| |
In the last
issue of Reformed Witness pamphlet, we began a discussion of the
Scripture
doctrine of creation. We did that by considering the popular
theory of atheistic evolution which
opposes the teaching of Holy Scripture concerning God's creation
of the heavens and the earth.
After presenting the main tenets of the theory of evolution, we
lodged several objections against this
false teaching. First of all, we oppose the theory of atheistic
evolution because it is a fundamental
denial of the existence of God. We oppose it because of its
inherent atheism. Secondly, we reject
the theory of atheistic evolution because it is a fundamental denial
of the absolute authority of the
Word of God. It is inherently rationalism. Thirdly,
on the basis of the teaching of Scripture we
reject the very idea of evolution. We reject the idea that
the creation derived its existence out of
itself and develops along the lines of a natural selection in an
ever increasing ascendancy. The writer
of the Epistle to the Hebrews not only teaches in Heb. 11:3 that
the worlds were framed by the
word of God. But he goes on expressly to state: "so that things
which are seen were NOT made of
things which do appear."
In this
issue of the Reformed Witness pamphlet we want to begin a discussion
of what has
come to be known as theistic evolution. It's important for
the church today to address itself to this
form of the teaching of evolution, as she strives to defend and
maintain the truth of the doctrine of
creation. It's important for the church to do this, first
of all, because it is this form of the false
teaching of evolution, this compromising position, that poses the
greatest threat to the members of
the church. It is a much more subtle and deceptive teaching
than outright, blatant evolution.
Therefore it is a more dangerous teaching. In the second place,
it's important for the church to
address itself to the position of theistic evolution because of
the increasing acceptance of this
position in fundamentalist and Reformed circles. Where in
the past the doctrine of creation was
maintained and taught in these circles, today that doctrine of creation
has been replaced by the
teaching of theistic evolution. In many of the Christian high
schools and colleges of our land, the
view of the origin of all things that is presented is the view of
theistic evolution. In many of the
churches and denominations, the interpretation of the first chapters
of Genesis has become an open
question. There is a crying need for the church and for believers
today to speak out against this
wrong view of theistic evolution and take a firm stand for the Scripture
doctrine of creation.
The fundamental
difference between atheistic evolution and theistic evolution is
that, whereas
atheistic evolution proceeds from the presupposition that God does
not exist, theistic evolution is
based on the premise that God does exist. The theistic evolutionist
professes theism, that is, he
professes belief of a faith in God. The theistic evolutionist
teaches that indeed God created all things
in the beginning. All things ultimately owe the origin of
their existence to the Creator God. But, says
the theistic evolutionist, God created all things by means of an
evolutionary process. God's creation
of all things was not instantaneous, but took place in the way of
evolution. God, then, created the
very first cell, the earliest and most basic forms of life.
But that was the extent of God's creative
activity. After that initial creation, God stepped back and
allowed the entire world to develop on its
own, governed by certain fixed natural laws. The theistic
evolutionist is fond of saying that the Bible
reveals the fact of creation, but not the method of creation.
The method of creation is something
that must be determined by science. And on the basis of scientific
research and discovery, it is plain
that the method of creation that God employed was the method of
evolution.
One of the
more recent variations of this view of theistic evolution is the
view that is knows as
progressive creationism. One of the leading proponents of
progressive creationism has been
Bernard Ramm. Ramm sets forth his views in his book, The Christian
View of Science and
Scripture. Although many progressive creationists, including
Ramm, are vehement in differentiating
their position over against the position of theistic evolution,
the fact of the matter is that these two
positions are very similar. The only main difference is that
whereas the theistic evolutionist posits
only an initial creative work of God at the beginning of the evolutionary
process, the progressive
creationist teaches that at several crucial junctures in the evolutionary
process God intervened with a
creative act. What these junctures were and when they occurred,
of course, progressive
creationists do not agree among themselves. One point at which
God undoubtedly intervened was
the point at which the ape-like ancestor of man had reached a sufficient
state of development that
God made and placed a soul in one of them by a special act of creation.
This was the creation of
Adam. For the rest, the evolutionary process continued, interrupted
only by a greater or lesser
number of Divine creative acts.
On the face
of it, both theistic evolution and progressive creation are mediating
positions.
They represent a compromise between the historic, Biblical doctrine
of creation and the modern
scientific view of evolution. They attempt to retain God and
the view that God is the Creator, and at
the same time allow room for the evolutionary theory.
One of the
major problems that confronts both the theistic evolutionist and
the progressive
creationist is that apparently Genesis 1 does not teach an evolutionary
view of things. In particular,
on first reading, Genesis 1 does not allow for the long periods
of time which the evolutionary
process requires. Apparently Genesis 1 teaches that God created
all things in 6 days. And the
problem is complicated by the fact that this has been the historic
position of the church. By and
large, the church down through history has taught, on the basis
of Genesis 1, a creation of the
heavens and the earth by God in 6 literal days.
This
presents a problem for the theistic evolutionist because he professes
to be a theist. He
professes to believe in God and professes to receive God's Word,
the Holy Scriptures. In order to
maintain his evolutionary position, he is forced to do something
with the teaching of Genesis 1 that
God created all things in 6 days. While acknowledging to receive
Genesis 1, he must at the same
time go to work to change the interpretation of Genesis 1 so that
Genesis 1 fits in with the theory of
evolution.
In especially
two ways the theistic evolutionist alters the teaching of Genesis
1 to make room
for the eons of time necessary for evolution. First of all,
some theistic evolutionists have set forth
what is called the "gap theory." According to this view, the
6 days of the creation account
mentioned in Genesis 1 were literal days. But these days were
not successive days, one day
following immediately upon another. Rather, between these
six days of creation were gaps of long
periods of time, millions of years, during which the evolutionary
process took place.
The second
way in which some theistic evolutionists alter the teaching of Genesis
1
concerning a 6 day creation, is to teach the "period theory."
According to this theory, the six days
of creation mentioned in Genesis 1 were not 6 literal days of 24
hours. But the days of Genesis 1
were actually long periods of time. These men teach that we
must not understand Genesis 1, and
particularly the word "day" in Genesis 1, literally. Instead
"day" must be understood in a figurative,
symbolic way. "Day", then, stands for long periods of time.
This is
basically the position of the theistic evolutionist. We have
attempted to be fair and
accurate in defining his position. Necessarily we have outlined
only the main tenets of the position.
In the next issue of the Reformed Witness pamphlet we hope to begin
to evaluate this position in the
light of the Scripture's teaching concerning the truth of creation.
We hope to see that the position of
the theistic evolutionist does not harmonized with, and is a departure
from, the Scripture doctrine of
creation.
|