Creation Matters

Creation matters—that is, belief in creation as it is presented in Genesis is foundational to our faith. Currently we have two prevailing sources of information concerning the origins of the world and some people see the need to reconcile them. The religious community points to God as the source of creation while the scientific community points to evolution as a way of explaining creation. The problem is both communities can offer persuasive explanations so people do not want to discredit either. This leads to the question, “Could God have used evolution as a way of creating life as we see it on earth?” People do not want to decide between religion and science so they try to combine the two by incorporating evolution in to creation. This unfortunately presents some problems.

The concept of God using evolution as a part of creation is commonly referred to as theistic evolution. Occasionally it is also called intelligent design; however intelligent design can also refer to studies and research in creation without the inclusion of evolutionary theory. Whichever way you label it, the acceptance of evolutionary theory creates several theological problems, or problems with our view of God and His relationship with the world. First it distorts the place of God in creation. Second it has implications about the role of sin and death. And finally, it has major implications on morality. Let’s evaluate each of these problems individually.

First we must note that there are several variations of theistic evolution. One suggests that God used natural forces in all aspects of creation. Basically God designed the natural laws and then let nature do all the work. This would mean God used secondary forces to do everything. For example: the creation of the continents happened through tectonics and life evolved from a collection of amino acids and proteins into the complexity we find today. God let nature work everything out without getting involved Himself.

A second variation, called front-loaded creation, says that God placed all of the potential for the diversity of life into the first single-celled organism and then allowed evolution to fill the earth with the diversity of life we see today through natural selection. This approach emphasizes evolution as a tool of God.

Besides negating the clear biblical account of creation presented in Genesis, both of these theories take God out of the center of creation. They paint God as uninvolved. God is now aloof to human affairs. He is no longer the sustainer of life. He has now only provided the opportunities for life instead of creating it Himself. These theories do not account for God interacting in human history. This is a major problem because we have records of God miraculously intervening in history throughout the entire Bible.

Interaction with our history is one way God reveals Himself. God personally set the plagues on Egypt and parted the Red Sea to rescue Israel from slavery. God delivered Jonah to Nineveh by appointing a giant fish to swallow him. Our salvation is founded upon God being involved with his creation. He came to earth as a human being in Jesus Christ to redeem us from our sins. How much more involved can you get? If you take away God’s involvement with creation, you take away salvation.

There is a third variation of theistic evolution that attempts to solve this problem; it is described as descent with design. What this means is that God used evolution as a tool for creating life but still finds places to reveal Himself and interact with history. This theory is just another attempt to reconcile “science” with religion.

While this theory tries to keep God involved with creation throughout history it still negates the Biblical account in Genesis which presents the seven days of creation. This theory also tends to make God a god of the gaps. This means that God is only the explanation for everything we cannot explain with science. This may sound good at first but we soon find out God’s dominion erodes. As technology advances and we discover more about our world there is less we cannot explain and thus God gets smaller and smaller. With this assumption, God diminishes as technology increases. This theory again displaces God from His intimate involvement in all of creation.

All three of these theories also hold a misunderstanding about death. All three theories assume there was death before Adam and Eve’s fall into sin. You cannot have evolution without death. Evolution requires the diversity of life to develop through countless generations of progress through the means of death. This again clearly contradicts the Genesis account. Genesis 3 contains the consequences for the fall. Verse 19 says we are dust and to dust we shall return. The actuality of death is just then being established. God pronounced it as the punishment for eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. This happens after creation not before or during. Evolution requires death before the fall.

If you accept theistic evolution you distort the role of death in our lives. With evolution death is no longer a punishment, it is a necessity. Evolution changes death from a consequence to a means. This is contrary to our faith. Death is the enemy; death takes away life. Evolution views death as a means for creating new life.

This realization leads to the final consequence evolutionary theory has on religion. Evolution can become a slippery-slope. It starts with an attempt to explain aspects of life. It tries to account for the diversity in life. It uses the means of natural selection, or survival of the fittest, as its catalyst for change or progress. When that means is carried to its logical conclusion it has severe implications for morality and ethics in society. If the motivation behind life is now adaptation and the progression of life into better, more capable forms, then we have to make some changes to the way we view the world. With evolution as the source for life, death becomes a means of perpetuation. This makes abortion and euthanasia desirable means to carry out the next stage in the life process. We should no longer devote time and resources to caring for those who are afflicted with disease or disfigurement. People with disabilities are now devalued. Anyone who does not measure up to the standard is no longer human.

Adolf Hitler was employing this idea when he began to slaughter Jews, people of African ancestry, and individuals with disabilities. Hitler was trying to create a master race by weeding out all the “undesirables” of society. He was trying to force an evolutionary change. This is the logical end to evolutionary theory. The world becomes amoral, the preservation of life is no longer a virtue; it is a hindrance. This sounds a bit extreme but we have a clear case in history where it is the truth.

