Christians sidelining the Creator?

Written by Steven Black on 25/07/2014. Posted in Articles, Creation

by Philip Bell and Dominic Statham1

The primacy of God is unequivocally set forth in the first chapter of Genesis, where the word, “God” or equivalents are used forty times.

 

If you spent a couple of hours in the centre of your local town or city, asking passers-by, ‘How did the Earth begin?’ and, ‘Where did life come from?’ you would receive a variety of responses, no doubt. Among those prepared to give a serious answer, many would confidently claim that it was through some sort of evolutionary process—though if you pressed them further they would be very hazy on the details! What is sad, but true, is that few people these days would assert unashamedly,
In the beginning, God created …

If you think about it, the difference between these two views is in a Person. Either, everything exists (and that includes you and me) through a wholly unknown process—unguided evolution—or through a holy unknown process—the act of God in Creation.2 From this it follows that any fudging on the Genesis account of Creation, where the plain meaning of the words is avoided, is in danger of distancing God the Creator from what He has made.

God first

The doctrine of Creation begins with God—His name is among the very first few words of the Bible. This being the case, the true Christian (who seeks wholly to love God; see Deut. 6:5, Mark 12:30) should be immediately suspicious of any theology of Creation that starts with man rather than God; the opinions of fallible men instead of the Word of the omniscient God.

God’s qualities, His various attributes and characteristics are clearly seen through the things He has made; so says the Apostle Paul (Rom. 1:20). A consideration of Creation leads to the inescapable conclusion that the One responsible is a God of immense power, unfathomable knowledge and amazing benevolence—He is a great God and a good God! To deny this is inexcusable, indeed foolish (Psalm 53:1). With this in mind, Christians should be wary of any scheme, however well-intentioned or plausible it might appear, where the Bible’s teaching merely serves as an afterthought; if, for instance, it is relegated to a marginal note, with man’s speculations occupying pride of place. Rather, our doctrine of Creation must, first and foremost, exalt God as the Creator.

God at the centre

When asked, “Which is the greatest commandment?”, Jesus replied:
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” (Matthew 22:37).
<The Bible is unashamedly God-centred. We were made for His glory (Isaiah 43:7); He leads us in paths of righteousness for His name’s sake (Psalm 23:3); we are to seek first His kingdom (Matthew 6:33); and pray above all that His name would be hallowed (Matthew 6:9). In Scripture, the primacy of God is unequivocally set forth from the first chapter of Genesis, where the word, ‘God’ or equivalent3 is used forty times. God created (v. 1), God said (v. 3), God saw (v. 4), God separated (v. 4), God called (v. 5), God made (v. 7) and God blessed (v. 28). So striking is this, that it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Genesis 1 is not so much an account of the Creation as it is an account of God the Creator. The many compromise views of Genesis 1 tend to push God into the background, or else He is barely in view at all. This is particularly true of ‘theistic evolution, which maintains that natural processes are sufficient to bring forth people. Rather, the text of this divine prologue emphatically keeps God in the foreground, indeed at the very centre of all that is being described.

The Bible’s uncompromising emphasis on God’s centrality is for good reason: ever since the Fall, man has been drawn towards idolatry, the worship of that which has been created rather than the Creator. It follows from this that any teaching that detracts from the glory of God in creation will tend to promote idolatry—including creation stories such as the big bang and Darwinian evolution which focus upon the power of ‘Nature’ rather than the power of God.

According to the Bible, God created the universe in all its vastness and complexity simply through His Word. Since God is spirit (John 4:24) He obviously did not speak with a physical mouth; His word here is synonymous with His will. We might say that God willed the universe to be and it was (Revelation 4:11). He did not require billions of years to do this and nor did He need to use an evolutionary process of trial and error to get it right. Indeed, only a perfect, flawless creation, ‘right first time’ could possibly be worthy of the utterly transcendent God of the Bible.

The claim of some theistic evolutionists, that Darwinian evolution is elegant, thereby glorifying God, is a violation of common sense, if not bordering on blasphemy.
 

Survival of the fittest—an elegant process?

