CREATION: THE FOUNDATION OF THE GOSPEL

adapted from an article by

John Rendle-Short

M.A., M.D.

Used with the kind permission of the Creation Science Movement, 50 Brecon Avenue, Cosham, Portsmouth, England, P06 2AW.

I asked a young British woman of about 22 whether she had been taught evolution at school. She replied, “No.” Had her teachers talked about the earth being millions of years old? “Oh, yes.” Had she been taught about ape-men? “Yes.” I talked to a well-known evangelical minister. “Creation isn't an issue in my church,” he told me. I spoke to a member of the Church of England Synod: “I've never really given it much thought. Some years ago I discussed evolution with [an evangelical scientist] and he said the book of Nature and the book of Genesis said much the same thing.” Altogether, I have discovered little spontaneous interest in creation among English Christians - no particular antagonism, just apathy.

This contrasts vividly with the situation in Australia. There, Christians are very aware of the issue. Of course, not all regard the first chapters of Genesis as being historically accurate. In fact, the main opposition to creation in Australia comes from members of the mainstream denominations, not from scientists. Members of Australia's Creation Science Foundation have little difficulty in obtaining permission to speak in state high schools, even in science classes. Sometimes they are asked to do so by a agnostic teachers. (I think the reason is because many of the students have heard about creation and ask questions about evolution that their teachers have trouble answering. Students want to find the answers for themselves.) Curiously, the situation is often different in denominational schools: “We teach evolution here,” the principal tells us proudly.

Because the difference between the two countries is so striking, I have even started to wonder to myself: “If creation is not an issue in Britain, perhaps it would be better to leave it that way.” This concern was underlined by the reply I received from a surgeon whom I had invited to join me in viewing the excellent Origin of Life series of films. He said: “Why can't we have both creation de novo from matter and evolution? For we know that mutation, in-breeding, cross-breeding, etc. does result in evolution. I'm not sure I could stand an evening of biased views which divide Christians into 'them' and 'us.'”

Three things are apparent from his letter. First, he is not aware of the difference between micro- and macro-evolution (leave aside the logical problems with creation de novo from matter). Of course mutation, in-breeding, and cross-breeding occur, but this has nothing to do with the origin of the species. Second, he does not understand bias. He seems to think that evolution is the norm, the straight-line, and creationists deviate from the true path. I accept the first chapters of Genesis as my interpretive framework; I am, therefore, biased in favour of creation. Everyone is biased. There is no neutrality. The question is not who is biased, but which is the better bias. With regard to his third objection, here I must agree with him. Tragically, this is a topic that may divide Christians.

It is apparent that the theory of evolution is in disarray and under attack from all quarters. Classic Darwinism has been superseded by Neo-Darwinism, the “hopeful monster” theory, and the more recent punctuated equilibrium model. Men of eminence, like Sir Frederick Hoyle, tell us there must be a guiding intelligence in the universe; “It” could not all have occurred by chance. More and more, school teachers are shying away from teaching evolution as factual, acknowledging that one “believes in” the theory of evolution. Students at school and tertiary institutions, aware of the discordant voices, are asking embarrassing questions in class. This is vindication for Christian parents who have worried about their children being torn between what they are taught at home and at what they learn at school.

For me, the important reasons for believing in the historical accuracy of the first chapters of Genesis are not scientific, they are religious. Let us look briefly at some of them.

The Historical Accuracy of the Bible

Do you believe that Jesus really fed over 5000 people from five loaves and two fish? (Mark 6:38ff). Or is this a parable of how there will be enough for everyone if people are willing to share their possessions with others? And what about the flood of Noah, Jonah and the big fish, the Virgin Birth, and the resurrection of our Lord? Are they historical? Did they really happen? Some Christians pick and choose their way through the Bible, accepting some miracles and rejecting others.

But the Bible is a carefully constructed, integrated whole. Removing parts of it weakens the rest. Take away the Genesis foundation and the basis for Christian belief will disappear along with it. On the other hand, if you can believe that God created the world in just six days, then you will have no difficulty with the other miracles talked about in the Bible.

Evolution Defames the Character of God

Hoyle has said that the Intelligence he believes in is not that of the Christians or Hebrews: “[T]hey [Christians and Jews] regard the Intelligence as all-powerful. And that leads to the contradiction that an all-powerful Intelligence would have to be rather peculiar to create a world with such horrible aspects as we find in this world.” He also correctly pointed out, “This was actually something that influenced Darwin quite a lot.” Indeed, in his autobiography, Darwin said he found it revolting to think that a God who is all-powerful and all-knowing would create the universe in a way that required the suffering of millions of creatures, throughout eons a time. Therefore, says Darwin, there can be no God. But surely there is an alternative: There is a God, but He did not use the evolutionary method to create the universe and everything in it.

Ultimately, the creation-evolution controversy revolves around the meaning of the word “good” in Genesis 1. The goodness of God seen in creation is a reflection of the overall goodness of His character. We read of His power, His truth, His judgment of sin and evil, His mercy, and His compassion. God is love. Jesus went about doing good. Could “good” in this sense be applied to the evolutionary method, involving the suffering of millions of creatures over the course of hundreds of millions of years?

