The Lie: Evolution (16 page)

Christians who say God used evolution to bring everything including man into being, have a real problem. If evolution is not occurring today (that is, if God is not "creating" through evolution), there is no basis to extrapolate into the past to say that evolution has ever occurred, as there is now no mechanism for it. In other words, modern evolutionary theory accepts that evolution is still going on (therefore, man must still be evolving!), so if a Christian accepts evolution he has to accept that God is still using evolution today. Thus, He is still creating. But God tells us that He finished His work of creating. This is a real dilemma for the theistic evolutionist.

6. DUST TO ADAM — RIB TO EVE

We read in Genesis 2:7 how God made the first man: "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." According to the verse, taken at face value, God made the first man Adam from the dust of the ground. His wife Eve was made in a different way. "And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, ‘This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man’ " (Gen. 2:21–23).

The first woman, Eve, was made from Adam’s side. There are many Christians who, having accepted evolution, say that the "dust" in Genesis 2:7 actually represents the chemicals that God used to start the evolutionary process. Thus Genesis 2:7 represents a summary of evolution — that is, chemicals-to-man. Yet people who hold this belief have an insurmountable problem: if dust-to-Adam represents chemicals-to-man, then what does rib-to-Eve represent? To be consistent, one needs an adequate explanation, and there is none — if one accepts evolution. Eve did not come directly from dust, but from an already fully functional created man.

7. RETURN TO DUST

Some people say that "dust" in Genesis 2:7 represents the animal (e.g., ape-like creature) that God breathed into and made a man (Adam). They say that when the Bible tells us God took dust and made Adam, it is symbolic of the evolutionary understanding that ape-like creatures evolved into human beings. But again, one must be consistent. Genesis 3:19 states, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." If the dust God used to make Adam represents an ape-like creature that God used to make man, then according to the Bible the dust from which man was made is what he returns to when he dies. To what
animal
does man return when he dies? Anyone can observe that when we die we return to dust — just as the Bible says. Dust of the ground, to which we return, is what we were created from in the first place!

8. GOD IS GOOD

In Genesis 1:31 God pronounced of His creation that "it was very good." What did He mean by "good?" The only way you would know is if you had an absolute with which to make a comparison. Jesus said in Matthew 19:17, "There is none good but one, that is, God." In Psalm 25:8 we are told, "Good and upright is the Lord." Therefore, when God pronounced His creation as "good," what existed reflected the attributes of a God who is good. When we look at the attributes of God we see, for instance, as exhibited in the New Testament through Jesus Christ, that He cared for the sick, He healed the suffering, He raised the dead, He had compassion, He helped the weak. He is a loving and good God.

Now think about the methods of evolution: elimination of the weak, survival of the fittest, death and struggle in an evolutionary progression, elimination of the unfit, and so on. Would God have used this method in bringing all life into being and then describe it as
good?
Of course not — this would be totally inconsistent with God’s nature as revealed in the Scriptures. Christians who believe that God used evolution must consider Him an ogre!

9. GENESIS IS LITERAL HISTORY

Many claim that Genesis is only symbolic — a kind of analogy. They claim it is not important what Genesis says, only what it
means
. Actually, it can’t mean anything unless it says something anyway. Many Christians say that Genesis is meant only to teach us that God is Creator, but it is done in symbolic terms because in reality the words really mean God used evolution.

However, if applying this idea — that Genesis is only symbolic — then one has to ask the question, "Where do we learn that God is Creator?" We can, of course, go to Genesis 1:1 which says, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." But if Genesis is only symbolic, to be consistent we would have to question whether the words "God created" are also symbolic. We would have to ask what this really means.

When people say Genesis is only symbolic, they are inconsistent, for they accept some parts as literal (such as "God created") and other parts as symbolic! If it is symbolic, then it must be written for a purpose, therefore, every phrase that is supposed to be symbolic must be a symbol of something. So one has to ask: What does every verse mean? What does it symbolize? For instance, what does "rib-to-Eve" symbolize? This makes no sense at all.
²
Either you take it at face value, or you don’t know what it means, for it has no purpose being there.

10. ALL DOCTRINES FOUNDED IN GENESIS

Any basic study of biblical doctrines of theology will show that ultimately all doctrines, directly or indirectly, have their basis in the Book of Genesis. In John 5:46–47 Jesus Christ said: "For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" Jesus was emphatic that the writings of Moses had to be accepted to understand what He was saying because all the doctrines He taught were founded in Genesis. For instance, in Matthew 19:46 we read of His answer to the question about divorce that concerned marriage: "And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, for this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

Marriage has its foundation in Genesis — the first marriage God ordained is of Adam and Eve. To understand the meaning of marriage one must understand and accept its literal basis and origin as contained in the Book of Genesis.

Christ died on a cross because of sin and death and the necessary shedding of blood for the remission of sins. The origin and basis of this is in the Book of Genesis. We wear clothing because God gave clothes because of sin. We read this in the Book of Genesis. To understand Christian doctrine we must understand the foundations of doctrine given in the Book of Genesis. If Genesis cannot be taken literally, there is no foundation for Christian doctrine — therefore, Christian doctrine no longer has meaning.