So why does this happen? Why do people try to reconcile evolutionary theory with the religious explanation? It starts with good, devote intentions. Many people who promote theistic evolution believe they are protecting God. They see aspects of nature they cannot immediately understand so they try to synthesize a theory to protect God from scrutiny. Thinking that God needs to be protected or that there are aspects of creation that God did not ordain, limits the power and wisdom of God. It puts God in a box. “Protecting” God elevates man’s wisdom over God’s. God is omniscient, He knows everything. He is omnipotent, He is all powerful. He is in control. He does not need us to defend him. God has implemented a plan that includes every aspect of creation, even the things we have not discovered yet. He knows what He is doing far better than we do. We must let Him be God and we must be content as His creatures. We need His help, He does not need ours.

“Putting God in a box” is what leads many evolutionists to atheism. They cannot understand why God would design so many similarities into very different animals; like the commonality of a five “fingered” appendage, or all DNA being made up of the same four proteins. Some cannot understand why God would leave apparently useless material inside his creation; like the human appendix or “junk” DNA. They see these things in nature and it does not fit with their conception of God. It is not how they believe God should have created the world. So instead of changing their view of God to being truly all powerful and all knowing, they simply conclude that He does not exist. This is the fundamental argument for atheists who promote evolutionary theory. They claim this is an argument based on scientific research but in actuality it is a theological argument. They are making claims about God not claims about science.

Evolutionary theory presents struggles for some people’s faith so they try to incorporate it into their faith. This is a fatal mistake. By incorporating evolution into faith we take God out of creation, we negate the consequences of sin, and we destroy morality. Instead of catering to the “scientific community” we must trust in God and realize that He is God. He has it all worked out. He has provided for us by getting involved in creation as our savior. Evolution breaks down the foundation of our faith because it is based on a flawed perspective. Science and research are great vocations and tools but they must be viewed in the appropriate light of trusting in God.

Milk and Honey: The Promises of God

Deuteronomy 26:9 “He brought us to this place and gave us this land, a land flowing with milk and honey;”

As I stumbled upon this verse the other day I began thinking about the promises God makes to His people. It occurred to me that God’s promises always have some kind of salvation attached to them. This one is about having a “land” for the people to call their own. They have salvation from the harsh living environment of wandering in the wilderness.

But there is more to this promise than just the land. The land is described to have an abundance of “milk and honey.” So what do these things have to do with salvation? How do milk and honey play into God’s greater plan of salvation? To answer these questions we must realize what milk and honey do for us.

Milk is a very valuable source of nourishment. When we are first born milk gives us everything we need as far as nutrition. This one food source is all the sustenance we need. As we grow, milk continues to sustain us. Milk provides the basic nutrients we need to produce strong bones and a healthy body. Milk is a continued blessing of life sustaining nourishment.

Honey, on the other hand, is not a source of all the nourishment we need. Honey is sweet—it tastes good and has some nutritional value but you could not survive on honey alone. However, honey has one thing going for it that no other food does. Honey does not spoil. Honey is the only food that does not go bad. Archaeologists find honeycombs in the Egyptian pyramids that are thousands of years old. The honey in these combs is crystallized but when heated it is just as good as new. People have eaten honey that is thousands of years old and it is still good!

Now that we know a little about milk and honey we can relate these two food stuffs to some of God’s blessings. Remember God’s promises are attached to salvation in some way. In this case food provides salvation from starvation. We need food to stay alive. This is obvious but I believe we can look at these two types of food that have been attached to God’s promise of land in a way that provides more insight into our salvation.

Our salvation—that is our forgiveness from sins—was won for us on the cross by Christ. But how do we get that salvation? How does God distribute forgiveness? The answer is with the sacraments—Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. The sacraments are the places where God promised salvation can be found. I think we can correlate milk and honey to the sacraments.

Bear with me here.

The Lord’s Supper is like milk. It repeatedly gives us the nourishment we need to continue to grow and sustain our lives (our saving faith). It is a habitual reception of God Himself as Christ’s body and blood are present in the sacrament. The Lord’s Supper continually nourishes us with the forgiveness our sins. We do it over and over throughout our lives as a continual source of God’s grace—our nourishment.

Honey is like Baptism. It never goes bad. Baptism is God’s sweet promise of salvation. As Peter tells us, “Baptism now saves you.” (1 Peter 3:21). This is a promise of God that never goes bad. This is why we do not need to be re-baptized. God’s promises are faithful—they stand forever. Likewise, God’s promise in Baptism never goes bad. It is a onetime adoption into God’s family. This is great news! But why do we provide sponsors with Baptism? Why is there also an aspect of ongoing instruction and teaching attached to Baptism?

Baptism is like Honey. It is a sweet promise that never goes bad, but because of our sinful nature we often need more nourishment than God’s honey provides. We need to be constantly reminded of God’s promise. We need to have our sins forgiven over and over. Baptism does save us but our sinful nature causes us to walk away from God’s promise. Let me stress that point: we walk away from God, He never walks away from us—His promise never goes bad.

This is how God’s promises work together. Milk and honey (The Lord’s Supper and Baptism) work together to deliver God’s salvation to us. Baptism is God’s ever present promise of salvation to us. And what could be sweeter than salvation? The Lord’s Supper is our continued nourishment of God’s forgiveness that keeps us growing and sustained in our faith. God truly does promise us salvation. One faithful promise of grace for all time—Baptism, and one faithful promise of ongoing nourishment—The Lord’s Supper. God’s promises surely are trustworthy because the promised land of faith certainly is flowing with both milk and honey.