BiblicalInsights.net

The attempt to marry the truth of creation with the lie of evolution produces the false theory of theistic evolution.  This attempt conflates the work of creation accomplished and revealed by God.  It produces some serious consequences.  In addition to the consequences already discussed in parts I and II, please consider the following thoughts.

6.  Theistic Evolution obliterates biblical chronology.  The Bible provides us with a time scale for human history.  The earth and all other astronomical bodies are of the same age, except for the three day difference reported in the creation week.  The earth was created on day one along with the heavens and light (Gen. 1:1-3; 2:1).  The sun, moon, and stars were created on day four (Gen. 1:14-19).   Fowls and aquatic life were created on day five and animals and man were created on day six (Gen. 1:20-27).  Moses writes, “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it” (Exodus 20:11).  Most Theistic Evolutionists deny the historical reality of the Genesis account of creation and so upend the chronology of the Bible.  Genesis declares that all things had a beginning and that Adam and Eve were created in the beginning of creation and not billions of years later.  Francis Collins places the beginning of human beings at about 100,000 years ago while the universe began 14 billion years ago (The Language of God, 207)!  What a contrast to the words of Jesus Christ, “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female” (Matthew 19:4).  Luke traces the genealogy of Jesus back to Adam (Luke 3:38).  Adam is called by the apostle Paul the first man (I Cor. 15:45; first formed, then Eve, I Tim. 2:13).  If this is true, then, the heaven and the earth are only a few days older than Adam, not billions of years older.  We can estimate the age of the universe in terms of the genealogies of Christ recorded in Matt. 1 and Luke 3.  We must conclude, based upon the biblical evidence, that the universe is thousands not millions or billions of years old.  The chronology is interwoven with the genealogy of Christ.  If you alter the chronology, you alter the genealogy and dramatically impact Christology.  Two doctrines are affected:  the doctrine of creation and the doctrine of Christ.  John declares, “Whosoever transgresses and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God.  He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son” (II John 9).  Theistic Evolutionists do not abide in the doctrine of Christ.  Jesus Christ was the creator and He tells us how and whenHe did it (Col. 1:16; John 1:1-3).  Who are you going to believe– the Creator or Theistic Evolutionists?  Theistic Evolutionists not only reinterpret Gen. 1 and 2, but they also have to reinterpret most of the Bible!  They ascribe to a faulty hermeneutic that undermines faith in God’s Word by denying plain statements in the Bible including statements by Jesus and the apostles. Any doctrine that denies a plain statement in God’s Word is a false doctrine.

7.  Theistic Evolutionists misinterpret reality.  The theory of evolution which affirms that all of life has evolved from a single organism distorts reality.  All life comes from life and there is no evidence that life spontaneously generated from non-living substances.  The fossil record does not contain evidence of transitional forms indicating that one species could evolve into another species.  There is no evidence that shows how organisms that reproduced asexually could evolve by gradation into organisms that reproduce sexually (see F. LaGard Smith, Darwin’s Secret Sex Problem). Smith states, “Lacking any sexual DNA, mitosis could not have provided either the information or mechanism required for the radically different process of meiosis” (88).  Graham Bell, James McGill Professor at McGill University in Montreal, and author of the Masterpiece of Nature: the Evolution of Genetics and Sexuality, provides the headline, “Queen of evolutionary problems.”  He states, “Sex is the queen of problems in evolutionary biology.  Perhaps no other natural phenomenon has aroused so much interest; certainly none has sowed as much confusion.  The insights of Darwin and Mendel, which have illuminated so many mysteries have so far failed to shed more than a dim and wavering light on the central mystery of sexuality” (Smith, 160). Smith utilizes McGill’s description of sexual reproduction as the queen of evolution’s problems.  He states, “Evolution theory teaches that the first organisms simply copied themselves. So, normative gendered sex as seen throughout Nature could not have begun without the appearance of the first-ever male and female organisms, mating in a never-before-seen way, and reproducing by revolutionary method of reducing their chromosomes precisely by half then blending those halves together to produce one-of-a-kind offspring. How those first-ever sexually reproducing organisms possibly could have evolved before sexual reproduction existed” is the queen of evolutionary problems (Smith, Darwins’ Secret Sex Problem, xxi). This is a strong argument against common descent.  Yet, Francis Collins affirms in The Language of God that, “the conclusion of a common ancestor for humans and mice is virtually inescapable”   ( 136-137). Dennis Venema, a biologist at Trinity Western University, argues that “numerous independent lines of genomics evidence strongly support the hypothesis that our species shares a common ancestor with other primates” (J. P. Moreland, Theistic Evolution, 366-367).  According to these scientists, human beings descended from mice and monkeys.  Creationists believe that human beings are the result of special creation by God who formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul (Gen. 2:7).  Also, creationists believe that human beings were created in the image of God (Gen. 1:27).  Human beings are distinct from animals and possess an immortal soul.  When you compare Theistic Evolution with special creation you get two different views of reality.  Which view do you believe?

