A Case for the Bible: The importance of understanding the Bible’s scientific authenticity, as it relates to Creation, when practicing Christian Apologetics

Last week we looked at how the Bible is scientifically authentic even though it is not intended to be a book of science. If the Bible is authentic when it speaks of things like germ avoidance, ocean seascapes and currents, and even the best day to perform a procedure like circumcision, then one might think there is authenticity to the question of origin of life.

Many people today often cite science as the main reason for their disbelief or disinterest in Christianity and the Bible. When pressed most will say that science has disproven the Bible’s account of creation, and that evolution has been shown to be the mechanism for the origin and existence of all life. In public education this is taught as fact and any other presentation of evidence could be grounds for ridicule, and sometimes even dismissal.

Keep in mind that public education is controlled by the “philosophies” of secular humanism. Secular humanistic reasoning does not allow for anything pointing to a “Divine Footprint” under the guise of separation of church and state. However, real science should follow the evidence to wherever it leads; and if we do we will find more support for the existence of a Creator, and the truths of Christianity, then for the evolutionary theories that have been indoctrinated into education today.

It has been said that many intelligent people believe in evolution as a means for the origin of complex life because other intelligent people believe in evolution as a means for the origin of complex life. Is that the best way to practice science?

A few things to keep in mind when considering theories about the origin of life:

1. Presuppositions:

• The preconceived ideas scientist hold can affect their research methods: Atheism, agnosticism, naturalism, theism etc. – these worldviews, like it or not, influence outcomes (bias is not suppose to be involved in research, but most people will lean toward evidence that supports their internal beliefs).
• Statistics show that the Christian worldview of Creation and/or Intelligent Design (even if it is based on scientific studies) is overwhelming ignored or blackballed in secular educational arenas, and this correlates to the majority of University Professors who claim to be “atheist/agnostic/have no religious belief.”
• The assumptions scientists make are based only on current paradigms that are held in higher academia – if the evidence does not fit the models in place it is thrown out.
• Keep in mind, there is a lot of money dished out to researchers who do work in support of the establishment’s doctrine; not many are willing to support, or financially back, research outside the approval of those in charge of these mainstream programs at the University level (and the trickle down effect is seen in our public schools today).

2. The role and limits of science:

• Science is suppose to study and report on how things observably work, and we cannot observe what happened at the beginning of life on this planet that secular science claims occurred “millions of years ago.”
• The laws of nature are descriptive (we can observe how things work today), not prescriptive (we cannot apply what we see today to how things began to work, or might have worked, as there is always the possibility of unobservable variables).
• Secular science today does not (will not) allow for metaphysical (or supernatural) answers even if the evidence points in that direction.

3. We must understand the word Evolution:

• Evolution is a misleading term because it is overarching and broad in its scope and definition.
• When we discuss and debate the origin of life issue, keep in mind the difference between microevolution (observable changes within species that we can see) and macroevolution (the assumption by evolutionists that species evolve from one kind into another completely different kind).

Microevolution:

• All scientists, including Christians, agree on observable microevolution.
• Microevolution is better referred to as adaption or micro-adaptation due to natural selection—this is observed when species alter their characteristics based on environmental conditions, food source needs, or disease—but we never see any of these factors resulting in a change of one kind into another.
• Microevolution is evidenced in the diversity of life that is measurable and observable.
• Humans can manipulate changes within certain species by selective breeding, but again there is no change of kind (like cat to dog, or horse to elephant)
• Taxonomists are in disagreement on where certain organisms fall and where cross-breading can occur in the taxonomic hierarchy, but kind would probably fall somewhere between Genus and Order.

Does microevolution’s observable evidence lead to this next assumption?

