The Lie: Evolution (5 page)

He admitted that he did not know everything and it was possible there were assumptions behind some of the scientific methods to which he was referring. This additional information could totally change his conclusions. He admitted this was a possibility, but then he went on to say that he could not believe the Bible in all areas (e.g., Noah’s flood) until science had proven it. Again, there was a problem in understanding what science is all about and the fact that science cannot prove anything in relation to the past. I accepted the Bible as the Word of God and therefore interpreted the evidence on that basis. He was accepting the Bible as containing the Word of God but subject to proof by science. Of course, if you hold to the latter approach,
as scientists make new discoveries and their theories change, your attitude towards the Bible must also continually change — you can never be sure of anything.

In the public school system I tried to ensure that my students were taught a correct understanding of science and how to think logically. However, when first teaching creation in the public schools, my approach was different. I would show the students the problems with evolution and how evidence supported the creationist view. However, when the students went to another class where the teacher was an evolutionist, the teacher would just re-interpret the evidence for them. I had been using what can be called an
evidentialist
approach — trying to use the evidence to convince students that it showed evolution wrong and creation true.

I then changed methods and taught students the true nature of science — what science can and cannot do. We looked in detail at the limitations that scientists have in relation to the past. They were told that all scientists have presuppositions (beliefs) which they use in interpreting the evidence. I shared with them my beliefs from the Bible concerning creation, the Fall, Noah’s flood and other topics, and how one may build scientific models upon this framework. It was demonstrated how the evidence consistently fitted with the creation framework and not within that of the evolutionists. I had begun teaching from what could be called a "presuppositionalist" approach. The difference was astounding. When students went to the other classes and their teachers tried to re-interpret the evidence, the students were able to identify for the teachers the assumptions behind what the teachers were saying. The students recognized that it was a teacher’s belief system that determined the way in which he looked at the evidence. The question of origins was outside of direct scientific proof.

This so perplexed some teachers that, on one occasion, a young teacher came to me and abrasively stated that I had destroyed her credibility with the students. She had taught her students that coal formed in swamps over millions of years. I had taught the students that there were different theories as to how coal could be formed. Since this teacher had not indicated the limitation of science and had taught her swamp theory of coal as fact, her credibility was undermined in the eyes of the students. The reason she was so angry was that she had absolutely no comeback and knew it. So did the students.

I would appeal to any who have the opportunity to teach in the area of creation/evolution to research carefully their method of teaching. Ensure that the students understand the whole philosophical area, that is, the presuppositions and assumptions involved. Not only will students understand the issues better but they will also become better scientists and thinkers as a result.

Another existing result of this presuppositional approach emphasizing the limitations of science, is the questions students ask at the end of such a program. When using the evidentialist approach, the questions students asked would be on topics such as, "What about Carbon 14 dating?" "Haven’t scientists proved fossils are millions of years old?" "Surely given enough time anything can happen." However, using the presuppositional approach (which brings the issues to the fundamental belief level), it was exciting to see a dramatic change in the nature of questions asked: "Where did God come from?" "How do you know the Bible can be trusted and is true?" "Who wrote the Bible?" "Why is Christianity better than Buddhism?" The students started to see the real issue. It was really a conflict of beliefs. The results of this approach have been astounding. Many, many students have listened to the claims of Christ and have shown real interest in Christianity with a number of conversions as a result.

This method works not only for public school students but for Christian school students as well. It is also an important method for the general public. One of the things they recognize is that creationists and evolutionists all have the same facts. Therefore, what we are really talking about are different interpretations of these same facts. They begin to see the real argument — two religions in conflict. Evidence is important (which is why creationists do intensive research), but the method used to present the evidence is vital to the success of the presentation.

After I gave a lecture to a class at a Christian college in Kansas, using material similar to that discussed already (plus additional scientific evidences), a student stated in front of the rest of the class, "What you have said sounds logical and very convincing in regard to accepting Genesis as truth. But, you must be wrong, because my geology professor here at the college believes in evolution and would totally disagree with you. If he were here now, I’m sure he could tell me where you are wrong, even if I can’t see it at the moment."

I replied "Even if your geology professor were here and said things I don’t understand because I’m not a geologist, if what he says disagrees with the Bible, then he is wrong. If I can’t explain why he is wrong, it only means I don’t have the evidence to know the errors in his arguments. The Bible is the Word of God and is infallible. I’m sure I could get a creationist geologist to find out why your professor is wrong, because the Bible will always be right!"

Surely, as Christians blessed with the conviction that arises from the work of the Holy Spirit, we must accept the Bible as the infallible, authoritative Word of God — otherwise, we have nothing. If the Bible is to be questioned and cannot be trusted, and if it is continually subject to re-interpretation based on what men believe they have discovered, then we do not have an absolute authority. We do not have the Word of the One who knows everything, which means we have no basis for anything. Truth is spiritually discerned. Without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit there can be no real understanding.

Chapter 4

THE ROOT OF THE PROBLEM

Why do evolutionists not want to admit that evolution is really a religion?

It is related to the fact that whatever you believe about your origins does affect your whole world view, the meaning of life, etc. If there is no God and we are the result of chance random processes, it means there is no absolute authority. And if there is no one who sets the rules, then everyone can do whatever he likes or hopes he can get away with. Evolution is a religion which enables people to justify writing their own rules. The sin of Adam was that he did not want to obey the rules God set but do his own will. He rebelled against God, and we all suffer from this same sin: rebellion against the absolute authority. Evolution has become the so-called "scientific" justification for people to continue in this rebellion against God.