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?”

Theistic Evolution attempts to marry a lie (the theory of evolution) with the truth (the creation of all things by God).  The result is a false theory.  Yet, theistic evolution is popular among evangelicals and other Christians.  Theistic evolutionists vary in their explanations of how God used evolution to create.  They are also married to the concept of an old earth (4 to 5 billion years) and an even older universe (approximately 14 billion years).  A good definition of theistic evolution is: “Broadly speaking, theistic evolution is the belief that God used evolution as his means of producing the various forms of physical life on this planet, including human life” (Norman Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, 233). What are some of the consequences of theistic evolution?

First, there is the denial of central biblical teaching.  The Bible is the final authority in all matters that pertain to religion.  The apostle Paul believed everything that is written in the law and in the prophets (Acts 24:14).  Jesus authorized all the meaningful elements of the text of the Bible (Luke 16:17).  Jesus believed in the historical account of the creation of the first human couple (Matt. 19:4-5); the universality of the flood (Matt. 24:38-39); and the history of Jonah (Matt. 12:40-41).  Theistic evolutionists deny that God created all things in six days (Gen. 1; Exodus 20:11).  The theory of evolution demands long ages or periods of time.  This fact forces theistic evolutionists to alter the interpretation of Gen. 1 and 2 to accommodate long periods of time.  The problem with this is that it contradicts plain passages of Scripture.  It contradicts God and calls God a liar.

Second, theistic evolution misrepresents the nature of God.  The Triune God is creator of all things.  Jesus is the true God and the everlasting life (I John 5:20).  God the Father created all things through His Son (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:16).  All things in the heavens, the earth and the sea (Exodus 20:11).  All things including things that are visible and invisible (Col. 1:16).  Everything God created was perfect and good.  In the theory of evolution, progress is brought about by pain and death.  The Darwinistic principle of “the survival of the fittest” means that superior organisms will win the battle for survival. The biblical principle of God’s nature (the goodness and the holiness of God) is distorted when death and ghastliness are presumed to be creative principles. Wolfgang Böhme, a theologian who supports evolution, even goes as far as to say that he regards sin as a harmless evolutionary factor. “If development has to go forward, sin is a marginal phenomenon at the edge of the great process of evolution, perhaps even a necessary feature.  Nature cannot sin.  Can man then be sinful when he is merely the product of nature, a link in the chain of nature’s creatures, taken from the earth to which we must someday return?” (Werner Gitt, Did God Use Evolution, 93).  If man is not capable of sin, the entire scheme of redemption revealed in God’s Word is useless.

