favor. Todd also says that people who believe in evolution are not evil people. James White has also shown that he can see why people with Islamic views and living in that culture have reached their conclusions. Wood has written a book with an evolutionist where apparently both authors defend their views but respect each other.

Problems with fideism

Many of us have encountered fideism in one form or another without being able to name it. In simplest terms, it is believing for its own sake, or having blind faith. There are many examples of it in evolutionism, where adherents cannot answer problems with their views or research, instead indicating that "stuff happens" and hoping that explanations will be found someday. That's not science, old son.

I was suspecting that Dr. Wood was engaging in fideism because the way I was taking his words, he was believing the Bible despite what he considered evidence for (chaos-to-chemist) evolution.

Here is something that has me confused. The Institute for Creation Research has an article, "Is Creation Evidence Ambiguous?", showing how fideism is dangerous. Wood is not named, but his material is listed in the references (which, unfortunately, are publications that I do not have). Are they saying that Dr. Wood is a fideist? Did they misunderstand what he wrote? Perhaps Todd also wrote against fideism in those referenced publications. I have not posted that article at The Question Evolution Project, nor have I featured it on any of my weblogs because I am uncertain of what they're doing at ICR.

That ICR article was in their August 2020 edition of Acts and Facts, which would have necessarily been written in July or sooner. Dr. Wood wrote "The dangers of fideism" in August. He believes it's bad. That's good. What's up with ICR, and why do they consider Wood a "young earth evolutionist"? Doc, you may want to write your own article to set them straight.

A few other thoughts

I do not know if Dr. Wood uses presuppositional apologetics, but as I have recommended to readers and others for a few years, I recommend to him Dr. Jason Lisle's Ultimate Proof of Creation, the book as well as video presentations that are available. It seems to me that Wood might find them quite helpful.

There are some practical applications to discuss now.

One is to hold on and wait. Although I came close to shutting all this down (I've had a lifelong struggle with depression) and Todd's remarks came at the wrong time and made things worse, I waited. Satan loves haste. Also, I sought counsel and some good people talked me back from the ledge. Another thing to learn is to keep on trying to get information.

Pay attention. If Todd Wood really was turning against biblical creation science, it seems that some of the big-name ministries would have offered up some direct rebukes. The silence from them helped influence me to take things slowly.

I'll be paying more attention to Dr. Wood's material, and have already picked up a few things for my own use. He has an interesting approach to writing and speaking that sort of resonate with me. He also has an interesting sense of humor. There are things I disagree with (as stated above), but there are things in my own thoughts and life that will bring that same crowd with torches and pitchforks over to kick me out of the Creation Science Hall of Fame.

"You're in the Creation Science Hall of Fame, Cowboy Bob?"

Well, no, but if I was and people read my mind, I'd be kicked out. For that matter, I have some opinions and half-formed ideas that may not sit well with some of my brethren and cistern in some other areas.

Since I dislike embedding more than one video in a post or article, I have one other to recommend. Sometimes people think they're hotshots and ready to slap leather with the opposition, then along comes a question that seems to have no easy answers at first. It's easy to give up instead of wait and persevere. Give a listen to Todd's short lecture on "Why I Am [Still] a Creationist". You'll thank me later.

You learned a bit about me while I learned a bit about Todd Wood (as well as myself), and how God kept things going over all. I hope this article gave all y'all some things to think about. Maybe I should send him a fruit basket or a gift card for Rustic Scoops Ice Cream Cafe or something.

ADDENDUM: Dr. Wood needs to get things nailed down, including his approach to theology. I'm baffled, and I'm sure others are as well. See "Young Earth Evolution, Todd Wood, and Me."