The Bible tells us in the Book of Genesis that there is a true and reliable account of the origin and early history of life on earth. Increasing numbers of scientists are realizing that when you take the Bible as your basis and build your models of science and history upon it, all the evidence from the living animals and plants, the fossils, and the cultures fits. This confirms that the Bible really is the Word of God and can be trusted totally.

The secular humanists, of course, oppose this because they cannot allow the possibility of God being Creator. They fight to have prayer, Bible readings, and the teaching of creation forced out of the public school curriculum. They have deceived the public into thinking this is eliminating religion from schools and leaving a neutral situation.
This is simply not true!
They haven’t eliminated religion from the public school.
They have eliminated Christianity and have replaced it with an anti-God religion — humanism.

Most public schools have become institutions that train generations of school children in the religion of humanism. There is a minority of Christian teachers in the public school movement who do try to be the "salt of the earth" in such institutions. However, it is becoming increasingly difficult for them. There are quite a number of Christian teachers who hide their light under a bushel — frightened of being consistent Christians in such a pagan environment. Some teachers have been threatened with termination of their employment if they are seen to be giving a Christian philosophy in the educational system.

We see extreme emotionalism in reaction to the creation ministries around the world because the evolutionists’ religion is being attacked by a totally different belief system. This emotionalism can be seen in the way in which the anti-creationists talk about the issue. For instance, consider the quote from Dr. Michael Archer (Senior Lecturer in Zoology at the University of New South Wales) in
Australian Natural History
, Vol. 21, No. 1: "Scientific Creationism is not just wrong; it is ludicrously implausible. It is a grotesque parody of human thought and a downright misuse of human intelligence. In short, to the Believer, it is an insult to God."

The real battle is aligned with the fact that these people do not want to accept Christianity because they will not accept that there is a God to whom they are answerable. Perhaps this is why one evolutionist lecturer said: "You will never convince me that evolution is religion." In other words, no matter what we were able to show him concerning the nature of evolution, he refused to accept that it was a religion. He did not want to accept that he had a faith because then he would have to admit it was a blind faith. And he would not be able to say that it was the right faith.

The public has genuinely been misled into thinking that evolution is
only
scientific and belief in God is
only
religious. Evolution is causing many people to stumble and not listen when Christians share with them the truth of the God of creation. You will notice in humanist opposition (through debates, the media, books, etc.) to the creation ministries that they very rarely identify any evidence for evolution. The main reason is, of course, that there is none.

Walk into a museum and have a look at all of the "evidence" for evolution on display. Different kinds of animals and plants are represented by carefully preserved specimens or by large numbers of fossils. You will see the story of evolution in words — but not in the evidence you see. The evidence is
in the glass case. The hypothetical story of evolution can only be seen pasted on the glass case.

All the evolutionists have to do is to come up with one piece of evidence that proves evolution.
If evolution is right and creation is nonsense, evolutionists have the media at their disposal to prove to everyone that evolution is true. However, they cannot do this. The evidence overwhelmingly supports exactly what the Bible says. It is a shame that creationists do not have the same media coverage to explain to the world the overwhelming evidence for the truth of creation.

Let’s face it, secular evolutionists must oppose creation ministries because, if what we are saying is right (and it is) — that God is Creator — then their whole philosophy is destroyed. The basis for their philosophy decrees there is no God. If evolution is not true, the only alternative is creation. That is why they will cling to the evolutionary philosophy even if the evidence is totally contradictory. It is really a spiritual question.

Some may say that if the evidence is so overwhelming that God created, surely people would believe this. In Romans 1:20 we read, "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse."

The Bible tells us that there is enough evidence in the world to convince people that God is Creator, and to condemn those who do not believe. If that is so, and the evidence is all there, why don’t people believe it? Is it because they do not want to believe it? The apostle Peter states that in the last days men will deliberately forget that God created the world (2 Pet. 3:5). This means there is a willfulness on their part not to believe.

The Bible also tells us that, "There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God" (Rom. 3:11) and "For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ." (2 Cor. 4:6). In other words, it is God who opens our hearts to the truth. When we think of the story of the pharaoh who would not let God’s people leave Egypt, the Bible says, "But the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he would not let them go" (Exod. 10:27). This idea is also recorded in Exodus 7:14: "Pharaoh’s heart is hardened, he refuseth to let the people go."

In the New Testament we read that Jesus taught the Pharisees and scribes in parables saying: "And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah, which saith, by hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive: for this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them" (Matt. 13:14–15).

Romans 1:28 tells us, "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient."

Thus, it is God who lets us see the truth — lets us see that the evidence is all there — that He is Creator. However, in a very real sense, there has to be a willingness on our part to want to see as well. Why can’t the humanists, the evolutionists, see that all the evidence supports exactly what the Bible says? It is because they do not want to see it. It is not because the evidence is not there. They refuse to allow the evidence to be correctly interpreted in the light of biblical teaching.

In Isaiah 50:10 we read, "Who is among you that feareth the Lord, that obeyeth the voice of his servant, that walketh in darkness, and hath no light? Let him trust in the name of the Lord, and stay upon his God."

It is my prayer that those who oppose the Creator God will come to trust in Him as Lord and Saviour. When we read the rest of Isaiah 50, it should make each of us pray more for humanists and evolutionists who want to walk in their own light — in the light of man: "Behold, all ye that kindle a fire, that compass yourselves about with sparks: walk in the light of your fire, and in the sparks that ye have kindled. This shall ye have of mine hand; ye shall lie down in sorrow" (Isa. 50:11).

We do not want this to be the fate of any human being. As the Lord says in His Word, it is not His desire that any should perish. However, God (who is a God of love) is also the God who is judge, and He cannot look upon sin. Therefore, sin must be judged for what it is. However, God in His infinite mercy sent His only begotten Son, "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (John 3:16).

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men" (John 1:1–4).