It is sometimes argued by theistic evolutionists that the Darwinian process is elegant and therefore points to the glory of God. For example, BioLogos founder Francis Collins opined,

“Seeking to populate this otherwise sterile universe with living creatures, God chose the elegant mechanism of evolution to create microbes, plants, and animals of all sorts. Most remarkably, God intentionally chose the same mechanism to give rise to special creatures who would have intelligence, a knowledge of right and wrong, free will, and a desire to seek fellowship with Him. . . this perspective makes it possible for the scientist-believer to be intellectually fulfilled and spiritually alive, both worshipping God and using the tools of science to uncover some of the awesome mysteries of His creation.”4

That Collins can believe such things boggles the mind. How could a process of natural selection, based on millions of years of death, disease and predation, ‘nature red in tooth and claw’, the elimination of the weak, and survival of only the fittest possibly be “elegant”? How can such a cruel, wasteful process involving such pain and suffering possibly glorify God? This point was not lost on Charles Darwin;5 indeed it is much emphasised by evolutionary apologists to this day, notably Richard Dawkins.

In a similar vein, Denis Alexander, Emeritus Director of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion, argues that billions of years are needed for planets to form and life to evolve:

“ … the universe needs to be this old … in order for elements such as carbon and oxygen, essential for life, to be formed … just as the heavier elements, the stars, and their orbiting planets need billions of years to come into being, so complex life needs billions of years in order to evolve. It takes about 3.8 billion years … to make a human being.”6

But what sort of god needs billions of years to achieve his purposes? Certainly not the God of the Bible. The Creator God of Genesis is unlimited and has total mastery over His creation. He can do all things and His purposes cannot be thwarted (Job 42:2). Nothing is too hard for Him (Jeremiah 32:27) and for Him all things are possible (Luke 1:37). Such is His sovereignty that even a sparrow will not fall to the ground unless he wills it (Matthew 10:29).

If it is accepted that God is not truly omnipotent one must wonder whether He really has the means to fulfil His promises. If He needed billions of years to create, how will He raise the billions of dead on the last day? Indeed, did He really, literally raise Christ? What did Jesus mean when He claimed to have received all power and authority? (Matthew 28:18). How can the Christian press forward without fear if his Lord has only limited power to sustain him? (Matthew 10:28).

Guardians of truth

The supreme manifestation of God is found in His Son who is His image (Colossians 1:15), the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His being (Hebrews 1:3). As the perfect expression or Word of God, the Son flawlessly reflects God’s nature in all He is and all He does. It is therefore theologically inadmissible that the Son, through whom all things were created (Colossians 1:16), could produce anything that did not, in every way, testify to a God of boundless love, inexpressible beauty, matchless wisdom and limitless power. Indeed, were we to have beheld the original untainted creation we would, like the twenty-four elders of the fourth chapter of Revelation, surely find ourselves prostrate before heaven’s throne crying, “Worthy are you, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honour and power, for you created all things,” (Revelation 4:11).

Revelation 22:19 warns of the seriousness of people attempting to water down God’s prophetic word in that book, by “taking away from the words”. Indeed it is dangerous either to add to, or take from, any clear teaching of the Bible—it being the perfect revelation from Almighty God. The late Henry Morris (author of numerous creationist books) pointed out that this biblical warning concerns not merely the thoughts, but the very words, of Scripture; furthermore, that God is intent on guarding His Word against man’s attempts to violate it (see Psalm 12:6-7, 2 Peter 3:16).7

In these days of rampant compromise with evolution and other secular philosophies, the truth matters! God calls all Christians to stand up for biblical truth and to act as guardians of the faith (Jude 1:3). May He help each of us to be true to His Holy Word.

References and notes
  1. An expanded version of the lead article, It’s all about the Creator, in Prayer News, CMI (UK/Europe), July 2014. Return to text.
  2. Words in italics courtesy of AF Green, lecture at CMI’s Unmasking Fables, Promoting Truth conference, April 2013; subtitled DVDs will be available shortly. Return to text.
  3. That is the personal pronouns, His/He/Us/Our. Return to text.
  4. Collins, F., The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, Free Press, New York, 2006, p. 200–201. Return to text.
  5. Indeed, in a letter to his good friend, the botanist Joseph D. Hooker (13 July 1856), Charles Darwin wrote: “What a book a Devil’s Chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low and horridly cruel works of nature.” Return to text.
  6. Spencer, N. and Alexander, D., Rescuing Darwin: God and Evolution in Britain Today, Theos, 2009; theosthinktank.co.uk. Return to text.
  7. Morris, H., Diluting the Word of God, Days of Praise, www.icr.org, 3 March 2014. Return to text.

Source: Creation Ministries International

Could God Have Used Evolution?

Written by Ian on 21/03/2013. Posted in Articles, Creation

Could God Have Used Evolution? (Part 1)
by Jay Seegert (Co-Founder & Principal Lecturer, Creation Education Center)

The following excert is from an article that is part one of a series of three articles on the subject at the head of the page.
To view the rest of the article follow the link at the end.

