‘Theistic evolution’ is nonsense

By JAKE
MOKRIS
On Feb. 12, many churches in the United States held an Evolution Sunday, stating that Christianity and evolution are compatible. But that belief is not theologically sound.
The Bible gives two points that relate to this issue: First, since God created the universe and gave us the Bible, facts about the universe will not contradict the Bible’s teaching. God cannot tell us one thing in the universe, and lie to us about the same thing in what he says in the Bible. That is impossible, for God is perfect.


Second, the Bible gives an account of how God made the universe. Unless you read Genesis with a large and inappropriate bias, the account supports creationism and goes against evolution.
Since the Bible says that evolution did not occur, and facts about the universe never contradict the Bible’s teaching, evolutionists must be wrong in some point: The evolutionists have interpreted the universe and scientific evidence incorrectly. There are two ways around this argument. One is to say that creationists have interpreted the Bible incorrectly, and that Genesis supports evolution. As I said before, this is most likely incorrect. The second way is for evolutionists to argue that Christianity is false, but that is a different topic.
Evolution is not as proven as evolutionists claim. Scientists have been wrong before; they believed for more than a millennium that the sun went around the earth. Christians must not be convinced so easily by scientists that the Bible is wrong in some points. Not only can scientists be incorrect, they can also be biased against Christianity.
If Christians say that the Genesis account of creation is merely a fable, then they invite people to cut up the Bible until only the desirable passages are left. And if Christians change their interpretation of Genesis to one that fits modern science but is almost certainly not what Genesis says, then they deny that the Bible is completely true. Both are destructive to the whole of Christianity. Christianity and evolution are just not compatible, and to combine them goes against theology and logic.
The heart of the theory of evolution is the idea that natural causes have creative power, while the Bible says that God alone created the universe. Theistic evolution combines these contradictory ideas, and most people look over the combination and its strange results.
If God has the power to create the whole universe and the natural processes that exist in the universe, as theistic evolutionists claim, no one can seriously restrict his creative power. Why can’t God create the universe in six days, as he says in His Bible? Why must God use evolution to create life? More importantly, who has the right to say that God used evolution to create life, when God clearly says he didn’t? If Christians believe in the omnipotent God of the Bible, shouldn’t they agree with God instead of with evolutionists?
I can make this argument even more interesting by turning it upside-down: If, as theistic evolutionists claim, natural causes have the power to evolve an organism that already exists, why can’t natural causes create an organism out of non-life? Why do natural causes require a God to work? Many evolutionists believe that God does not exist, that life can and did evolve from non-life. Their evidence for this has the same status as the evidence for the evolution of life into organisms that exist now. When do we believe the Bible, and when do we believe the scientists?
These questions reveal large holes in theistic evolution. Of course, theistic evolution is not discounted by the existence of other ways that the universe could have come about. Theistic evolution fails because it forces a choice between the Bible and science. This gives humans the job of choosing what is true and what is false. But mankind cannot choose what it wants to be true; it can only look and see what the truth is.
Jake Mokris is a homeschooled student and member of the Teen Takeover staff.

About Scott Fisher

I'm opinion page editor and blogging coordinator for the York Daily Record/Sunday News and Yorkblog.com. Phone: 717-771-2049. Email: sfisher@ydr.com. Twitter: twitter.com/YDReditpage.
This entry was posted in Rants. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to ‘Theistic evolution’ is nonsense

  1. Stephen Douglas says:

    Mr. Mokris, I do agree with your statement that GOD IS PERFECT,no question about that. However, God did not write the bible, it was handed down thru several writer’s & on down for more revisions, I have my own thought’s on evolution, & I do beleive that without actual fact that evolution was possible to a certain degree. Just like scientest have been fooling around with cloning, I don’t beleive that God will interfere. I beleive God can do anything, ie. Sodome & Gamora, God had enough. And I am sure this is highly spectulative, I have alway’s beleived God caused AID’S, for the Bible states Man shall not lay next to Man. And I do beleive that God had seen enough. There is still no scientific evidence to show what did cause it, however, anyone can get some pretty strong stuff if reading a lot & thinking ” WHAT WOULD GOD DO “. Very well written.

