BiblicalInsights.net

In a series of articles, we have been exposing the fallacies of Theistic Evolution.  Part V of this series, continues to reveal the false ideas inherent in the doctrine.
9.  Some Theistic Evolutionists deny substitutionary atonement.  Substitutionary atonement is the biblical doctrine that Jesus died in the place of sinners, i.e. He endured the punishment (unjustly) that sinners rightfully deserve. Jesus did this to satisfy the justice of God and provide for the atonement of sin.  Joseph Bankard on the BioLogos (a term coined by Francis Collins) website affirms: “substitutionary atonement does not fit well with the theory of evolution.”  He explains, “If evolution is true, then the universe is very old, humans evolved from primates…[and]…the Fall is not a historical event….However, if denying the historical Fall calls into question the doctrine of original sin, then it also calls into question the role of the cross of Christ within substitutionary atonement.  If Jesus didn’t die in order to overcome humanity’s original sin, then why did Jesus die?  What is Jesus, the second Adam, attempting to restore with the cross, if not the sin of the first Adam? Substitutionary atonement sees original sin as a major reason for Christ’s death. But macroevolution calls the Fall and the doctrine of original sin into question.  Thus, evolution poses a significant challenge to substitutionary atonement” (Theistic Evolution, p. 707).  Bankard affirms in Part 2 of his article that, in his alternative view of the cross, “Christ’s death was not a part of God’s divine plan” (emphasis added) (Theistic Evolution, p. 707 an article by Colin R. Reeves, “Bringing Home the Bacon: The Interaction of Science and Scripture Today). The doctrine of substitutionary atonement is taught in the Scriptures.  Peter states, “Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed” (I Peter 2:24).  God’s Word declares “For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself…So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation” (Heb. 9:26,28). In refutation of Bankard’s claim that “Christ’s death was not a part of God’s divine plan” consider Peter’s remarks in Acts 2:23, “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain.”  “Let God be true and every man a liar” (Rom. 3:4). With respect to substitutionary atonement, theistic evolutionists sound similar to evolutionists who are also atheists.  G. Richard Bozarth, an atheist, states, “…evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary.  Destroy Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the son of god…If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing! (Theistic Evolution, 706). We cannot accept the claims of evolution and adhere to historical Christianity.  Theistic evolutionists attempt to marry the lie of evolution with the truth of creation.  But, they fail to realize that the result is another lie and not the truth.  They thus assault the integrity of the gospel of Jesus Christ.