The Lie: Evolution (2 page)
Read The Lie: Evolution Online
Authors: Ken Ham
Tags: #Religion & Spirituality, #Religious Studies, #Science & Religion, #RELIGION / Religion & Science
At an ever-accelerating pace, society is putting its stamp of approval on practices that just several decades ago were not only frowned upon, but were outright illegal. Whereas once the Christian church had a significant impact on society, today almost every vestige of our Christian heritage is being eradicated. After spreading like wildfire, from a tiny handful of believers to the four corners of the world, Christianity today is in retreat at an even more rapid rate than that by which it spread.
There must be a root cause for this reversal that the Christian church is overlooking — a fundamental flaw in our approach. Why did Christians once exert influence on both social customs and laws of government, but today are finding that even in the United States, the so-called land of the free with a constitution that guarantees the free exercise of religion, their rights are being flagrantly violated?
Ken Ham gets to the bottom of the problem in this book. He shows how we have been simply fighting the symptoms of over-looking the root cause. Why have we not been able to convince the world of the evils of abortion, divorce, homosexuality, pornography, and drugs? Mr. Ham has identified the real crux of the matter. The cause is so subtle that even most of the large religious denominations have been deceived and have failed to recognize it.
With public education and even seminaries teaching that evolution, as well as the law of gravity, is a scientific fact, students have decided that there must be a naturalistic explanation for everything so they forget all about God. Anyway, they knew that His Ten Commandments put a crimp on their sexual lifestyles, so they were quite eager to escape from such constraints. They adopted the new morality; if it feels good, do anything you can get away with without being caught.
If there is no Creator, there is no purpose in life. There is thus no one watching over us to whom we must someday have to account for our actions. So, we come to the root of society’s problems. When God the Creator is removed from the picture, there are no absolutes; there is a loss of respect for law and absolute principles, and man is set adrift in a purposeless universe, guided only by his fickle passions and the situation of the moment.
Mr. Ham shows that Genesis, in particular, is a dependable account of actual events that are supported by solid scientific evidence. Furthermore, he shows how the questioning of this foundational book of the Bible, even by many Christians, has led to the degeneration of society so that the only moral codes it accepts are based upon "survival of the fittest," "do your own thing," and "if it feels good, do it." There are no moral absolutes.
This book is must reading for all Christians. It gives them much needed answers to the common questions of the unbeliever and advice for parents who must prepare their children to face a rebellious secular world. Mr. Ham calls upon a wealth of experience in answering questions during years of lectures throughout both America and Australia.
Luther D. Sunderland
Author of
Darwin’s Enigma:Ebbing the Tide of Naturalism
INTRODUCTION
I was reared in a Christian home where the Bible was totally accepted as the infallible, inerrant Word of God that provided the basis for the principles to be applied in every area of life. I recognized the conflict when as a high school student I was taught the theory of evolution. If Genesis was not literally true, then what part of the Bible could I trust?
My parents knew that evolution was wrong because it was obvious from Genesis that God had given us the details of the creation of the world. These details were important foundational truths for the rest of Christianity. At that time, the current wealth of materials on the creation/evolution issue produced, for instance, by the Institute for Creation Research, were not available. I recall going to my local minister and asking him what to do about the problem. He told me to accept evolution but then add it to the Bible so that God used evolution to bring all forms of life into being. This was an unsatisfactory solution to the problem. If God did not mean what He said in Genesis, then how could one trust Him in the rest of the Scriptures?
I went through my science degree and my teacher training year pigeonholing this problem, regurgitating to the lecturers what they told me concerning evolution. I did not know from a scientific perspective why I did not believe in evolution — but I knew from a biblical perspective it had to be wrong or my faith was in trouble.
Just before I received my first teaching appointment, the associate director of a teachers’ college in Australia, Mr. Godron Jones (a member of the church I was attending) gave me a small book outlining some of the problems with evolution. He also told me of books that were becoming available on this topic — books authored by such people as Dr. Henry Morris. I searched the book shops to try to collect as much of this material as possible.
The Genesis Flood
by Morris and Whitcomb was one of the first books I read on the subject. When I realized there were easy answers to this creation/evolution dilemma, there came a real burden from the Lord to go out and share this information with others. I could not understand why the Church had not made people aware of this information which really helped restore my faith in the Scriptures.
Understanding the foundational nature of the Book of Genesis to all Christian doctrine was a real awakening. This book is the result of a series of messages developed so that Christians could understand the significance and relevance of Genesis and the real nature of the creation/evolution issue. Over and over again, people have come and said that they had never realized the importance of Genesis — in fact, for many of them it meant a complete revival of their faith. It is gratifying to know that many of these people are still committed supporters of the creation ministries.
