Creation and the Gospel message


The day is approaching when the Church at large will recognise that what Christians believe about origins is very important for what Christians believe about everything else. The voices which have declared that creation is a non-issue for Christians are growing fainter. There was a time when Christians said that complementarity solves all the problems: `the perspectives provided by the Bible are wholly complementary to the perspectives provided by the theory of evolution. No theological truth is affected'. In the BCS Creation Manifesto, we have sought to identify fundamental doctrines that are affected by our beliefs about origins - we have not found the complementarity approach helpful for our understanding of the early chapters of Genesis (the first book in The Bible).

The Church of England Newspaper (October 21, 1994, page 7) has an article by Rev Dr Tom Ambrose entitled Just a pile of old bones? . Ambrose has been a professional geologist and is now Director of Communications for the diocese of Ely. The discovery of Australopithecus ramidus stimulated him to write: `When will the Church really "come clean" about evolution? Recent reports of the discovery of one more "Missing Link" between Homo sapiens and the higher primates forces everyone to face up to a question which some Christians have been ducking for the last 100 years.'

What then, according to Ambrose, are the theological implications of accepting evolutionary theory? In brief, we must no longer maintain that death is a punishment for sin; the Fall was not a historic event - God made the world as it is; Adam did not have a perfect relationship with God before he sinned - and salvation is not to be seen as a restoration of such a harmonious relationship. Since the Church's major confessions of faith affirm these disputed teachings, Ambrose's assertions are worthy of more than a passing comment.

1. Death and sin. `Fossils are the remains of creatures that lived and died over a billion years before Homo sapiens evolved. Death is as old as life itself by all but a split second. Can it therefore be God's punishment for sin?' From a Christian teacher, we expect to find reference here to the Word of God - but readers of Ambrose's article are not told what the Bible has to say on the matter. Surely it is right to refer to Genesis chapter 2 verses 16 to 17 which links sin and human death? Genesis chapter 3 verse 17 to 19 leaves us in no doubt that the promised retribution was carried out. Romans chapter 2 verse 12 and chapter 6 verse 23 make it clear that this teaching is not peripheral to the Christian message.

2. The Fall and history. `The fossil record demonstrates that some form of evil has existed throughout time... There never was a time when death appeared, or a moment when the evil changed the nature of the universe.' Yet Romans chapter 5 verses 12 and 17 indicate that the consequence of the Fall are as momentous for our understanding of spiritual things as the consequences of Christ's death. Ambrose's article seems to bypass the real issues completely!

3. Man's relationship to God - fellowship lost and restored. `People try to tell us that Adam had a perfect relationship with God until he sinned, and all we need to do is to repent and accept Jesus in order to restore that original relationship. But perfection like this never existed. There never was such a world. Trying to return to it, either in reality or spiritually, is a delusion. Unfortunately, it is still central to much evangelical preaching.' Is the Biblical message so obscure? What is the Bible saying to us when it describes God meeting and speaking with Adam (Genesis chapter 2 verses 15 to 17; chapter 3 verses 8 to 19)? What is the significance of our first parents being banished from Eden (Genesis chapter 3 verse 23)? Restoration of fellowship with God is one of the blessings the redeemed have in Christ (Romans chapter 8 verses 12 to 17; 2 Corinthians chapter 5 verses 17 to 21; Ephesians chapter 1 verse 17 to 19). Ambrose's article is disturbing because it does not even begin to address the New Testament teaching on the reconciling work of Jesus Christ.

The reason for considering the theological implications of evolutionary explanations of origins is that Christians do need to `come clean' as Ambrose says. Ambrose finds it necessary to sacrifice much that Christians have held dear over the centuries - because he accepts `the obvious truths of science'. What do we think? There are too many people who still say that no significant point of doctrine is affected by evolution. Ambrose's first sentence is the only one I can feel positive about: `When will the Church really "come clean" about evolution?' It is time to grasp the nettle. It is time to proclaim to the world what the Bible teaches about origins. It is time to show the fallacies in treating evolution as science! Mail us to find out if there are any creation meetings in your area. Explore this site to become more informed about these issues.

David J. Tyler (1994)

******

Return to the Introductory level articles Page
Return to the BCS Home Page


Copyright © 1996 The Biblical Creation Society
The serial number of this page is S/N: BCS-03-H-47
This page was last modified 24 April 1996