BiblicalInsights.net

Theistic Evolution is not innocent.  Theistic Evolution involves the attempt to marry the lie of evolution with the truth of creation.  However, the result is not the truth, but another lie.  In Part I of this study, we considered three consequences of theistic evolution that sufficiently show the errors involved in this theory.  Now, we will consider more problems that this theory presents.

Fourth, some theistic evolutionists deny the incarnation of Jesus.  The idea of evolution and thus of “common descent” undermines the foundation of the incarnation of Jesus.  Hoimar von Ditfurth discusses the incompatibility of the incarnation with evolutionary thought:  “The only way that I see of resolving the contradiction (between evolution and the incarnation of Jesus) is to ascribe a basic historical relativity to the person of Jesus Christ” (Werner Gitt, Did God Use Evolution? 96).  Theistic evolution contributes to a loss of meaning regarding the nature of Jesus Christ.  This fact violates I John 4:2-3 and identifies some theistic evolutionists as anti-Christ.  John writes, “Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.”

Fifth, theistic evolution relativises the work of Jesus’ in redemption.  In the New Testament, Adam is identified as the first man (I Cor. 15:45; I Tim. 2:13).  Many theistic evolutionists deny that Adam was the first man and they deny that Adam was created by God directly.  They interpret Genesis 1 and 2 as myth and not as historic fact.  Francis Collins in his book, The Language of God, denies that Genesis 1 and 2 are historical reality.  Instead, he argues that they must be interpreted as symbolic allegory (myth).  Collins denies that Adam and Eve were historical humans that actually lived in the Garden of Eden.  He writes, “As noted previously, studies of human variation, together with the fossil record, all point to an origin of modern humans approximately a hundred thousand years ago, most likely in East Africa.  Genetic analyses suggest that approximately ten thousand ancestors gave rise to the entire population of 6 billion humans on the planet” (207).  Collins affirms that humans descended from great apes as part of an evolutionary process.  He states as tenets of theistic evolution, “Once evolution got under way, no special supernatural intervention was required. Humans are part of this process, sharing a common ancestor with the great apes” (200).  How did humans come to possess a soul and express moral law?  Collins defers to C. S. Lewis for the explanation.  Lewis, a theistic evolutionist,  wrote the following explanation, “For long centuries, God perfected the animal form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself.  He gave it hands whose thumb could be applied to each of the fingers, and jaws and teeth and throat capable of articulation, and a brain sufficiently complex to execute all of the material motions whereby rational thought is incarnated.  The creature may have existed in this state for ages before it became man: it may even have been clever enough to make things which a modern archaeologist would accept as proof of its humanity. But it was only an animal because all its physical and psychical processes were directed to purely material and natural ends.  Then, in the fullness of time, God caused to descend upon this organism, both on its psychology and physiology, a new kind of consciousness which could say “I” and “me,” which could look upon itself as an object, which knew God, which could make judgments of truth, beauty and goodness, and which was so far above time that it could perceive time flowing past…We do not know how many of these creatures God made, nor how long they continued in the Paradisal state, But sooner or later they fell. Someone or something whispered that they could become as gods…They wanted some corner of the universe of which they could say to God, “This is our business, not yours.” But, there is no such corner” (208-209).  Collins quoted at length from Lewis’ work, The Problem of Pain, 68-71. Both Collins and Lewis believe that God used evolution to create.  However, Collins affirms that once the process of evolution began, God ceased to have a part.  Yet, when quoting from Lewis, it appears that God caused a new kind of consciousness to descend upon animal creatures specially prepared by God.  After receiving this undefined spiritual infusion, the creature fell.  Thus we have Collins’ explanation for man’s soul and his fall into sin.  Jesus places the creation of the first man and woman at the beginning (Matt. 19:4-5; Gen. 1 and 2).  Paul spoke of Adam as a historical reality (Romans 5:12-21).  Paul connects the redemptive work of Christ (the second Adam) to the introduction of sin into the world by Adam.  He shows that Christ’s redemptive work is able to correct the spiritual loss brought about by Adam’s sin and the subsequent sins of human beings by providing atonement for sin.  If Adam is not a real, historical, person, how can we accept Jesus’ redemptive work as real?  Compare Lewis’ explanation of the origin of the soul of man with Genesis 2:7, “And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.”  Which seems more reasonable?  Which seems “historical” and which seems “mythical?”