Darwinian evolution
is the unguided change in the gene pool of a population through mutation, natural
selection, and genetic drift over long periods of time. The key word in Darwinian
evolution is “unguided.” The term “unguided” refers to God’s absence in the neo-Darwinistic
evolution equation.
Theistic
evolution, on the contrary, reconciles Darwinian evolution to theism by
importing God into the fabric of evolution. Since evolution is diametrically
opposed to creation (a belief that God created the universe as in the creation
narrative in the book of Genesis), the question we need to ask is “Was God
involved in evolution or did God create the living and the non-living as in the
Biblical narrative?”
Theistic
evolution broadly states that God guided the evolutionary process over millions
of years. This view of evolution smuggles God through the back door into the neo-Darwinistic
evolution equation! This evolution seems to be for science-lovers and
Bible-doubters (of the creation narrative) who believe both in God and the
Darwinian evolution.
Christians
who believe in theistic evolution ought to resolve these strong dilemmas:
Diluting God’s Attributes
On one hand
is the creation account where God created everything by the power of HIS Word
in six days. On the other hand, the theory of evolution, under the assumption
of being scientific, posits the evolved existence of the living and the
non-living over millions of years.
Why did God
wait for millions of years to create? It seems that God’s powerless; hence HE waited
for HIS creation to evolve over millions of years. Attributing powerlessness to
God is a severely debauched position.
While
creation is teleological with a purpose, goal and an end, evolution is
accidental. Chaos is a means to evolution, for evolution is absolute
randomness.
The wise
and almighty God would not create the universe through chaos. In other words,
what mandates God to create the universe out of randomness? God would not cause
construction from destruction, for to cause it in such a manner is to mitigate God’s
wisdom.
Debunking Adam, Eve
& The Bible
Those who
believe in evolution discard Adam & Eve as the first human beings. Science
does not provide us with any evidence whether the first human evolved was a
male, female or a transgender or whether both man and woman evolved at the same
time.
Discarding
Adam & Eve is infinitely troublesome for a Christian.
To
reconcile evolution without Adam & Eve from within the biblical framework
would essentially undermine the Bible. The Bible teaches that Adam & Eve were
actual human beings created in the image of God.
Adam &
Eve are not limited to the book of Genesis but they appear repeatedly in the
Bible. In Luke 3: 23-38, Christ’s genealogy is traced back to Adam. Adam being
a myth would contradict Luke. Why did Luke go through the trouble of tracing
Christ’s lineage if Adam was a myth? If Adam was a myth, then the Bible cannot
be trusted.
The Bible
speaks about Christ as the last Adam. If Adam was a myth, then Christ may also
have not existed. Therefore, theistic evolution effectively undermines the
Bible. (Thankfully, both the Bible and extra-biblical resources affirm the
existence of Christ.)
Disbelieving Christ
Theistic
evolution, in its essence, motivates a disbelief in Christ.
Consider
this simple instance. Evolution scandalizes Adam & Eve into mythical
personalities. But Christ taught the existence of Adam and Eve, ““Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at
the beginning the Creator ‘made them
male and female’” (Matthew 19: 4, NIV, Emphasis Mine).
If Christ referred
to the existence of Adam & Eve, we should either believe evolution or
Christ. We cannot believe in both evolution and Christ, since they mutually
contradict each other in the context of Adam and Eve.
Evolution
implies that Christ lied about Adam & Eve. If Christ lied about Adam and Eve,
then one could think that Christ lied about everything else also. Hence,
theistic evolution motivates a disbelief in Christ.
Demeaning Salvation
Creationism
posits goodness of all God’s creation. Although he was created good, man
disobeyed God when he ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil a.k.a. the fall (Genesis 3: 6-7). Salvation
was necessitated by the fall of man.
If
Darwinian evolution is true, there was no fall to begin with. Death and
suffering are intrinsic to the world even before the creation of human beings. Theistic
evolution posits man’s intrinsic selfishness and negates the fall of man, “According to Karl Giberson in Saving
Darwin, human beings were flawed and sinful from the very start because they
were produced by an evolutionary process driven by selfishness. Thus, there was
no “Fall” from original goodness in the history of humanity.” 1
If there
was no fall – an act of disobedience to God, there is no need for salvation –
an act of belief and obedience to God.
Moreover,
the future of salvation is to restore everything to its original state of
goodness by eliminating evil and death to usher new heavens and a new earth for
an eternal cohabitation of man with God (cf. Acts 3: 21). If theistic evolution
is true, the original state of the earth was death and suffering, not goodness.
Death will continue to exist without a plausibility of restoration.
Salvation presupposes
man’s sinfulness, and is predicated on the fact that Christ, God-incarnate, came
into the world (in the form of a man), to sacrifice HIS life to save man of his
sins.
Sin,
according to the Bible, was not caused by God but entered into the realm of
mankind through the freewill of angels and man. Theistic evolution, by virtue
of undermining Adam & Eve and the subsequent fall, posits sin and evil’s
existence even before the existence of the first humans. Notwithstanding that,
the theistic evolutionist posits God as the creator of evil and sin.
This view
of the divine renders God as a maximally evil being. An evil God would not
liberate man from evil and sin. Therefore, biblical salvation is demeaned by
theistic evolutionists.
Denigrating Biblical
Interpretation
The Bible
should interpret itself. You and I cannot impose our views into the Bible.
Similarly, science cannot interpret the Bible.
Theistic
evolution interprets the creation account from within the framework of science.
Allowing science to interpret the Bible is gross injustice to God and HIS
living Word.
Science does
not possess the power or the authority to interpret God’s Word. God is greater
than science. God causes science. In fact, science is a mere means to
understanding God’s architecture of this universe. So the “means” has neither
the power nor the authority to interpret the actions of the “cause.”
Conclusion
Organizations
such as BioLogos2 advocate for harmony between science and religion.
They seduce and strangle the Christian churches to evolve their teaching from
creationism to theistic evolution so to be aligned to the 21st
century thought.
That which
undermines God should be rejected categorically. Theistic evolution rigorously
undermines God, “In the initial years
after Darwin’s theory was proposed, most theistic evolutionists believed that
God guided the evolutionary process to specific ends. However, as the Darwinian
view of the undirected nature of evolution gradually solidified in the
scientific community, defenders of theistic evolution increasingly disowned the
idea of guided evolution. Consequently, many leading proponents of theistic
evolution today insist that Darwinian evolution by definition is an undirected
process and that not even God knows what the process will produce with
certainty or specificity.”3
Theistic
evolution is “design by chance” - an oxymoron. Just as the concept of “married
bachelor” cannot even be a figment of one’s imagination, design by chance is an
utterly imaginative concept.
Significantly,
theistic evolution presents strong dilemmas as stated above. Therefore, Christians
should not believe in theistic evolution.
Endnotes:
1 http://www.discovery.org/a/10091
2 http://biologos.org/
3 http://www.discovery.org/a/10121
2 comments:
Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed this article. There are many Christians who see nothing wrong with combining certain theories, especially if they are "science-based" theories, with the Word of God. Too many times, this merely has the effect of diluting God's Word and making it say something it wasn't meant to say. Just wanted to let you know I stand with you concerning this matter...what's more important is that I stand with the Word of God, I encourage you to continue writing, and others to think deeply about what God's Word has to say.
Yours in Christ,
Robert
Thank you for your very kind words, Bro. Robert. Please accept my sincere apologies for not responding earlier.
Yes, we need to stand with the Word of God. That's my constant endeavor.
Remain blessed Sir.
Post a Comment