“How could you be so arrogant to say that God could not use evolution? I have a degree in Biology and know that evolution is a fact and that all scientists believe it!”

‘Where does this question come from? I believe it is largely generated by the fact that many Christians find themselves in a bit of an apparent dilemma. They certainly believe in God and view the Bible as being his inspired Word, but they are also under the impression that scientist have virtually proven that evolution is a fact. They may also believe that science just deals with facts and you can’t really argue with that, because it is what it is. On the other hand, they reason that the Bible can be interpreted in many different ways and it doesn’t matter so much what we believe about creation, as long as we at least believe in Jesus.’……

To read the rest of this article please click HERE

Could God Have Used Evolution?

One Blood

Written by Ian on 10/09/2012. Posted in Creation

Acts 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;

The speaker is the Apostle of the Gentiles, St. Paul. The hearers are the cultivated men of Athens, and specially the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers. The place is Mars’ Hill at Athens, in full view of religious buildings and statues, of which even the shattered remains are a marvel of art at this day. Never perhaps were such a place, such a man, and such an audience brought together! It was a strange scene. And how did St. Paul use the occasion? What did this Jewish stranger, this member of a despised nation, this little man, whose “bodily presence was weak,” and very unlike the ideal figure in one of Raphael’s cartoons, coming from an obscure corner of Asia, what does he say to these intellectual Greeks?

One Blood

Frozen feeding

Written by Ian on 21/08/2012. Posted in Creation

by Carl Wieland

How long does it take a well-preserved fish fossil to form? The average member of the public, including most teachers of science classes, would reply with a story involving long periods of time. In this view, a dead fish on the bottom of a lake or sea is slowly covered by particles of mud or sand settling on the bottom.

The Bible would indicate, on the other hand, that most fossils were formed rapidly, buried in mud or sand carried by large volumes of water during the great Flood or its aftermath.

One fossilized fish is of the species Mioplosus labracoides, from the so-called late Early Eocene Fossil Lake sediments of the Green River Formation (Wyoming, USA). It was apparently trapped in sediment and buried while part-way through swallowing another fish. Another fossil shows a fish which has already eaten its meal, but has not yet had a chance to digest it.

Y chromosome shock

Written by Ian on 21/08/2012. Posted in Creation

by David Catchpoole

Researchers were unprepared for what they would find when they recently completed sequencing of the chimpanzee Y chromosome, and compared it to the human Y chromosome.

“The Y is full of surprises,” said David Page of the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He and his team had just found that the Y chromosomes of chimps and humans are “horrendously different from each other”1,2

Why did Dr Page use the word “horrendously”? Because he believes evolution—that chimps are our closest evolutionary relatives. But Page’s team found that the chimp Y chromosome has only two-thirds as many distinct genes or gene families as the human Y chromosome and only 47% as many protein-coding elements as humans. Also, more than 30% of the chimp Y chromosome lacks an alignable counterpart on the human Y chromosome and vice versa.

Octopus Fossil Shocks Evolution World

Written by Ian on 21/01/2011. Posted in Creation

By Garry Graham – Creation Ministries International

Five octopus fossils, supposedly 95 million years old, were recently discovered in Lebanon, catching scientists by surprise. First, they were surprised that the octopuses were even fossilized. Unlike animals with hard shells or bony skeletons, cephalopods, like the octopus and squid, have no hard parts (other than the mouth). One report said that fossilizing an octopus was as unlikely as capturing a “fossil sneeze”. The fossils were exquisitely preserved. All eight arms were visible for each animal, as well as traces of muscle and rows of suckers. Remarkably, a few of the fossils even showed internal gills and remnants of ink.

Scientists try to explain the past by looking at what they see happening today. When an octopus dies today, it decomposes into a slimy blob and disappears within a few days. For an octopus to be fossilized it would need to sink to the ocean floor without being eaten, and remain there without decomposing or being consumed by bacteria while being buried by sediment. How could such a process be possible for an octopus at all?

Lead author of the report, Dr Dirk Fuchs of the Freie University, Berlin, said, “The luck was that the corpse landed untouched on the sea floor. The sea floor was free of oxygen and therefore free of scavengers.” But lack of oxygen is no preservative – experiments with fish carcasses show that even in the absence of oxygen they still disintegrate on the ocean bottom. Other scientists have published research showing that the ocean floor is actually teeming with bacterial life. So these scientists have not explained the remarkably preserved fossils at all.