Third, the nature of man is distorted.  The theory of evolution promotes the idea of common ancestry and affirms that human beings are the result of evolution from lower life forms.  In the book, Apes, five stages of development are considered:  orangutans, bonobos, chimpanzees, gorillas, and human beings.  Francis Collins argues in The Language of God that “the conclusion of a common ancestor for humans and mice is virtually inescapable” (The Language of God, 136-137).  Collins is a theistic evolutionist.  Evolutionists are materialists who deny the spiritual realities including that man has a soul.  Theistic evolution attempts to marry a purely materialistic explanation for life with a miraculous explanation for life (God’s creative acts).  Evolutionists would completely reject this attempt.  Here are some of the distinctions between animals and man: (1) The human brain possesses qualities that have no parallel in the animal world; (2) Man possesses the faculty of speech.  He is able to make abstractions and to use his system of signs for metalingual purposes; (3) Only man is fully bipedal; (4) only man is able to express emotions; (5) only man is created in the image of God; (6) Only man received the breath of God and became a living soul (I Thess. 5:23); (7) Only man can actually communicate with God; (8) Only man has free will and is accountable to God; (9) Only man has the faculty of creative thought.  Human beings possess gifts such as freely developing personalities, inventiveness, and the capacity of cultural development (writing, music, historical awareness); (10) the Bible clearly differentiates between different types of flesh (I Cor. 15:39); (11) Only man receives the calling to become a child of God (John 1:12); and (12) Only man is an eternal being (Luke 16:19-31) (see Werner Gitt, Did God Use Evolution?, 68-70). (More to follow).

July 20, 1969 at 10:56 p.m., the first man, Neil Armstrong, set foot on the moon.  This year is the 50th anniversary of that historic event.  Landing on the moon, walking on the moon and returning men home from this adventure safely was a technological achievement that proved American ingenuity and exceptionalism.  This achievement paved the way for the computers and iPhones that we use today.
But, what if the moon didn’t exist? (see the article by Marsha Lewis, What Would Happen If There Were No Moon? insidescience.org, Dec. 2, 2015).

The Creation of the Moon
The sacred record declares that on the fourth day of creation God created the sun, moon and stars.  “And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons, and for days, and years: And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.  And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also.  And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day” (Gen. 1:14-19).
The consequences if the moon didn’t Exist
First, nights would be much darker.  God created the sun to rule the day and the moon to rule the night.  The moon has no light of its own.  The moon’s light is a reflection of sunlight on the surface of the moon.  The sun is many times brighter than the moon and this contrast gives us the day/night cycle.  Many animals are nocturnal and depend upon the night to function.  Sunlight is essential for all life. Consequently, both the moon and the sun are essential to life.
Second, without the moon,  a day on the earth would last six to twelve hours.  There could be more than a thousand days in one year.  The reason for this is that the earth’s rotation slows down over time thanks to the gravitational force–or pull–of the moon.  Without it, days would go by in a blink (Marsha Lewis, inside science.org).
Third, a moonless earth would also change the size of the ocean tides.  Without the moon, the tides on the earth would be one-third as high as they are now.  Tides would still exist, because of the suns’ gravitational force on the earth.  The tides affect our climate on the earth and without the moon, earth’s climate and our weather would be drastically different.
Fourth, without the moon, there would be no lunar or solar eclipses.  A Lunar eclipse occurs when the earth is between the sun and the moon.  A Solar eclipse occurs when the moon is between the earth and the sun.  Without the moon, neither eclipse could occur.  Both lunar and solar eclipses can be predicted.  This is evidence of the design involved in our solar system and demonstrates the delicate balance involved in it.
Fifth, without the moon, the tilt on the earth’s axis would vary over time.  This would create some very wild weather.  Right now, thanks to the moon, the earth’s axis stays tilted at twenty-three point five degrees.  But, without the moon, the earth might tilt too far over or hardly tilt at all leading to no seasons or perhaps even extreme seasons.  The moon revolves around the earth once every 27.3 days.  It also rotates on its axis in around the same length of time so that from the earth we always see the same side of the moon (the near side) and never see the far side (also known as the dark side). About 59% of the moon is visible from the earth.  The moon goes through eight phases:  New Moon, Crescent, First Quarter, Waxing Gibbous, Full Moon, Waning Gibbous, Last Quarter, Crescent, then, New Moon again.  The time it takes for the moon to revolve around the earth gives us our month.
God created the moon with a purpose.  The purpose relates to its design and its relationship to the earth and all of the other elements in our solar system.  Life as we know it is dependent upon the moon.  Take away the moon, and the consequences would be drastic and perhaps even alter the earth in such a way as to prevent life from existing.