  2. Karen says:

    my only question for you is where in the Bible does it say that God said that the Bible was the infalliable word of God?
    I have never found that passage.
    As a Christian in today’s society that puts much credence and weight on the written word I find my biggest stumbling block not to be science, but to be reminding myself that the trinity is the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit… not the Holy Scripture.
    Please when speaking on theology remember that disagreements and even schisms don’t make those on either side “better” Christians than the other. Just those who approach their faith differently. Just because you can’t wrap your head around why I believe in theistic evolution doesn’t mean that either of us is correct and the other wrong. It just means that more thought and effort should be put into the matter.

  3. Paul Elliott says:

    Mr. Mokris is to be commended for his insightful article.
    Every viewpoint has a starting point. Some starting points are correct; others are incorrect. The evolutionary viewpoint (whether theistic or non-theistic) starts with the notion that there is no authoritative standard of truth. The creationist viewpoint starts with the proposition that there is an infallible standard of truth, and that this standard is the Bible.
    The Bible tells us that it is the only infallible source of truth; it is the only book that makes this claim. Why does it make such a claim? Because it tells us that the author of the entire Book is God Himself. “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God (in the original Greek, ‘God-breathed’) and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16). What does it mean for the Bible to be “God-breathed”? 2 Peter 1:21 tells us that nothing in Scripture was written by a mere act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke the very words of God. The God who wrote the Bible cannot lie (Titus 1:2). Scripture also makes it very clear in a number of places (e.g., Galatians 3:16) that God has been exceedingly careful in the choice of words in Scripture. God chose the Hebrew word “yom” for “day” in Genesis — a word that always means a literal day when used with an ordinal (“first day”, “second day”, “third day”, etc.). God could have chosen other Hebrew words that would have been open to interpretation as long ages, or “days” of unspecified length, but He chose to use the word “yom” specifically.
    We either accept these facts or we do not. In doing so, we either take God at His word or we do not. We accept the testimony of infallible God, the only eye-witness to creation; or we accept the testimony of fallible men, whose theories about origins are constantly shifting as one by one they are continually disproven. But if we accept the Biblical facts, they lead logically and inevitably to the conclusion that the account of creation given in Genesis is literal, factual and accurate.

  4. Dr. Jeffery Sheely says:

    Jake Mokris has written an excellent article on creationism and evolution. His arguments are sound and they should cause anyone who reads them to give serious thought to the validity of theistic evolution.
    The immensity and complexity of the universe should cause anyone to doubt the truth of evolution. The alignment of the planets and all the workings of the universe are so precise that the slightest change would bring chaos. Do you really think that random evolution could bring such order and intelligent design?
    Life is too complex to have developed from evolutionary means. Plant and animal diversity and the complexity of man are just too much for random occurrence.
    The Bible tells us in the book of Genesis that God created the simple to the complex, in that order. Man was His greatest creation, and He breathed into him a soul that made him different from all the rest of His creation.
    The pre-incarnate Jesus Christ was involved in this creation. Colossians 1:16 says, “For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible…”

  5. KenBob says:

    “Evolution is not as proven as evolutionists claim. Scientists have been wrong before; they believed for more than a millennium that the sun went around the earth. Christians must not be convinced so easily by scientists that the Bible is wrong in some points. Not only can scientists be incorrect, they can also be biased against Christianity….”
    –Funny how Christians can be so blinded by the light they claim to see. Wasn’t the astronomer Copernicus accused of heresy by the Church for daring to propose that the Earth went around the Sun? I guess we forgot that one, eh? Likewise for Galileo who was imprisoned and whose books were banned during the Inquisition because they conflicted with the Bible. Who is biased against whom? If the Bible can’t be wrong, then you must still believe that the Earth does not move and that science has it all wrong….whoops, I guess Einstein will have to go back to the drawing board. The infallible Pope John Paul himself admitted that the Church was wrong about Galileo. Science is the search for the unbiased truth. Science evolves and so does nature…..hopefully more Christians will too.

  6. Kathy says:

    Actually, the Bible was not wrong with regards to Copernicus or Galileo’s views. The church was wrong, not the Bible. There’s a difference. The Bible speaks about the earth in the same way as weather forecasters do – by observation, as man would see it. We know that the sun does not rise or set, yet that’s the way that the weatherman reports it everyday.
    Christians do not need to evolve. They need to understand and gain tools for interpretting the Bible. In our culture, people believe what they want to believe, but they don’t have a sound basis for their beliefs or decisions about them. They worship God as they want Him to be, not as He is, and they create their religion without regards to sound logic, teaching, or theology.
    Christians need to get off the fence and either believe the God of the Bible or believe evolution. You can’t have it both ways, no matter how many churches say that you can.