Macroevolution:

• Evolutionary scientists take the observable evidence of microevolution and infer that the diversity of life we see today has evolved through a gradual series of changes over time, creating new and better life-forms – for example: Humans and monkeys have evolved and branched from extinct ape-like creatures, or amphibians evolved from fish-like creatures, or birds from reptiles.
• Evolutionists teach that you can take this “philosophical assumption” (because it cannot be observed) back to where all life began as single cell bacteria-like organisms in a primordial fluid (although admittedly they do not know where this primordial fluid came from), and this fluid is said to be the foundation by which random chance conditions were able to produce the first building blocks of life called amino acids.
• Evolutionists often try to convolute microevolution with macroevolution and then defer to abiogenesis when cornered on origin, (this is part of the deception, whether willful or not, that causes confusion in students of the sciences today).
• Macroevolution is not possible because: 1) It has never been observed, and 2) you must add new genetic material to “create” or evolve into something new, and that cannot happen by random chance.

The truth: Macroevolution is unobservable and untestable. It is not derived from the scientific method, and contrary to popular belief, it does not have the required evidence in the areas that it claims to such as the highly regarded fossil record and genetics.

To summarize

Microevolution: Changes within species (or kinds), better known as adaptation, is true based on observation.

vs.

Macroevolution: A change from one “kind” of living thing into a new “kind” of living thing, is false because it cannot be, and has never been, observed.

In addition, to even get the conversation started evolutionists must answer the genesis question: Where did the first of anything come from?

We are called to give a reason for the hope that we have (1 Peter 3:15). This means we must be able to share, and defend, the reasons for what we believe, and why. The Bible warns us that in the last days deception will run rampant:

The Apostle Paul warned the Church at Colossae:

See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ. Colossians 2:8

The Apostle Paul also wrote this warning to the young pastor Timothy:

The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons.  1 Timothy 4:1

The Apostle Peter wrote this to the early Church facing persecution:

Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires.  2 Peter 3:3

Special Note

In two weeks we will be starting a new series called “A Case for Creation” in which we will cover, in-depth, these topics and more from Genesis chapters 1-11 – Continue to join us here!

Going Deeper

Watch this awesome presentation by Dr. Sean McDowell called “Examining Evolution”

Also, take a look at these “street interviews” as Ray Comfort exposes the fallacy of evolutionary theory in the documentary “Evolution vs. God,” by Living Waters:

Reflection

1. What are three things to keep in mind when discussing evolutionary theory?
2. What is the difference between “microevolution” and “macroevolution?”
3. PTRs: Prayer focus – That public education would allow the teaching of “Intelligent Design” and “Creation” into the science conversation when it comes to origin and diversity of life.

Bible Study

Each week we do a Bible study to practice our Bible study skills. Read/reread James chapter three, then answer the following questions:

Always remember to pray before reading and studying Scripture.

A little background for context in James chapter 3: It is important to remember that we are all called to “teach” by sharing the Gospel with others as commanded by Jesus (Matthew 28:19-20). However, in this passage James is specifically addressing new Christians to be careful with their tongues and their desire to teach. In Jewish culture (which most of these early Christians came from) teaching was a highly respected profession and therefore it became a coveted position in early Christianity. James warns that teaching others should not be done for prestige or reputation, and therefore careful examination of motives and tongue was essential.

Read James Chapter 3:

1.  What does James say about becoming a teacher (Read 3:1-2)?

2.  Make a list from James’ metaphors/analogies of the negative effects that can come from the use of the tongue (Read 3:3-12).

3.  Contrast the difference between wisdom from above and earthly wisdom using the examples that James cites (Read 3:13-18) –you can also add some of your own examples.

Go to the book of Proverbs and read chapter 1, then answer the following questions:

4.  What is the importance of a Proverb (Read 1:1-7)?

5.  Copy Proverbs 1:7 as a memory verse. What does Solomon mean when he says “the fear of the LORD?”

6.  What does Solomon say about the “enticement of sinners” and the consequence of giving in to that enticement (Read 1:8-19)? Any examples of things this would apply to in our own lives or culture today?

7.  How does gaining wisdom and discernment help us (Read 1:20-33)? Who gives us this type of wisdom?

8.  Application and Discussion: What are some things we can do to attain wisdom? What are some things we can do to avoid earthly wisdom?

Join us next week as we conclude our Case for the Bible with the final “S” for Saved Lives!