Many people try to say that in the New Testament Jesus was only quoting the writings of His day — that He did not believe Genesis to be literal. They say that because the Jews happened to believe in the writings of Moses and in Genesis, Jesus just quoted this to go along with them. However, the Bible also teaches us that Jesus Christ is "the way, the truth and the life" (John 14:6). Jesus is the
truth
. To say that Jesus would knowingly teach "myth" as fact is to call Jesus Christ a liar. Jesus Christ was not just a man; He was not a sinner; He was the perfect "God-Man." Christians who say that Jesus was only quoting the myths of the day should be careful not to be calling Jesus a liar.

There are other instances where Jesus quoted from, or referred to, and thus accepted Genesis. For example, Matthew 24:37–39: "But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark. And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."

11. NEW TESTAMENT REFERENCES TO GENESIS

There are many references throughout the New Testament to Genesis, accepting it as literal history — as truth. There are at least 165 passages in Genesis that are either directly quoted or clearly referred to throughout the New Testament. Included in these are more than 100 quotations or direct reference to Genesis, chapters 1 through 11. Every one of the New Testament authors refers in his writings to Genesis 1 through 11. Every one of the first 11 chapters is alluded to in certain sections throughout the New Testament. A complete listing of all New Testament references to Genesis can be found in Dr. Henry Morris’ excellent commentary on Genesis,
The Genesis Record
, co-published by Baker Book House and Creation Life Publishers.

Throughout the Old and New Testament, Genesis is quoted from or referred to more than any other book in the entire Bible. This certainly indicates something of its importance. It also shows that both Old Testament and New Testament writers accepted Genesis as truth. On at least six occasions, Jesus Christ either quoted from or referred to some aspects of Genesis 1 through 11.

12. "DAYS" CANNOT BE "MILLIONS OF YEARS"

Many Christians claim that the days of creation actually represent millions of years of earth’s history. They say that God did not create the universe in six literal days but in six periods of time, representing the millions of years held by the evolutionists.

First of all, one has to recognize that science cannot prove the age of the earth. There are many assumptions behind all of the dating methods of which most people are not aware. There is also much scientific evidence consistent with a belief in a young earth. But the Bible itself teaches quite clearly that the days in Genesis are ordinary, literal days (approximately 24 hours).

The Hebrew word for day,
yom
, can mean an ordinary day or an indefinite period of time. It should be made clear that the word for day in Genesis can never mean a long period in the definite sense. It can mean something longer than a day, but only in the indefinite sense (e.g., in the time of the Judges, in the day of the Lord). Exodus 20:11 tells us that God created the universe in six days and rested on one as a pattern for man. This is the reason God took as long as six days to make everything. He set the seven-day week pattern for us, which we still use today. God did not say He worked for six million years and rested for one million years, telling us to do the same. It makes even less sense to suggest he worked for six indefinite periods of time.

There are many other aspects at which we could look to show that the days must be ordinary days. For example, Adam was created on day six. He lived through day six, and day seven, and died when he was 930 years old. If each day were a million years, there are big problems here, too. It also needs to be made clear that the passage in 2 Peter 3:8, that compares a day to a thousand years is not defining the word "day" as a thousand years. In fact, taken in context, 2 Peter 3:8 has nothing to do with the days of creation, but with the fact that God is outside time.

The word "day," when first used in Genesis, cannot be symbolic. A word cannot be used symbolically the first time it is used. It can only be used symbolically when it first has a defined literal meaning. It is given this defined literal meaning in Genesis chapter 1, the first time it is used. Also, the words used for the "evening" and "morning" can only mean exactly that.

In Genesis 1:14–19, concerning the fourth day of creation, the word "day" is used five times in relation to days, nights, seasons, and years. If the word "day" here doesn’t mean an ordinary day, it makes absolute nonsense of the way it is used in these passages.

13. AFTER HIS KIND

In Genesis 1, the phrase "after his kind" or "after their kind" occurs a total of ten times. This phrase is used in reference to the animals and plants as they are to reproduce on the earth. The Bible clearly teaches that God created fixed kinds of animals and plants, each to reproduce after its own kind. One kind could not change into another kind. Today we know there can be great variation within a kind, but fixed boundaries do exist. In fact, the classification system we use in naming animals and plants in groups was first formulated on the biblical teaching of fixity of kinds, basically as the result of the work of Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778).

There is no indisputable in-between, transitional form anywhere in the world, living or fossil. What we observe are distinct groups of animals and plants, as we would expect on the basis of what the Bible teaches. Those who believe in evolution have to make up additional theories as to why these in-between organisms are missing (e.g., "we haven’t found them yet," or "evolution happened so fast that it left no in-between forms").

14. EVOLUTION AND GENESIS HAVE A DIFFERENCE SEQUENCE

For those who try to harmonize evolution with Genesis, the order of evolution must compare with the order of events in Genesis. There are a number of problems here. The basic tenets of evolution totally conflict with the order in Genesis. For instance, Genesis teaches that God created fruit trees before fish — plants on day three, fish on day five. Evolution teaches that fish came before fruit trees. Evolution teaches that first life began in the sea, and after millions of years life was established on the land. The Bible teaches that the earth was first created covered with water: evolutionary teaching is that the earth first began as a hot molten blob. There is no way that the order of events according to evolution and Genesis can be reconciled.