  7. Phil says:

    Two questions for Jake:
    1. Does the earth revolve around the sun or the sun around the earth (per the Bible)?
    2. When do you and your friends do your animal sacrifices (per Leviticus Chapters 1-11)? I would like to watch.

  8. Jake says:

    Phil asked two questions in his comment; here are my answers:
    1. “Does the earth revolve around the sun or the sun around the earth (per the Bible)?”
    The Bible does not say whether the earth revolves around the sun or the sun revolves around the earth. The Bible does talk about the sun rising and setting, as Kathy says in one of the previous comments. The weather channel also gives the times of sunrise and of sunset. The literary term for this is phenomenological language; phenomenological language is language that refers to how an event looks to the people that observe it. When I watch the sun, I see it moving in the sky. The earth is actually moving, but from what I see, the sun is moving. I am using phenomenological language, describing an event as I see it. Phenomenological language is not the same as scientific statements. And the Genesis account is not phenomenological language, because humans did not observe it, and the passage gives the account as fact.
    2. “When do you and your friends do your animal sacrifices (per Leviticus Chapters 1-11)?”
    Hebrews 10 says: “For the law [ceremonial and sacrificial law, given in Leviticus] having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. [...] For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. [...] But this Man [Jesus], after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.”
    We no longer offer sacrifices, for Jesus has fulfilled the sacrificial system, which represented Jesus’s sacrificial death on the cross. The Israelites had to practice the sacrificial system before Jesus came (and that is why God gave the system to the Israelites in Leviticus), but since Jesus fulfilled the system, we do not offer sacrifices.
    Phil seems to imply that the belief that the Bible is completely true leads to contradictions. However, the Bible does not contradict itself: if the so-called contradictions are examined further, they turn out not to be contradictions at all, as my answers to his questions show.

  9. KenBob says:

    –Just as someone today would be thought a lunatic to suggest that the Sun revolves around the Earth or that the Earth is flat, a century from now people who deny the existence of evolution will be thought of as equally absurd. When that day comes, I guarantee Christianity will reinterpret the Bible to fit the science. Invariable Biblical scholars will claim that the Bible never explicitly or literally supported Creationism and that such an idea was only a misguided interpretation of the Bible by man. The Christian of the future will quite happily believe in God AND evolution –no fence sitting necessary.

  10. Tim Gerber says:

    This whole article is ludicrous. It is based on the alleged idea that the Bible is infallible. The Bible condones slavery and the stoning of a child who doesn’t adhere to his parents’ beliefs.
    Does Mr. Mokris agree with that? We have enough problems in this country without such juvenile comments. We don’t need a revival of the Inquisition in this country!

  11. Katie says:

    Good article, Jake. You made a good point- if the Bible is wrong in it’s first book, it might as well be cut to pieces.
    Have you checked into much of the scientific evidence supporting creation and discrediting evolution? I don’t know if you’ve ever heard of Kent Hovind, but he’s got a lot of great information on the scientific (and theologial!) aspects of the issue. He’s coming to the Dover High school March 17 and 18 at 6:30 p.m. and 10:00 a.m., respectively.
    I think you’d really enjoy it, whether you’ve seen any of his videos or not. Our family is going. Hope to see you there!
    Karen, The Holy Word is part of the trinity. It is Jesus Christ.
    (John 1:1 says, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:14 reads, “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us.” 1 John 5:7 says, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”)
    This is why the WORD (including the Genesis account of creation) is of utmost importance.
    The Bible also says that every word of God is pure, therefore it cannot be fallible.
    Kenbob, When you mentioned the “Church’s” views, you failed to add that you were talking of the Catholic church, which has persecuted God’s true people throughout the ages. Real Christians who have access to the Bible have always known that the earth was round, etc. Neither did Jake say that the pope was infallible.
    ~*~ Katie ~*~