Graham Bell, James McGill Professor at McGill University in Montreal, and author of the Masterpiece of Nature: The Evolution of Genetics and Sexuality, provides the headline, “The Queen of Evolutionary Problems.” Bell states, “Sex is the queen of problems in evolutionary biology. Perhaps no other natural phenomenon has aroused so much interest; certainly none has sowed as much confusion. The insights of Darwin and Mendel, which have illuminated so many mysteries have so far failed to shed more than a dim and wavering light on the central mystery of sexuality” (F. LaGard Smith, Darwin’s Secret Sex Problem, 160).

The Problem
“There is no viable evolutionary explanation for the existence of male/female meiotic sexual reproduction (Ibid. 88). Lacking any sexual DNA, mitosis could not have provided either the information or mechanisms required for the radically different process of meiosis (Ibid. 88).

What is Mitosis and Meiosis?
Mitosis is a process of cell reproduction that is observed in one-cell organisms and human cell growth.  No male and no female are involved in producing cell duplication. Mitosis is a process of cell duplication, or reproduction, during which one cell gives rise to two genetically identical daughter cells. Before a cell divides to make two cells, it copies all of its chromosomes.  These copies, called sister chromatids, are identical.  The result of this cell division is two identical cells each having 46 chromosomes.  
Meiosis is a type of cell division that results in reducing the number of chromosomes in half and creating genetic diversity.  “Meiosis begins like mitosis: the cell copies each chromosome.  But unlike in mitosis, homologous chromosome pairs line up and exchange pieces-a process called recombination. Remember, homologous chromosomes have the same genes but with slight differences. Recombination increases genetic diversity by putting pieces of slightly different chromosomes together” (https://learn. genetics.utah. edu/content/ basics/diagnose/). Then, the two newly combined homologous chromosomes are divided into two daughter cells which have 23 chromosomes having a unique combination of gene variations. This process of cell division produces egg and sperm cells.  Through the process of fertilization, the egg and sperm cells combine to make a cell with 46 chromosomes called a zygote.  The process of fertilization involves a male and a female of the same species.  
Mitosis and meiosis are both processes which describe the production of new cells. Mitosis produces two daughter cells which are genetically identical to the parent cell. Each daughter cell is diploid (contains the normal number of chromosomes). This is the result of DNA replication and 1 cell division. Mitosis is used in growth and asexual reproduction. Meiosis produces 4 daughter cells, each of which are unidentical to the parent cell and to one another. Each daughter cell is haploid (contains half the number of normal chromosomes). This is the result of DNA replication, followed by crossing over of homologous chromosomes and separation of chromosomes. There are two cell divisions: the parent cell divides once and then each cell produced by this first division divides once. Meiosis is used to produce gametes (sperm and egg cells), the cells of sexual reproduction. Two gametes fuse to form a zygote, a diploid cell with the full number of chromosomes.

Evolution Refuted
Evolution theory teaches that the first organisms simply copied themselves (mitosis). Consequently, normative gendered sex as seen throughout nature could not have begun without the appearance of the first-ever male and female organisms, mating in a never-before-seen way, and reproducing by a revolutionary method of reducing their chromosomes precisely by half then blending those halves together to produce one-of-a-kind offspring (Ibid. xxi). The queen of evolution’s problems is to explain how those first-ever sexually reproducing organisms possibly could have evolved before sexual reproduction existed. Evolutionists have failed to show how organisms could go from mitosis to meioses through gradation. The process of sexual reproduction is irreducibly complex. Consequently, there are no steps from mitosis to meiosis.

Darwins’ Admission
Darwin states, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down” (Ibid. xi). It is impossible for organisms to evolve through gradual steps from mitosis to meiosis.

Creation’s Affirmation
The creation account in Genesis 1 affirms that every creature is created by God and is capable of bearing after its kind. This is the law of kinds. Jesus affirms the truthfulness of this law in Matthew 7:16-ff. Microbe to man evolution is false.