This book deals with the relevance of a literal Genesis. I pray that it will challenge the mind and heart in pastor, layperson, scholar, and student alike.
Chapter 1
CHRISTIANITY IS UNDER ATTACK
AFTER A LECTURE, a young man approached me — "What you said ... it’s suddenly like a light bulb lighting up in my head!" A young lady standing nearby stated, "I realized today that my understanding of Christianity was like starting in the middle of a movie —
you
took me back to the beginning — now I understand what it is all about." A middle-aged man approached, "This information is like a key. It not only unlocks the reason as to why we have problems in society today — it’s the key to knowing how to be much more effective in witnessing for Jesus Christ.... Thank you."
These are challenging days. On the whole, society is becoming more anti-Christian. We are seeing steady increases in homosexuality, support for abortion on demand, unwillingness to obey authorities, unwillingness to work, marriage being abandoned, clothing being abandoned, an increase in pornography, and an increase in lawlessness, to name but a few areas. Christians are fighting for their freedom even in so-called "Christian" nations.
 |
What has happened in society to bring about these changes? Why is it that many people are cynical when you talk about Christ and seem to be closed to the gospel? There must be some foundational reason for this change. In this book we will discover
the basic reasons why modern society has turned away from Christ. More importantly, a biblical (and hence, successful) way to reclaim lives for our Saviour will be outlined for you.
Years ago, our society was based on Christian absolutes. People knew what was right and what was wrong. Behaviors such as sexual deviancy, easy divorce, public lawlessness, abortion on demand, pornography, and public nudity were considered to be wrong. Varying punishments for offenders were meted out by society. Value judgments were basically built on biblical principles (for example, the Ten Commandments). Most people accepted or respected a belief in God.
Recently more and more people have rejected the God of the Bible. As belief in God has been abandoned, people have questioned the basis of the society in which they live. For instance, if there is no God, then why should they obey the Ten Commandments? Why should anyone say that homosexuality is wrong? Why should women be barred from having abortions whenever they desire? Once people eliminated God from their consciences, they set about to change any laws based on Christian absolutes that held God as Creator (and thus owner) of everything.
Christian absolutes have been diluted or removed as the basis of society and replaced with a world view that says, "We do not have to accept that the Christian way of doing things (basing our world and life view on biblical principles) is the only way; we must tolerate all religious beliefs and ways of life." However, this "tolerance" really means an
intolerance of the absolutes of Christianity
. This false idea of tolerance has subtly undermined Christianity, and most Christians have not recognized what was really happening. Many Christians have been deceived into believing they have no right to impose their views on society. We are told, for instance, that anti-abortionists have no business impressing their particular bias on society. Have you ever heard anyone say this about the pro-abortion groups? The result is one bias being imposed on society by the pro-abortionists —
legalized abortion
on demand! No matter what you do, you cannot avoid the fact that a view is being imposed on someone by someone. There is no such thing as neutrality, although many Christians become ensnared in the trap of believing there is.
It is like the many theological and Bible colleges that say, "We do not take a dogmatic stand on Genesis. We tolerate all views." But what happens when someone comes along and says, "Will you allow the view that says you
must
take Genesis literally?" "Oh, no!" they say, "We cannot allow that view because we tolerate all views!" In reality, they have taken a dogmatic stand to teach a dogmatic view to their students — a view that you do not have to take Genesis literally if you do not want to do so.
At one lecture I gave, a person said in an angry tone, "This is not fair. You are insisting that we take Genesis literally, that God actually took six days, that evolution is not true, and that there really was a worldwide flood. You are being intolerant of other people’s views. You must show tolerance for people such as I who believe God used evolution and that Genesis is only symbolic."
I then asked, "Well, what do you want me to do?"
The person replied, "You must allow other views and be tolerant of opinions different to yours."
"Well," I said, "My view is that the literal interpretation of Genesis is the right view. All other views concerning Genesis are wrong. Will you tolerate my view?"
The person looked shocked, and he hesitated. I could almost hear him thinking,
If I say yes, then I’ve allowed him to say you can’t have another view such as mine; if I say no, then I’ve obviously been intolerant of his view — what do I do?
He then looked at me and said, "That’s semantics!" What he really meant was that he had lost the argument and did not want to admit his intolerance of my position. The fact is, he had taken a dogmatic, closed-minded position.
Occasionally people are upset when dogmatic statements are made. They say, "You cannot be dogmatic like that." This in itself is a dogmatic statement. Many think that some people are dogmatic and others are not. It is not a matter of whether you are dogmatic or not, but of which dogma is the best dogma with which to be dogmatized!