  12. Katie says:

    I didn’t get to say everything I wanted to on my last post.
    I’m a teen (a home-schooled one I might add), so I can go on a “rant” here if I want to, right?
    My grandma, who claims the Bible literally, believes in the gap theory. While that theory isn’t exactly theistic “evolution,” it is very close. We’ve talked her into coming to Kent Hovind’s seminar so she will hopefully better understand the facts.
    I think the reason many people believe in theistic evolution is because evolution in general is taught as if it were fact is so many venues (i.e. – books, TV, etc.). They don’t want to be thought of as being unscientific and “blind” believers in the Bible, so they go with the mixed theory.
    I really believe if more people could get their hands on the facts supporting young earth creation, they’d give up on the unsupported theory of evolution altogether. Isn’t it amazing how people are always saying evolution is SO proven, and has SO many facts supporting it, but we rarely ever see even a little evidence?
    There is a $250,000 reward for anyone who can provide empirical evidence proving evolution. It’s been a standing offer for at least a year that I know of, and hasn’t found anyone to give it to yet. For more info on the offer, check our drdino.com and search the site for $250,000.
    I think that’s all I want to say for now.
    ~*~ Katie ~*~

  13. Chris Becker says:

    Stephen Douglas said — “However, God did not write the bible, it was handed down thru several writer’s & on down for more revisions”
    First, Paul Elliot quoted 2 Timothy 3:16, and I believe that dictation is a valid way of writing.
    Second, I believe that the problem you have with the Bible being handed down through many different scribes (no book was re-written) is from the game “telephone”, where you sit in a circle and whisper somthing around and it is somthing different at the end. However it is a bit different when it comes to the coping down written words by monks and others. They may mistake one word or character, but it is not like they are reading it and writing their own version. Anyone who wanted to sabotage the Bible would probably burn it instead of just trying to change a word or two. I would be supprised by the commonality in the many versions of the Bible in English today if there was as much changing done as you assume. I tell you I have 12 versions of the Bible on my computer, plus my NIV, and they all say the same thing– God created in six days, veggies before the sun and stars.
    KenBob said “–Just as someone today would be thought a lunatic to suggest that the Sun revolves around the Earth or that the Earth is flat, a century from now people who deny the existence of evolution will be thought of as equally absurd.”
    Actually Einstein would agree that the Sun does revolve around the earth and that the Earth is flat, from a certian viewpoint. If you come into this argument assuming that Christianity is absurd, then it may remain absurd to you, but unlike Einstein and Relitivity, one or the other is true and we cannot simply let them coexist as “Theistic evolution”.
    I also have to agree that anyone who does not agree with evolution is absurd. That is microevolution which is a scientifically proven fact, cells can, by mutation and inheritance, have decendants that have minor differences in their DNA. This is far from proving Particle to Person evolution, especially because it gives no idea of how the first cell, or even self-reproducing particle, came about.
    Tim Gerber said —
    “The Bible condones slavery and the stoning of a child who doesn’t adhere to his parents’ beliefs.”
    Did you know that the bible also places a 7-year limit on slavery (in the OT), and it definitaly does not condone it in the new testament, in fact it deals not with the problem of owning a slave as much as the problem of relating to everyone you meet, whether they be slave, roman, jew, gentile, christian, non-christian, in a maner that is loving and compassionate.
    I bet you also hate the idea of communism, don’t you. That is because it has been beaten into your head that all forms of slavery, communism, and Christianity are wrong and that Evolution is right.
    I also fail to remember any passage where a father stoned a child for any theological disagrement, and I believe you are refering to the general use of capital punishment by the Hebrews. Governments use capital punishment today as they did then. Someone could leave Isreal and not be under their laws just like we can be what we want to be today. Anyway, that is in the OT, before Jesus’ sacrificial death on the cross. In the NT there is no real mention of how a government should use capital punishment, and there is definatly no capital punishment on children!
    Christianity does not accept Evolution, Evolution truly wants nothing to do with Christianity. Why do people even try to find a common ground when the basic premise of each contradicts the other? Science cannot tell me my last thought and Science cannot tell me if God created or if we are all just meaningless things waiting to end. Everyone must look to faith for that. I believe that there is a God, and I believe that the Christian God, as described in the Bible, is the most logical, and I have come to know Him through His Son. However, I will listen to any attempt to discredit my faith if someone would like to offer some hard evidence against what Jake is saying. If someone can find some verse or passage in the Bible that offers room for Evolution, I will listen. As for now, I am standing on my faith as Evolutionists must stand on their’s.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>