A Christian’s Concern:
It is my intent in these Blogs to address the impact evolutionary teaching has on the Gospel, preferably without creating hard feelings among those of differing views. As the true children of God we are called in the truth, “From the elder, to an elect lady and her children, whom I love in truth…” 2John 1:1.
The love that the Apostle was talking about in the introduction to his letter was not a fluffy kind of feeling based love without any teeth in it. His love was wed to the truth, and by nature the truth divides. How so you ask? When two people come together and talk, as all mature Christians do, about things that matter, they eventually dig down into doctrinal beliefs and it is at that point that division becomes the most profound. Matters of preference are not soul threatening, therefore Christian liberty is allowed, but in matters of principle where the Gospel is corrupted or doctrinal heresy is introduced no such liberty should be allowed.
The question I continually ask myself is why would a professing Christian want to defend a philosophy that has been so destructive on a world wide scale? Millions of deaths through war during the twentieth century were at the hands of leaders sold out to ideologies which roots were Darwin. Henry Morris in his fascinating work “THE LONG WAR AGAINST GOD” makes this statement.
“The idea of racial superiority was certainly not confined to England and North America. Darwin’s books were quickly translated, not only into German and French, but also into Spanish, Russian, Czech, Polish Hebrew, and Japanese, exerting profound influence on the leadership in many nations. The eminent historian Jacques Barzun commented in 1958:” 1
“War became the symbol, the image, the inducement, the reason, and the language of all human doings on the planet. No one who has not waded through some sizable part of the literature of the period 1870-1914 has any conception of the extent to which it is one long call for blood, nor of the variety of parties, classes, nations, and races whose blood was separately and contradictorily clamored for by the enlightened citizens of the ancient civilization of Europe. …the militarist of the second half of the century poeticized war and luxuriated in the prospect of it. With relative impunity for themselves, they took it for granted that all struggles in life must be struggles for life, and the death of the loser its “natural” goal.” 2
The arch villain of the 20Th century Adolf Hitler was a devout evolutionist and a complete racist. Even though many today want to hide the fact of Hitler’s beliefs because of widespread acceptance of evolution there is much evidence in his writings to support the fact. “[Hitler] stressed and singled out the idea of biological evolution as the most forceful weapon against traditional religion and he repeatedly condemned Christianity for its opposition to the teaching of evolution…For Hitler, evolution was the hallmark of modern science and culture, and he defended its veracity as tenaciously as Haeckel.” 3
As horrible as the happening are in the world concerning temporal things how much more dangerous are those philosophies that concern our eternal souls. For this reason we are warned in Colossians 2:8 “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” The Christian is commanded to take his stand on the side of truth for the propagation of the Gospel, so that souls might be saved. Never should we rally behind any philosophy or religious belief that would damn people to hell. Such was the case in the life of Andre Carnegie who wrote in his autobiography,
“I remember that light came in as a flood and all was clear. Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural but I had found the truth of evolution.” 4
Last but not least in this very long line of individuals who were misled to believe that Christianity in its purest form is not true is none other than Charles Darwin himself.
“Charles Darwin started his professional career as a creationist and professing Christian, soon changed to uniformitarianism and progressive creationism, then to theistic evolutionism, and eventually to materialistic evolutionism and probably atheism, in which unhappy condition he died. This tragic sequence has since been repeated in the lives of countless individuals.” 5
It is my concern that evolutionary teaching is presented as pure science, when it is in fact a religious belief. The teaching of origin is not like some medical breakthrough, which is unrelated to a man’s eternal destiny; origin is distinctly a religious belief. The Gospel does not begin with Matthew but Genesis. When the Apostle Paul presented the Gospel to the Gentiles on Mars Hill he did not begin with the law but with the words,
“The God who made the world and everything in it, who is Lord of heaven and earth, does not live in temples made by human hands, nor is he served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives life and breath and everything to everyone.” (Acts 17:24)
If our approach is not purely a biblical one, then we will be tempted to pardon the effects evolution has upon the Gospel and on those who hear it. I often wonder how many times the Gospel has been presented to someone who dismissed what they heard because in the back of their mind they were thinking, “Why is this person talking to me as if I didn’t know there is no God and we all simply evolved from the primordial soup.”
My concern is that too many Christian people today are letting logic, “knowledge” falsely called, and PhD’s who themselves have been indoctrinated into a false religion disguised as empirical science be their guide to the origin of the universe instead of the straight forward words of scripture. Many today will say you can’t know anything in an absolute sense but in the same breath will be dogmatic about the origin of species. Many today are willing to view science as intelligent and the Biblical creation story as simply an allegory as if God did not care about the details of the beginning. It is a little disheartening to me when I hear Christian brothers that I love take as fact the imaginings of atheists, and at the same time dismiss the words of the eternal God who cannot lie nor mislead. It is further disheartening when I hear the opening chapters of Genesis referred to as poetry, since they are never referred to that way in the whole of scripture.
