Many modern Evangelicals, seeking to understand the Scriptures in ways which will not contradict science, and long eager to be viewed with respect by the enemies of the gospel, seem to be increasingly inventive in their interpretive contortions and contrivances when dealing with the account of Creation found in the Scriptures. The evangelical mouthpiece Christianity Today continues to print articles friendly to Darwinian evolution. In order to attempt to harmonize this with their stated belief in the Scriptures, these writers simply reinterpret the Bible texts to conform to changing scientific dogma — no matter how badly the rules of grammar and historic intent have to be twisted. Some things being set forth are outside the bounds of Biblical orthodoxy.
The October 2013 issue carried a feature entitled: “Where Did We Come From? How Milton, Paley, and Darwin Help Us Answer the Question.” It is written by Andrew J. Wilson, an elder of the Kings Church in Eastbourne, on the southern coast of England.
William Paley is mentioned because of his familiar watchmaker analogy which says that just as it is not rational to look at a watch and believe that all the parts just came together by accident, we can’t look at our world and think it was all assembled by mere chance. However, most of the discussion is saved for Milton and Darwin.
Wilson states: “For Milton, Adam and Eve were real people, created in the image of God.… The Apostle Paul, and Milton after him, clearly believed Adam was a historical figure. But modern genetics has added huge scientific weight to Darwin’s view, through the study of pseudogenes, ‘jumping genes,’ retroviral insertions, and so on.…”
Wilson asserts that “The first [the view of the Apostle Paul, which was held by Milton] leads to problems with science, and the second [Darwin’s view, which has ‘huge scientific weight’] leads to some big problems with Scripture.”
But do not be perplexed! Wilson offers the Christian “help” with this conundrum by means of a little fanciful thinking.
He writes: “There is no evidence to say that a pair of Neolithic farmers, formed directly by the hand of God in Mesopotamia, did not exist. There’s no evidence to suggest that they weren’t the first people, made in his image, with the soul-life of God breathed into them. There’s no evidence to contradict the claim that they knew God, and were tempted, and sinned, and were exiled, and had children, and died. Not only that, but Genesis doesn’t actually say that all human beings are biologically descended from Adam and Eve alone. The people Cain was scared of, and the woman he married, don’t seem to be related to him. And if they weren’t, then we don’t actually know if they were created out of the dust of the earth, created out of creatures that already existed, or created in some other way.
“So I don’t think Milton and Darwin are impossible to reconcile. In fact, I can’t think of anything Milton (or Genesis) says about Adam and Eve that is contradicted by Darwinian evolution, as strange as that sounds.”
Yes, Mr. Wilson, it does indeed sound very strange — and the rules of logic would dictate that if what you write is true, some very unorthodox conclusions must be drawn and the integrity of God’s Word is shattered. Just a few obvious concerns are:
- If some men were created “out of creatures that already existed, or created in some other way,” how do any of us know whether we are descended from Adam or from some creature?
- If we are not all descended from Adam, are some of us exempt from the wrath and curse of God, due to Adam’s sin and his federal headship over his descendants?
- Are some of us without the need of a Saviour?
- Since Paul taught in the Scriptures that Adam was an actual man and the father of the ENTIRE human race (as Mr. Wilson admits), any other view (such as Mr. Wilson’s surmisings) would place Paul in serious error and would make the Scriptures to be totally untrustworthy.
Scientific study has revealed some very amazing things about our universe. These things can help us see more fully what the Scriptures teach concerning God’s creation. However, to twist the plain teaching of the Scriptures beyond recognition, to supposedly conform to every hypothesis and theory which “the scientific community” may espouse at any given time, is a great offense to science as well as to the Scriptures. •