At one time, a group called "Toleration" began. They were insisting on a tolerance of all religious ways, beliefs, and customs. They said that we had to stop intolerance in society. In their promotional leaflet explaining their viewpoint, it was interesting
that they listed all the things they were against. And most of the things of which they were intolerant were related to Christianity. What they really meant was that they wanted a tolerance of anything in society, except Christianity!
The idea of open-mindedness comes from the notion that there is no such thing as absolute truth, or that truth cannot be absolutely known. Some say, "There are no absolutes." Ironically, this premise has become their one absolute. Such ideas are derived from an anti-biblical philosophy which holds that everything is relative.
Christian absolutes — those truths and standards of Scripture which cannot be altered — are becoming less and less tolerated in society. Eventually this must result in the outlawing of Christianity. When Christian absolutes were the basis of society, immoral activities such as homosexual or lesbian lifestyles and pornography were outlawed. There has been a fundamental shift. Our society is now based on a relative morality: that is, a person can do what he likes and is answerable to no one but himself as long as the majority of people can be persuaded that their interests are not being threatened. This results in society’s being told that no one can say anything against those who choose to be sexual deviants, go naked publicly, or do whatever they want (within the limits of the law, which is also changing to become more "tolerant" of people’s actions).
God’s absolutes dictate that there are rules by which we must abide. Christianity cannot co-exist in a world community with relative morality as its basis. One or the other will yield. There are two world views with two totally different belief systems clashing in our society. The real war being waged is a great spiritual war. Sadly, today many Christians fail to win the war because they fail to recognize the nature of the battle.
It is my contention that this spiritual conflict is rooted in the issue of origins (creation/evolution). Although the thought may sound strange or new to the reader, biblically and logically this issue is central in the battle for men’s souls.
 |
 |
Most people have the wrong idea about what the creation/evolution question involves. Instead of perceiving the real issue, they have been deceived into believing that evolution is science. It is not a science at all (refer to chapter 2). It is a belief system about the past. We do not have access to the past. We only have the present. All the fossils, all the living animals and plants, our planet, the universe — everything exists in the present. We cannot directly test the past using the scientific method (which involves repeating things and watching them happen) since all evidence that we have is in the present.
It is important to understand that special creation, by definition, is also a belief about the past. The difference is that creationists base their understanding of creation upon a book which claims to be the
Word of the One who was there
, who knows everything there is to know about everything, and who tells us what happened. Evolution comes from the words of men who
were not there
and who do not claim to be omniscient. This whole issue revolves around whether we believe the words of God who was there, or the words of fallible humans (no matter how qualified) who were not there.
It is astonishing in this so-called "scientific age" that so few people know what science really is or how it works. Many think of scientists as unbiased people in white laboratory coats objectively searching for the truth. However, scientists come in two basic forms, male and female, and they are just like you and me. They have beliefs and biases. A bias determines what you do with the evidence, especially the way in which you decide that certain evidence is more relevant or important than other evidence. Scientists are not objective truth seekers; they are not
neutral
.
Many people misunderstand bias, thinking that some individuals are biased and some are not. Consider an atheist, for example. Such a person believes there is no God. Can atheists entertain the question, "Did God create?" The answer is, "No." As soon as they even allow it as a question, they are no longer atheists. So, to an atheist scientist looking at the fossils and the world around him, it would not matter what evidence he were to find. It could have nothing to do with biblical events, such as Noah’s flood. Even if he found a big boat on the top of Mount Ararat he could never allow that evidence to support the claims of the Bible regarding Noah’s ark. As soon as he did, he would have abandoned his atheistic religious framework. An atheist is one hundred percent biased. This should be kept in mind wheneverone reads a textbook or sees a television program produced by an atheist.
I have seen many examples of bias exhibited in various ways. I was on a talk-back radio show in Denver, Colorado, and the radio announcer said I had seven minutes to give the evidence for creation. He would just sit back and listen. So I went into detail about what the Bible says concerning Noah’s flood, the Tower of Babel, and other related topics. I explained how evidence from various cultures and from the fossil record supported what the Bible said. Various other aspects of creation were explored to demonstrate the truth of the Bible. At the end of the seven minutes the announcer made this comment on the air, "Well, I didn’t hear any evidence for creation at all; so much for that!" Of course, what he meant was that he was not prepared to accept the evidence that I had given him because he wanted to hold on to his own bias — agnosticism. An agnostic is one hundred percent biased. He believes one cannot know anything for sure, so, no matter how much evidence he hears, he can still say, "I do not know." As soon as he knows, he has stopped being an agnostic. From a biblical perspective, Romans 1 teaches that the evidence for creation is all around us and, therefore, anyone who does not believe in the Creator and Saviour is condemned. It is also important to recognize that one does not have to see the Creator to recognize the fact of special creation. Just because one cannot see the architect and builder who designed and constructed a house does not mean that there was not an intelligent designer behind it.