My concern in the long term is that many well meaning Christians who seek to avoid a firestorm in church may be naively unaware that weeds are growing in the garden, and if given enough time will overtake and kill all the good fruit that is there. In times past, church leaders rose up and confronted error and from them we have the confessions, such as the “Westminster Confession of Faith,” which have served the church so well and for so long. These are scholarly works by many godly men, and we should look on these works with appreciation, humility, and thankfulness. My heart’s desire is to see the true church rise up once again and take a stand against heresy that is threatening the very fabric of truth that is the gospel. We are tempted to think that God will never stop pouring out His grace on the land in which we live, but history records that the light went out in the land where the Apostles preached, the light went out in the land where the reformers and Puritans once stood and died for the gospel. My concern is that as it has happened in the past it will happen again.
My concern is that even some well meaning Christians are willing to teach from the white spaces, as if the scriptures teach an evolutionary beginning to the world but that is just not the case. Evolution can be stuck in between the verses of Genesis 1 and 2 but it cannot be read out of them. It is not acceptable for Christians who want to defend the theory of evolution to argue their point from what the scripture does not say, the white spaces make a poor hermeneutic. If the scriptures teach an old earth then it should say so from the text of Genesis 1 & 2; it is exceedingly dangerous to add to or take away from the words of Holy Scripture. I will indirectly address the matter of scriptural integrity in all my arguments because Darwinian Theory always attacks scriptural integrity.
My concern is that well meaning Christians are willing to defend origin according to Darwin, which is built on blind chance without an intelligent creator, but who alter what Darwin said to make it “more Biblical” and thereby justify Darwin and not the Bible. Nowhere in “The Origin of Species” is God the author of the evolutionary process; instead, nature uses death to accomplish what the Bible says God created. Therefore, in Darwin’s view, nature is god and death is good. Why would anyone want to defend such heresy?
In the following Blogs, I will discuss these topics.
· CAN DEATH PRECEDE THE FALL OF MAN
· WHY ANIMALS COULD NOT DIE BEFORE THE FALL OF MAN
· FROM MONKEY TO MAN: Christians Caught in the Crossfire,
· THE CONFIGURATION OF THE EARTH FROM A WORLDWIDE DELUGE
· MAN CREATED IN THE IMAGE OF GOD: From Adam to Noah
· NATURAL SELECTION: Can Mortal Animals Ascend to the Image of God
· THE HIGH PLACE OF EVOLUTION: Sacrificing Scripture on the Altar of “Science”
· LIFE BEFORE THE FALL WAS LIFE BEFORE THE CURSE
· SABBAT REST – PERFECTION LOST
I will make statements like, evolution is a false religion and it should not be brought into the Bible. I do not mean to imply by these statements that anyone who believes in an old earth is not saved. There are core beliefs that are necessary for salvation; however, it is possible for a person to fail to connect the dots between core beliefs and seemingly isolated teachings. Evolution, an old earth, scientific theories, etc., can become peripheral doctrines in a person’s mind while that person continues to hold tightly to the truth of the Gospel.
It is not my intention to question anyone’s salvation, but to prompt others to question how evolution affects the Gospel. I would add that every Christian should be profoundly careful not to adhere to any teaching that negatively impacts the Gospel. Carefully consider the Humanist Manifesto with regard to Biblical teaching and then try to separate the Manifesto from evolution as evolution was first taught by Charles Darwin. I do not believe you can!
The Humanist Manifesto
FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.
SECOND: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process.
THIRD: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.
FOURTH: Humanism recognizes that man’s religious culture and civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, is the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his natural environment and with his social heritage. The individual born into a particular culture is largely molded by that culture.
FIFTH: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to human needs. Religion must formulate its hopes and plans in the light of the scientific spirit and method.
SIXTH: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of "new thought".
SEVENTH: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, and recreation–all that is in its degree expressive of intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.
EIGHTH: Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man’s life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the explanation of the humanist’s social passion.
NINTH: In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being.
TENTH: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.
ELEVENTH: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.
TWELFTH: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.
THIRTEENTH: Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions, their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern world.
FOURTEENTH: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.
FIFTEENTH AND LAST: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few. By this positive morale and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.
If Evolution is the bedrock for the Humanist Manifesto, should we then bring it into the Bible?
Suggested reading: “The Long War Against God” by Henry Morris.
1. Henry Morris, “THE LONG WAR AGAINST GOD,” (Master Books edition, 20003), pp. 69.
2. Jacques Barzun, Darwin, Marx, Wagner (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1958), PP. 92, 93.
3. Gasman, Scientific Origins, p. 168.
4. Andre Carnegie, “Wealth,” North American Review 148 (1889): 655-57. Cited in Hofstadter, Social Darwinism, p. 46.
5. Henry Morris, “THE LONG WAR AGAINST GOD,” (Master Books edition, 20003), pp. 95.