SERMON:
May grace and peace be yours today, from God our Father, and from our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Amen.
For the past few Sundays we've been using our sermon time to examine a few of the lies of Satan. Satan uses these lies in an effort to pry us away from our Savior kill our trust in Him. Today's lie is this: "Science has proven evolution is true."
May the Holy Spirit bless our hearts and minds as we study this lie, and see what the Bible says about it.
▬
One of our own young people was standing in a college hallway after class with some friends. They were discussing the theory of evolution and the evidence for and against it. A professor walking by happened to overhear their conversation and stopped to comment. In a disdainful way the professor explained that if you don't believe in evolution, you might as well not believe in the light of the sun. Not believing in evolution is like not believing in the air you breath. Evolution isn't a theory, he explained, it is an unshakable fact. Essentially, that professor was proclaiming Satan's lie that "Science has proven evolution is true."
Indeed, many people believe that science has done just that. But are they right? That is the question.
▬
In this discussion, let's begin by defining our terms. That's always a good place to start. That way we know that we're talking about the same things, and not just talking past each other.
Science, in it's simplest definition is the acquisition of knowledge. The word "science" comes from a root word meaning just that, "knowledge". But different branches of science have different methods for getting at knowledge. And not every method is as reliable as the next.
To ensure that we're clear about what kind of science we're talking about, some have found it helpful to divide science into two types. Here's a quote from an article I read called, "Science or the Bible?".
"1. Operation science uses the so-called “scientific method” to attempt to discover truth, performing observable, repeatable experiments in a controlled environment to find patterns of recurring behavior in the present physical universe. For example, we can test gravity, study the spread of disease, or observe speciation in the lab or in the wild. Both creationists and evolutionists use this kind of science, which has given rise to computers, space shuttles, and cures for diseases.▬
2. Origin science attempts to discover truth by examining reliable eyewitness testimony (if available); and circumstantial evidence, such as pottery, fossils, and canyons. Because the past cannot be observed directly, assumptions greatly affect how these scientists interpret what they see.
So, for example, how was the Grand Canyon formed? Was it formed gradually over long periods of time by a little bit of water, or was it formed rapidly by a lot of water? The first interpretation is based on secular assumptions of slow change over millions of years, while the second interpretation is based on biblical assumptions about rapid change during Noah’s Flood" (Science or the Bible? by Ken Ham and Terry Mortenson, Ph.D.).
Keep that distinction in your mind; operation science and origin science.
▬
Next, we have to define "evolution". Evolution in it's simplest definition is "change or growth". We use this sense of the word when we speak of our relationships evolving, or our economy evolving. These things are changing, growing in one direction or another.
But when we talk about the theory of evolution, we're not just talking about ANY change and growth. When we speak of the theory of evolution we're talking about the idea that life arose from non-living things. In a phrase, we're talking about molecules-to-man evolution.
▬
Let me ask you this, when we're talking about molecules-to-man evolution, which type of science are we discussing? Is it operation science which can be tested and proven in the laboratory? Or is it origin science, which seeks to determine what happened in the past using eyewitness testimony and physical evidence? The promoters of evolution may use some lab experiments to support their claims, but molecules-to-man evolution falls squarely in the field of origin science.
This is an important observation to make, because you cannot use Bunsen burners and Erlenmeyer flasks to test the past. The past is the past, and cannot be revisited and tested by the scientific method. We can make educated guesses about the past, but we cannot scientifically prove what cannot be tested.
▬
One of the lies connected to the theory of evolution is that scientists have arrived at that theory by approaching fossils and other evidence with an open and scientific mind. They have come to the evidence, and the evidence has provided clear stepping stones which have led them to a theory which explains the existence of life.
But this just isn't the case. The theory of evolution doesn't offer a single, clear, flowing explanation of how life came to be. There are PLENTY of holes in the chronology of evolution. Holes that have no explanations. Some would argue that there are more holes than there is substance.
For example, proteins are the building blocks of life. You need proteins or you don't have living organisms. Proteins are made up of amino acids. But so far, amino acids don't appear to be naturally occurring in a lifeless world.
So, where did the first amino acids come from? The theory of evolution doesn't have an testable hypothesis to explain how amino acids could have been created on a pre-life earth.
And even if you could create an amino acid by chance in a dead world, you'd still be light years away from life. You'd have to have the right amino acids (and plenty of them) to create the right kinds of proteins, and then those proteins would have to be arranged correctly to create the cellular structures necessary for life to exist. By the way, the simplest living cell is composed of approximately 10,000 different parts.
One scientist has said that it would be impossible to accidentally form a living cell, and says he can prove it. He suggests that we try this experiment. Fill a sterile test tube with the perfect solution for a living cell to thrive in. Then put a living cell into that test tube. Then take a sterile needle and pop that cell so that all the inside parts of the cell leak out into the tube. Once the cell has been punctured, the scientist has all the parts he needs to make life. He doesn't just have a bunch of disorganized amino acids. He doesn't just have a mass of lifeless proteins. He's got all the super complex organic machinery that fills each and every living cell. But no scientist can make that cell alive again. He's got all the pieces, but you can't put humpty-dumpty back together again.
