A
young Christian had written to the Biologos
Foundation website that he no longer knows what to believe. Consequently,
he is now suicidal. A “moderator” on this theistic evolution website responded:
·
Let's be honest. Any foundation for "why
Christianity is true" can ultimately be deconstructed. There is no
argument or proof that can get you from skepticism to faith. At the end of the
day, Jesus is Lord, or he isn't. But you are only going to be convinced Jesus
is Lord by personally encountering Jesus. There is no path to Jesus via
science, logic, or philosophy.
This is very typical thinking for a Christian who has given
herself over to marrying evolution with the Bible. In the process, she has
compromised the Bible so severely. As a result of evolutionary indoctrination,
the theistic evolutionist (TE) believe that it is historically and scientifically
inaccurate and that, therefore, there is no longer any way to prove the Bible’s
claims.
Generally, we prove the unknown or the uncertain by what we
already know as fact. However, the TE has gutted the Bible of any defense for
its truth claims by claiming that the Bible only speaks authoritatively in
areas of theology and spirituality and not when it speaks about the physical
world.
Consequently, Christianity has been reduced to a blind leap
into the darkness of uncertainty where the only comfort available is “personally
encountering Jesus.” This represents a rejection of the life of the mind and
evidences (which have already been surrendered to evolution) for feelings. The
Christian, therefore, is left to think:
·
My faith is no more valid that the faith of
others, who also claim that their feelings or mystical experiences have
validated their particular brand of faith.
Once we have abandoned the life of the mind, life is reduced
to a confusing, uncertain, and truncated existence, perhaps even to a suicidal
existence. Instead, we require cognitive assurances. Paul wrote that God had
provided teachers and preachers so that the believer would no longer live in an
unstable and insecure land of shadows:
·
…to equip the saints for the work of ministry,
for building up the body of Christ, until we all attain to the unity of the
faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure
of the stature of the fullness of Christ, so that we may no longer be children,
tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by
human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. (Ephesians 4:12-14)
When we reach a point where we know what we believe and why
we believe it, we find great riches. Paul, therefore, prayed that we’d attain:
·
…all the riches of full assurance of
understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, which is Christ, in whom are
hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. (Colossians 2:2-3)
According to the TE moderator, a “full assurance of
understanding” is not possible. Instead, we are condemned to the darkness of
uncertainty.
Interestingly, the moderator’s position is essentially the
same as that of another evolutionist, Richard Dawkins:
·
Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to
evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of,
even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.
However, this statement does not at all capture of
robustness of a Biblical faith. The Bible NEVER instructs us to take a blind
leap of faith. Instead, it consistently admonishes us to embrace the light of
truth and its supporting evidences. For example, Moses had reasoned with the
Israelites:
·
Has any god ever tried to take for himself one
nation out of another nation, by testings, by miraculous signs and wonders, by
war, by a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, or by great and awesome deeds,
like all the things the Lord your God did for you in Egypt before your very
eyes? You were shown these things so that you might know that the Lord
is God; besides him there is no other. (Deut. 4:34-35)
Israel simply had to recall the evidences. Moses did not
insist upon any mental gymnastics in order to believe. Jesus even counseled
that He shouldn’t be believed without the supporting evidences:
·
"If I [alone] testify about myself, my
testimony is not valid.” (John 5:31)
He then went on to provide supporting evidences: the
testimony of Scripture, John the Baptist, the Father’s miraculous
confirmations, and Jesus’ miracles:
·
“Do not believe me unless I do what my Father
does. Even though you do not believe me, believe the miracles, that you may
know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father." (John
10:37-38)
·
If I had not done among them what no one else
did, they would not be guilty of sin. But now they have seen these miracles,
and yet they have hated both me and my Father. (John 15:24).
Jesus had even given His disciples a regular diet of the miraculous
to support their faith, for example:
·
"I am telling you now before it happens, so
that when it does happen you will believe that I am He.” (John 13:19; 14:28-29)
However, the moderator (and Biologos) claims that “There is
no argument or proof that can get you from skepticism to faith.” However,
without proof and hard evidence, Christianity would have remained a mere relic
on the dump-heap of history:
·
After his suffering, he showed himself to these
men and gave many convincing proofs that he was alive. He appeared to them over
a period of forty days and spoke about the kingdom of God. (Acts 1:3; 2:22)
Even today, we have many historical evidences for the fact
of the resurrection. However, the moderator claimed that “Any foundation for ‘why
Christianity is true’ can ultimately be deconstructed” and, consequently, is
insubstantial. If this is so, how can we explain the fact that many atheistic
scientists have become theists and even Christians based on the evidence of
science?
The leading atheist of the 20th century, Antony
Flew, confessed that the evidence had led him to believe that there must be an
intelligent Designer:
·
Almost entirely because of the DNA
investigations. What I think the DNA material has done is that it has shown, by
the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to
produce (life), that intelligence must have been involved in getting these
extraordinarily diverse elements to work together. It’s the enormous complexity
of the number of elements and the enormous subtlety of the ways they work
together. The meeting of these two parts at the right time by chance is simply
minute. It is all a matter of the enormous complexity by which the results were
achieved, which looked to me like the work of intelligence.” (Antony Flew with
Roy Varghese, “There is a God: How The World’s Most Notorious Atheist Changed
His Mind,” 75).
Reviewer Lita Cosner pointed out that:
·
Flew was particularly impressed with a
physicist’s refutation of the idea that monkeys at typewriters would eventually
produce a Shakespearean sonnet. The likelihood of getting one Shakespearean
sonnet by chance is one in 10690; to put this number in perspective, there are
only 1080 particles in the universe. Flew concludes: “If the theorem won’t work
for a single sonnet, then of course it’s simply absurd to suggest that the more
elaborate feat of the origin of life could have been achieved by chance.” (78)
Instead of the Christian truth claims having been “deconstructed,”
it was Flew’s atheism and belief in the claims of evolution. Perhaps, Biologos
and the TE also need their faith in evolution deconstructed.
No comments:
Post a Comment