I have uploaded a response to Matthew Sokoloski’s review of Nobie Stone’s book, Genesis 1 and Lessons From Space.  Sokoloski teaches in the Humanities department of Faulkner University.  He wrote a book review of Nobie Stone’s book for Sufficient Evidence, a journal published by the Warren Christian Apologetics Center.  The review appeared in the Fall, 2017 issue.  Sokoloski’s review exposes one of the major weaknesses of Nobie Stone’s book (also published by the Warren Christian Apologetics Center) which is its skepticism (agnosticism).  However, Sokoloski fails to point out some of the other errors contained in the book.  You will find my response to Sokoloski’s review under my Book Reviews page on this blog.  Please take the time to read it.  Then, for more background information, please read my book reviews of both the first edition and revised edition of Nobie Stone’s book.  The publishing of Stone’s book utterly destroys the integrity of the Warren Christian Apologetics Center and brings shame and reproach on the name of Thomas B. Warren.

In Ruth 2:3, the Bible says, “And she went, and came, and gleaned in the field after the reapers: and her hap was to light on a part of the field belonging unto Boaz, who was of the kindred of Elimelech.”  The word hap means “an accidental set of circumstances.”  For accidental causes to accomplish something that would normally require insight is a coincidence (Theistic Evolution, p. 97).  Ruth gleaned in the field of Boaz by coincidence.
Probability is the math of coincidence–  the math by which we rigorously rank coincidences.  For instance, you bump into an old classmate at a restaurant a thousand miles from your home and understand that it was a coincidence.  However, if your entire graduating class was at the restaurant, then, you know that it could not be by accident or coincidence, but would have to be by design.
Common Science
Whether or not we know how to calculate probabilities, we all seem to know from everyday experience–common science–that the number of opportunities cannot be large enough for anything but minor coincidences to occur.  Douglas Axe introduces us to the concept of common science in a chapter that he wrote for the book, Theistic Evolution.  Axe confidently affirms that inventions never occur by accident.  An invention is illustrated by a pizza, a power point presentation, or a paragraph in a book.  In invention (and we are all inventors) a large number of small things must be done sensibly (intelligently) in order for the big thing to come together.  Projects like making a pizza are easy to accomplish because we have mastered all of the elementary skills they require, but the fact that these skills had to be acquired assures us that accidents will never take the place of inventions.  If an invention such as a pizza will never be made by accident, then, for mind blowingly spectacular inventions like hummingbirds or dolphins to happen by accident is completely out of the question.  The rule then is: accidental invention is impossible.
Application of the Rule to Evolution
If accidental invention is impossible, then macroevolution is false.  The theory of evolution does not escape the rule of accidental invention.  Yet, evolutionists insist that, given enough time, the natural world and the universe that we live in including all life forms happened by accident!  They affirm this even though the probability is so high that it violates common science. 
Application of the Rule to Theistic Evolution
The concept of theistic evolution attempts to compromise the theory of evolution and the Biblical account of creation.  However, evolution and design are contradictory as noted above.  Theistic evolution is false because it attempts to assert that both evolution (chance development of all things) and design (intelligent design) are true.  This violates the law of non-contradiction.  The law of non-contradiction states that a proposition cannot both be true and not true at the same time.  Every precisely stated proposition is either true or false.  Evolutionists like Charles Darwin and his followers explicitly claim that chance variation (mutations) and the law of natural selection have produced all species of living organisms from a common ancestor including human beings. If true, then, design is ruled out.  In contrast, if design is the cause of creation of species as the Bible affirms, then chance and the law of natural selection are ruled out.  Theistic evolutionists attempt to have it both ways and violate the law of non-contradiction. This simply means that you have to be irrational in order to be either an evolutionist or a theistic evolutionist.
Evolution is a story without a mechanism.  It is not possible for chance to produce the design (invention) that we see every day in our universe.  This means that there is only one explanation for the design we observe all around us–an intelligent being–God–created it (Gen. 1:1)!  (reference:  Theistic Evolution, edited by J. P. Moreland, Stephen C. Meyer, Christopher Shaw, Ann K. Gauger, and Wayne Grudem).