Confronting Evolution Appeasers: A Christian Response Unveiled

The Authority of Scripture

Many Christians wonder why there is so much debate about creation versus evolution when there are disagreements on other theological issues. The answer lies in the fact that all other debates presuppose that Scripture is the final and sufficient authority, and the disagreement is over its interpretation. However, when it comes to origins, the debate is about whether Scripture or 'science' is the final authority.

Theistic evolutionists and old-earth creationists may claim to uphold biblical authority, but in reality, they have reinterpreted Scripture to fit with 'science'. They have replaced the principle of Sola Scriptura (Bible alone) with Scriptura sub scientiā (Scripture below science). This is evident in statements made by prominent scholars who admit that the plain meaning of the text supports young-earth creationism but reject it because of the authority of 'science'.

If theistic evolution and old-earth views were truly derived from Scripture, we would expect to find evidence and statements within the Bible supporting these views. However, there is no such evidence or support. In fact, prior to the rise of long-age geology in the early 19th century, biblical scholars accepted Genesis as written, including prominent figures such as Josephus, Basil the Great, Thomas Aquinas, Luther, Calvin, and Wesley. These views were not derived from Scripture but were novel interpretations imposed on the text.

A biblical Christian should not reinterpret the perfect Word of God according to fallible human theories. Scripture should be studied in light of God's general revelation, not vice versa. As theologian Louis Berkhof explained, true knowledge about God can only be gathered from His general revelation if it is studied in the light of Scripture.

Consequences of Appeasement on Biblical Authority

When Christians appease evolution by accepting long ages and rejecting a literal interpretation of Genesis, they undermine the authority of Scripture. This raises questions about where Scripture starts being authoritative. If evolutionists claim that dead men don't rise and miracles are impossible, should Christians appease them by denying the bodily Resurrection and other miracles of Christ? If evolutionists claim that certain behaviors are genetic, should Christians throw out biblical morality?

Unfortunately, some ministers and denominations have already taken this path. They have reasoned their way into denying a young earth and embracing evolution, which has had baneful consequences for the authority and understandability of Scripture. By compromising on the historical accuracy of Genesis, they open the door to further compromise on other essential teachings of the Bible.

In fact, theistic evolutionists are following in the footsteps of Eve, who was the first compromiser of God's Word with fallible science. She made her own interpretation of sense data authoritative over God's clear command. This is a dangerous path to follow, as it undermines the trustworthiness of Scripture and leads to a distorted understanding of God's character and His plan for redemption.

Genesis Was Written as History

The grammatical and historical context of Genesis clearly indicates that it was written as history, not poetry or allegory. The Hebrew language used in Genesis employs specific grammatical structures for historical narrative, and the verb forms used indicate a series of past events. The structure and language used in Genesis 1 closely resemble other historical accounts in the Bible, further supporting its status as history.

Attempts to reinterpret Genesis as a literary device or framework hypothesis are unfounded. The supposed parallels between different sections of creation days are overdrawn and do not hold up under close examination. The structure of Genesis 1 does not negate its historical nature; rather, it emphasizes the order and purpose of God's creative acts.

Scholars who deny the historical accuracy of Genesis are often driven by a desire to reconcile the biblical account with long-age interpretations imposed on the text from outside sources. However, their arguments lack solid linguistic and contextual support and are inconsistent with the rest of Scripture.

Other Biblical Writers and Jesus Accepted Genesis

The people, events, and teachings of Genesis are affirmed by other biblical writers and even by Jesus Himself. In John 5:46-47, Jesus states that if people believed Moses, they would believe in Him because Moses wrote about Him. Jesus also explicitly references Adam and Eve, Noah's flood, and the creation of male and female as historical events.

Other biblical writers, including the Apostle Paul, also accepted the historicity of Genesis. They saw a direct connection between the first man Adam and the last Adam, Jesus Christ. The genealogies recorded in Luke trace Jesus' lineage back to Adam, highlighting the importance of a literal Adam as the ancestor of all mankind.

The consistent acceptance of Genesis as history by biblical writers and Jesus Himself demonstrates that it is an integral part of God's revelation to humanity. To deny its historicity undermines the authority of Scripture and raises doubts about the reliability of Christ's teachings.

Denying Genesis Makes God Author of Death and Suffering

One of the key implications of denying the historicity of Genesis is that it makes God the author of death and suffering. According to the biblical account, death entered the world as a result of human sin and rebellion against God. This understanding is foundational to an effective theodicy (defense of God's goodness in the face of evil) and provides a coherent explanation for the existence of death and suffering in the world.

Long-age views, including theistic evolution, place death before sin. They require millions of years of suffering and death as part of God's creative process. This contradicts the biblical teaching that death is an enemy to be defeated and that it entered the world through human disobedience.

The fossil record itself presents a challenge to long-age interpretations. Fossils with evidence of diseases and cancerous tumors are preserved in layers supposedly millions of years old. If these layers represent millions of years of death and suffering, it raises questions about God's character and the goodness of His creation.

The biblical understanding of death and suffering resulting from sin provides a consistent theodicy that allows for hope and restoration. It aligns with the promise of a future paradise free from pain and suffering, where all creation will be redeemed.

Evolution: Logical Deduction from Materialism

Evolution is often presented as a scientific fact that has proven the earth to be billions of years old and all life to have descended from a single cell. However, it is important to recognize that evolution is a logical deduction from materialism, not an objective scientific observation.

Materialism, the belief that only the physical world exists, requires an explanation for the complexity of life without invoking God or divine intervention. Evolution provides that explanation by positing that all life evolved through natural processes over millions of years.

However, this deduction from materialism is then used to support and justify the materialistic worldview. As geneticist Richard Lewontin stated, materialists are committed to material causes and will interpret evidence in a way that supports their preconceived beliefs, no matter how counter-intuitive or mystifying.

By accepting evolution as fact, Christians who hold to a young-earth creationist perspective challenge the underlying materialistic assumptions. They recognize that science deals with repeatable observations in the present, while evolution is based on assumptions about the unobservable past. They affirm the authority of Scripture over human theories and interpretations.

Conclusion

The appeasement strategy towards evolution advocated by some Christians undermines the authority of Scripture and compromises essential theological teachings. Denying the historicity of Genesis raises questions about when Scripture becomes authoritative and allows for further compromise on other biblical teachings. It also undermines the trustworthiness of Jesus' words and His role as our kinsman-redeemer.

The grammatical and historical context of Genesis supports its status as history, not poetry or allegory. Attempts to reinterpret Genesis as a literary device or framework hypothesis lack solid linguistic and contextual support. Other biblical writers and Jesus Himself accepted Genesis as history, affirming the importance of a literal Adam and the events described in Genesis.

Denying the historicity of Genesis makes God the author of death and suffering, contradicting the biblical teaching that death entered the world through human sin. It also raises questions about God's character and goodness. The biblical understanding of death and suffering resulting from sin provides a coherent theodicy and allows for hope and restoration.

Evolution is a logical deduction from materialism, not an objective scientific fact. By accepting evolution as fact, Christians compromise their faith and give credence to a materialistic worldview. Holding to a young-earth creationist perspective challenges materialistic assumptions and upholds the authority of Scripture over human theories.

As Christians, we must stand firm on the authority of Scripture and trust in God's perfect Word. We should not compromise our faith by appeasing evolutionary ideas, but instead seek to understand and defend God's truth with confidence and conviction.