Skip to main content

The Dirt on Theistic Evolution

By Cowboy Bob Sorensen
A group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. They elected one scientist to go and tell God that he was now irrelevant.

The scientist walked up to God the Son and said, “God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We’re can clone people and do many other things that seem miraculous, so why don’t you just go on and leave us alone?”

God listened patiently and then said, “All right, how about if we have a man-making contest?”

The scientist said, “Okay, we can do that!”

“But,” God added, “we’re going to do this just like I did when I made Adam.”

The scientist said, “You got it”, and bent down and grabbed a handful of dirt.

Jesus (Col. 1:16) looked at him and said, “Not so fast. Go get your own dirt.”
Biblical creationists believe the Bible as written, using the historical-grammatical approach. Theistic evolution and other compromising positions require eisegesis and elevating science philosophies to a magisterial authority position.
morgueFile / Slartibartfast
Aside from the arrogance of man thinking that God is not needed because we've evolved beyond the need for him (or that he does not exist at all, Rom. 1:18-19), some people insist on believing in evolution and then slapping God's name on it to justify their belief in rebellious pseudoscience. Although many theistic evolutionists claim to believe the Bible, they elevate man-made science philosophies to the magisterial level for their authority; those owlhoots dare to tell God what he said and means. Maybe they believe the Bible is a text that God preserved, but do they believe what it says? The rest of us will continue reading the Bible with historical-grammatical exegesis.

Although belief in special creation is not essential to salvation, Genesis is foundational to the gospel message. Theistic evolution is easily refuted in the minds and spirits of those who actually believe the Word of God. In some sermons on Genesis, Dr. John MacArthur pointed a few things and sparked some ideas that I'm going to present to you. Evolution means not only that God is not in authority over creation, but that God's Word is false.

God made man out of the dust of the Earth, וַיִּיצֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָֽאָדָם עָפָר מִן־הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים וַֽיְהִי הָֽאָדָם לְנֶפֶשׁ חַיָּֽה׃ , Gen. 2:7. Adam was made separately from the animals, and had the personal touch of God breathing into him the breath of life. This was not just physical life, but also spiritual life. Man was a separate, distinct creation, and you cannot get anything resembling evolution or long ages from the text.

Animals were also formed from the ground (Gen. 2:19) and then brought to Adam to give them names, but there was no suitable helper for him. The critters were different, lacking the abilities to reason and have meaningful interaction with him; a cowboy may talk to his horse while riding herd, but that's not exactly fulfilling for him. So God did something different for his special creation, and made woman from his side (Gen. 2:21). Adam did not have to wait for his wife to finish evolving, nor was she a separate species. She came from his side to stand with him, not as an inferior creation. Edit: Adam called her Eve (Gen. 3:20), another indication that she was unique and not just one of many co-evolving humanoids. The Bible clearly refutes evolution for the Christian.

In Genesis 2:8-14, we are given details about they layout of Eden. It wasn't just a tiny plot of land, but rather a big place. Such details are not the stuff of mythology, legend, poetry, or allegory.

Genesis sets forth the foundation that God's plan for marriage is one man and one woman (Mark 10:6-9). Jesus (Mark 10:6), Paul (1 Tim. 2:13, 1 Cor. 15:45), Jude (1:14), and others in the Bible treat Adam as an actual historical person and creation as a real event, not an allegory or poetry. To say that it is nothing less than actual history is to call Jesus and others either liars or stupid.

Like atheists and cultists, theistic evolutionists and other compromisers try to put Bible-believing Christians on the defensive — especially biblical creationists. (Interesting that theistic evolutionists cozy up to atheists and join forces to ridicule us, isn't it? So much for John 13:35, 2 Cor. 6:14-15, Gal. 6:10, and other verses.) Some will claim superior knowledge of Scripture and require that we answer certain questions they think we cannot answer (Steve Risner and Tony Breeden each wrote a series that shredded one compromiser's rant, and Charlie Wolcott addressed old Earth creation and theistic evolution). I reckon we should turn things around and find out if they claim to believe the Bible, do they believe what it says?

Some TEs claim to believe the Bible, but from their conduct, they don't appear to do so. Not only do some of them treat many Christians like garbage, but to get millions of years and evolution out of the Bible, eisegesis is necessary. God takes a dim view when people add to his words, see Prov. 30:16 and Rev. 22:18-19, and also note that in 1 Cor. 4:6, Paul cautioned believers not to go beyond what is written. Although Peter heard the voice of God during the transfiguration of Jesus, he said in 2 Peter 1:19-21 that the Word of God is more certain! Having a dim view of God's Word, adding to it, not following the teachings, causing divisions (Jude 1:17-19, Rom. 16:17), compromising with unbelievers and their philosophies — apostates and false teachers are heading for serious trouble (Jude 1:4).

We were warned not only about false teachers, but that scoffers would try to denigrate the Word of God (2 Peter 3:3-4). The rest of us are to continue in the Word, which is sufficient to equip us for godly living (2 Tim. 3:16-17). Philosophies will come and go, but God's Word stands forever (Isaiah 40:8).

A follow-up to this article is here.


Popular posts from this blog

Andy Stanley, Frank Turek, and Bad Theology

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Andy Stanley has been disappointing some people, and causing quite a few to be alarmed by his opposition to the authority of Scripture. (Note: Do not be confused.  Charles  Stanley is his father, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, and heard on In Touch Ministries . I've found most of his teachings to be doctrinally sound, and he upholds the inerrancy and authority of the Bible.) Unfortunately, megachurch director Andy Stanley has been saying things that are destructive to the truth, including recommending the false teaching of theistic evolution. Gray wolf image credit: US National Park Service While shooting from the hip can be a good thing, someone claiming the title of pastor should reign himself in . Stanley was disrespectful of small churches, then apologized later . In another instance, " What  did he just say?", Stanley may have used a very bad word in a sermon. When the segment was legally posted on YouTube

Disappointment with Young Earth Creation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  First, a note for anyone who is curious. The usual format: introduction with some of my thoughts plus links for useful information, excerpts of featured articles, then links to keep reading. I put my name on it and call it an article when I have more to say. This one will be different. I will reference older articles, then add some thoughts that I hope will prove helpful. There is more following the excerpt and link. So, does anyone remember Ken Keathley? Medal image manufactured at Custom Medal Maker Several years ago, Ken Keathley renounced young earth creationism to accept an old earth view. Apparently, he was disappointed by people in the young earth community. No kidding? Taking Friendly Fire This is where I'm going to open up and get personal with both of my readers. Ken Keathley is not the only one who has been disappointed, and in addition, I've been deeply hurt by the young earth community. Things I have posted on social(ist) media have been &qu

Gopher Wood and Noah's Ark

Something that has puzzled readers of the sixth chapter of Genesis is the use of the term gopher wood. Footnotes often say that the "Hebrew term is uncertain", and Bible translations differ — "I know what that means, Cowboy Bob! Noah commanded his sons, "Shem, you gopher water, Ham can gopher more pitch, and Japheth can gopher wood". No. Anyway, Bible translations differ. Many use the term gopher wood, and using the translations in my copy of theWord Bible Software , Coverdale (1535,) Geneva (1587), and Tyndale (1526) translated it as pine. The NIV translates it as cypress and adds the "uncertain" reference. The KJV, NKJV, NASB, HCSB, ESV, WEB all render the term as gopher wood. Credit: Wikimedia Commons /  Cimerondagert  ( CC by-SA 4.0 ) An excellent possibility is that God was not specifying a particular tree that has disappeared since then, but that Noah was to use hardwood. Getting into the Hebrew language, we see the root word tha