Creation Ordinances

Certain propositions are laid down in the first chapters of Genesis, which predate Christianity, Judaism, and indeed all religions. They are binding on all races at all times. They could be called the Creation Ordinances. Some examples are: Unity in Creation - there is one Creator who is Lord over all men, wherever they live; The Universe was Created for Man - man occupies a place of supreme importance in the world, and he should have a corresponding sense of responsibility toward God and his fellow man; and The Work Ethic - Adam was given work to, “whence it follows,” says John Calvin, “that men were created to employ themselves in some work, and not to lie down in inactivity and idleness.”

Some very important Christian ordinances are concerned with sex and marriage. According to Scripture, Eve was created from part of Adam's body; that is, women originally came from man, not man from woman. Genesis 2 states that it is “[f]or this cause a man shall leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and they shall become one flesh (emphasis added). Notice the three aspects to this statement: leave, cleave, and become one flesh. These are three essentials of marriage. Christ based his teaching concerning marriage and divorce on them; so did Paul (Matthew 19:4-6, Ephesians 5:22-33). Why is sex outside marriage wrong? Because ”the one who joins himself to a harlot becomes one body with her[.] For he says, 'the two will become one flesh'“ (1 Corinthians 6:16, emphasis added), which is something to be reserved for marriage.

There are many other New Testament doctrines that flow from the creation of mankind:

• The wife is to submit to her husband - he was created first.
• The husband is to love his wife - as his own body.
• The church is the bride of Christ - His beloved.
• The church is the body of Christ - “we are members of his body, of his flesh and of his bones” (see Ephesians 5:22-33. A.V.).

If I do not accept that Eve was a special creation derived from Adam's flesh and bones, then I have no reason to accept these fundamental Christian doctrines. “Marriage is just a bit of paper,” a young lady once said to me, using worldly logic. But in truth, the Creation Ordinances, given by God to mankind from the dawn of time, take precedence over any man-made belief. They are binding on everyone for all time, whether we accept them or not.

Why do men and women everywhere conceal their private parts? Calvin pointed out that we do not object to an unclothed dog or ox, but that human nakedness is shameful. Why? Contrast the last words of Genesis 2 (“the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed”) with the situation after disobedience in chapter 3 - upon becoming aware they were naked, Adam and Eve covered themselves and tried to hide from God. As twentieth-century man rejects God, he often tries to return to man's original state. He maintains that nakedness (now upgraded to nudity) is still natural. He is wrong. The Fall altered that. If a non-Christian says to me, “what is wrong with nudity?” I have only one possible answer: Because Of the Fall, throughout the Bible God says it is a shame to go naked.

The Gospel

In 1 Corinthians 15:1-8, Paul places the Gospel in its historical setting: Christ died, was buried, rose on the third day, and subsequently appeared to his disciples and others, including over 500 people at one time. The Resurrection has been described as the best attested event in history. The importance of the Resurrection for the Christian is summed up in Paul's words: “[I]f Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins” (v. 17). The Christian's claim to forgiveness of sins, eternel life, and final resurrection of himself, is totally dependent on Christ's space-time resurrection from the dead. Paul used the Corinthian's knowledge of Adam's sin and death (the Fall) to prove the certainty of Christ's resurrection: “[A]s in Adam all die, so also in Christ all shall be made alive” (v. 22). (Note that Paul assumes the Corinthians knew about Adam and the Fall even though most of them were Gentiles. How did they know? He must have taught them when he was in Corinth! He seems to have regarded this as an essential element in the teaching of the Gospel message.) Paul argued from Adam to Christ, but the argument can be reversed: the certainty of Christ's resurrection is linked with the certainty of Adam's fall. This is of vital importance for the Christian. If someone does not believe in the historical Adam who truly sinned and was truly condemned to die, he has no basis for believing in Christ's atonement and resurrection on his behalf.

Some Lessons

Genesis 1 teaches that when the earth was created, it was “very good”; that is, perfect, reflecting the goodness of God. Indeed, the word for “good” in English is derived from the word “God”! Adam and Eve were in Paradise.

There was no sin or death. They were given complete freedom, aside from one prohibition: they were not to eat the fruit of a certain tree. But Eve ate the fruit, and so did Adam. Each engaged in an act of wanton disobedience. God had told Adam that if he ate the forbidden fruit he would die, and so it was. From that moment he died, first spiritually, and some 900 years later, physically. Then, as now, “the wages of sin is death” (Romans 6:23). If there had been no original perfection, there could have been no Fall. And if there was no historical Fall leading to spiritual and physical death, what need is there for a historical Saviour to physically die and be spiritually separated from God? (Jesus said on the cross, “My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?” (Mark 15:34)). Evolved man would need only a supreme example, a hero, dying at martyr's death to encourage him to higher evolutionary heights. But a created and fallen man needs a Saviour and Redeemer.

There is worldwide malaise in evangelicalism at the present time. To a large extent, it is the result of widespread rejection of the first chapters of Genesis. Too often the Christian faith is represented as commencing with the Gospels. But Christ said, “[T]he one who accuses you is Moses... For if you did not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?” (John 5:45,47). We would do well to heed this admonition.

Scripture quotations in the text are from the New American Standard Bible, unless otherwise noted. The quoted material on the pamphlet cover is taken from the King James (Authorized) Version.