The Scientific Apostasy

In the previous study we discussed the doctrine of creation as taught in the Bible. Now we must consider how the Chris­tian world departed from the plain truth of a literal creation.

H. W. Clark, Professor Emeritus of Biology, Pacific Union College

In the previous study we discussed the doctrine of creation as taught in the Bible. Now we must consider how the Chris­tian world departed from the plain truth of a literal creation.

1.   What was the attitude of New Testa­ment writers toward creation?

"All things were made by him [Christy" (John 1:3).

"From the beginning of the creation God made them" (Mark 10:6).

"For by him were all things created" (Col. 1:16).

"God, who created all things by Jesus Christ" (Eph. 3:9).

2.   What relationship does the Bible re­veal as existing between Christ and created things?

"By him all things consist" (Col. 1:17), or hold together.

"Upholding all things by the word of his power" (Heb. 1:3).

Christ not only brought the universe into existence but continues to maintain it. Modern physics has shown that material substance is merely a manifestation of energy. This correlates perfectly with the scriptural statements. The power that holds all things together is the same power that was necessary to produce them in the be­ginning. Note the expression "the word of his power." In the Greek the term logos is used, meaning an outflow, or emanation, of power.

Deism, which was popular in the eight­eenth century, and is still held by many scientifically-minded men, supposes that when God created matter, He endowed it with properties whereby it could continue to perform the work originally com­manded. But the Bible does not support this view. The material universe, according to the Bible, is upheld and maintained by the Word, the Logos, the outflowing of divine power from the throne of God. Just as an electric light ceases to glow when cut off from the source of power, so material substance would cease to act, in fact, cease to exist, were the stream of divine power cut off for one instant.

We must be careful in this study not to get the idea that the Word, meaning Christ in person, is actually present everywhere in nature. Such a viewpoint would be pan­theism. In fact, many of the great pagan religions of the world are founded on exactly this premise, that God and nature are one. We must be careful to recognize the distinction between the Word, Christ, the personal Being, and the outflow of power by which He manifests Himself through the whole universe.

So little is given in the Bible regarding the relationship existing between the three persons of the Godhead that we must be careful not to speculate unduly. However, from the statement in Genesis 1:2 that the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, we are led to conclude that He was the active agent in creation. If so, He is doubtless also the active agent in main­taining the universe. Speculation on the interrelationships in the Trinity is, how­ever, rather fruitless.

3.    What control does God declare that He has over nature?

In Isaiah 48:3 God declares His ability to foretell events. This would be impossible unless He had full and complete control over natural forces and over the powers of men. In verse 7 He declares that He creates, or brings to pass, new things in order to prove His superiority over hea­then gods.

4.    Against what did Paul warn the early church?

"Oppositions of science falsely so called" (1 Tim. 6:20).

In Paul's day Greek philosophy was a type of naturalism. This attributed all nat­ural phenomena to inherent forces within matter itself. It denied the existence of a Supreme Being such as was taught by the Bible. All natural forces were self-operat­ing, by means of inherent elements within themselves.

In the fifth century A.D. the Christian theologian Augustine introduced into Christianity an interpretation of creation borrowed from Greek philosophy. When he spoke of creation he affirmed that it did not take place instantly, or in a short time; rather, he declared that we must believe that God created the original germs of life with potentialities for infinite develop­ment. Throughout long ages of time these original germs, or seeds, as he called them, have continued their progressively upward development until they have reached the complexity of organization that is seen in the world today.

This interpretation of creation has been called a thorough-going theistic evolution by competent authorities. (For further de­tails see the writer's New Diluvialism, p. 2.)

This position has been the orthodox view of the Catholic Church during practically all of its history, and is today quite widely accepted by Catholic and Protestant theo­logians alike.

5. What scientific apostasy was foretold by Peter?

In 2 Peter 3 is foretold the modern re­volt against literal creation and the Flood. The basis for this is the doctrine that "all things continue as they were from the be­ginning of the creation" (verse 4). The Bible says that "the works were finished from the foundation of the world" (Heb. 4:3). But modern skeptics say that every­thing has been going on the same from the beginning of the creation. Thus the earth and its life would be the result of slow, natural processes. The theory of uni­formity, proposed in 1785 by James Hut­ton, of Scotland, and expanded into scientific geology by the English geologist Sir Charles Lye11 in 1830, has become the background for popular geological inter­pretation. The result is that scientists of today "willingly are ignorant" of the Flood. They "deliberately ignore this fact" (2 Peter 3:5, R.S.V.).

Uniformitarianism, however, not only is an unproved hypothesis but is unprovable. It is impossible, upon the observations of 150 years or less, to prove that present known forces have been in operation in a uniform manner for billions of years. The yardstick of present-day geological knowl­edge is too short for measuring such vast expanses of time. Not only so, but the whole scheme of uniformitarianism is based on the deistic theology, and denies the power of God to create or destroy or alter by means of His infinite powers. It is absolutely out of harniony with the teach­ing of the Bible with regard to His com­plete and continuous action through the things He has created.

6. Is it possible to harmonize the find­ings of science with the simple Bible teach­ing in regard to creation and the Flood?

The position of the modern creationist is perfectly consistent with all known prin­ciples of philosophy and science. He be­lieves in the following:

a.     That all material substance was brought into existence by the fiat of the Creator; therefore matter is not regarded as having an independent existence of in­herent properties by which it performs its activities; the phenomena of nature are subject to the control of the Supreme Being at all times and in all their manifestations.

b.     That the organization of the physical features of the earth and the creation of life upon it were accomplished in six lit­eral days; accordingly, the theories of cos­mic and biological evolution through long ages of time are not acceptable.

c.     That confusion and degeneracy among plants, animals, and man came as a result of the advent of sin into the world, and through the influence of Satan and his agents.

d.     That the pristine earth was destroyed by one great overwhelming catastrophe, the Flood, or Deluge, of Genesis 6, 7, and 8, and that this Flood was the direct or in­direct cause of most of the major geologi­cal features of the earth.

e. That since the Flood there have been many minor changes in the surface of the earth, with resulting changes in climate and ecological conditions, and that these have been simultaneous with certain changes in the structure and behavior of plants and animals; in this way there have been distributed over the face of the earth the present array of "species" of plants and animals.

On these points the creationist main­tains that his views are exactly as scien­tific as those of the evolutionist. He con­tends that the theories of evolutionary progress are not sufficiently supported by scientific evidence to make them conclu­sive. Therefore, he accepts the Genesis rec­ord of creation and the Flood at its face value as an inspired historical record, and upon this assumption he proceeds to array the facts of science in harmony with the literal interpretation of this record. All supposedly scientific "evidences" contrary to this literal viewpoint are regarded as speculative assumptions that are not proved.

In our next studies we shall give a brief outline of the main lines of evidence that support the Bible teachings regarding a lit­eral creation and the Flood.

Advertisement - RevivalandReformation 300x250

Ministry reserves the right to approve, disapprove, and delete comments at our discretion and will not be able to respond to inquiries about these comments. Please ensure that your words are respectful, courteous, and relevant.

comments powered by Disqus

H. W. Clark, Professor Emeritus of Biology, Pacific Union College

Digital delivery

If you're a print subscriber, we'll complement your print copy of Ministry with an electronic version.

Sign up
Advertisement - Southern Adv Univ 180x150 - Animated

Recent issues

See All
Advertisement - NAD Stewardship (160x600)