If we can't make a single living cell when we've got all the parts of that cell already constructed, what makes us think that random chance could make one? Without the parts, without the proteins, without the amino acids?
That leads to another major thing that the theory of evolution fails to explain. What is the difference between a living body and a dead one? What exactly is the spark of life which makes all the difference? Evolution has no answer.
Again, the point is, scientists have not arrived at the theory of evolution because they followed the evidence.
▬
If you compare the evolutionary literature from one decade to the evolutionary literature of the previous decade, there are huge differences in what is believed and taught. The theory of evolution itself is constantly evolving. What was considered certain and unshakable evidence explaining the process of evolution in one decade is cast away for more plausible explanations in the next.
But one part of the theory is never cast aside. One part that is fundamental to the heart of the theory of evolution: God can have no part in it. God does not exist. God did not create. God is a myth. That's what the theory of evolution is founded upon, not on real, testable science.
And if you think about it, it's not surprising. Apart from God, evolution is the only explanation for the existence of the universe or the existence of life. Think about it like this. I've got a watch in my hand. If it wasn't created by an intelligent being, how could it get here? What are the other options? There is only one other option. It got there by random chance. It's pieces were formed by accident and random chance put them together to form a functioning machine.
When you abandon the idea of a watch maker, random chance is all you have left . So it is with the universe, if you abandon the idea of a creating God, random chance is all you have left.
▬
So, what exactly does the Bible say about how our universe got here, and how life came to be? Well, you can read all about it in the first few chapters of Genesis. But our sermon reading for today summarizes those events in a single verse. We'll read Exodus 20, verse 8-11. But, verse 11 is the summary verse that I'm eluding to.
Exodus 20:8-11 (ESV)
8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
▬
This is the third commandment in it's entirety. The main point of the verse is that the Israelite people were to take Saturday off to worship God and to rest. They were to model their work week after God's creation week. Six days of work, and rest on the seventh. "Sabbath" means "rest".
Just as a side note, have you ever noted that the ways that we measure time each have a corresponding natural phenomenon? A year is... the earth going around the sun. A month is... based on the cycles of the moon. A day is... the earth rotating on it's axis. But what about a week? There is no corresponding natural phenomenon. We have our week because God created in six days, and rested on the seventh.
Back to the point. The main thing that our sermon text does for our study today is confirm that the six days of creation mentioned in Genesis were indeed six ordinary days.
There are also other proofs of this in Genesis. First of all, when you read Genesis, the simplest understanding of the words is that God created the universe in six ordinary days. This is expressed grammatically when the days are numbered in sequence (first, second, third, etc.). With each successive day the phrase, "evening and morning" is used. And there was evening and morning, the first day. And there was evening and morning, the second day, etc. (the Jews considered evening the beginning of a new day).
▬
Now, some of you may be wondering, why does it even matter if some people believe that God used evolution to create life and other people believe that God just made living creatures by speaking them into being?
Some churches do indeed teach that the theory of evolution and the creation account of Genesis can co-exist. But this is false. The theory of evolution and the Biblical account of creation are fundamentally contradictory because they say opposite things.
For one example, turn to Romans 5, verse 12. There Paul writes...
"...sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—" (Romans 5:12 ESV).The theory of evolution says that death existed for millions of years before man did. In fact, the theory of evolution says that we owe who we are today - to death. Because death weeded out the less fit to survive, we are here today.
But the Bible says the opposite. The Bible says that mankind existed before death. The Bible says that death is not a good thing at all! The Bible says death is the horrible consequence of man's sinful rebellion against God! It Mankind let death into the world by sinning against God!
Forget the chicken or the egg; which came first, death or man?! Evolution says one thing, the Bible another.
Is death good, or evil? Evolution says one thing, the Bible another.
These two different belief systems stand on different foundations, and cannot exist together. Given enough time, one will eventually swallow the other.
▬
When people try to combine evolution with the Genesis account of creation, things get all mixed up. And this is exactly what Satan wants. Here's his attack strategy: First, convince people that scientists have proven evolution is true. That means the Bible's account must be a figurative fairytale. Next, either lead people to combine evolutionary ideas with Genesis, or better yet, discard Genesis altogether.
If Satan can get us to discard Genesis, then we've discarded the book that explains where sin, death and evil came from. If Satan can get us to discard God's Word in Genesis, then we'll have discarded the book that contains God's first promise to send a Savior to take our sins away and restore us sinners to a right relationship with God. (See Genesis 3:15)
When evolution is accepted, it destroys the need for a Savior and makes God into a liar.
▬
This is why Satan uses this lie. The Bible clearly says God is the Creator of all things. The Bible clearly says that the first two humans sinned and brought death into the world. The theory of molecules-to-man evolution has no place in Bible history.
So... if evolution could be proved true, than the Bible would be proved false. And if the Bible is false, it's promise of life after this one is empty. If the Bible is false, it's insistence that sin is shameful, damaging and damning is not necessarily correct. If the Bible is false, than the idea of a sinless and holy and all-powerful God who threatens to punish sinners but offers forgiveness through His Son is nothing but a fairytale.
This is why Satan uses this lie. If he can get people to believe that science has proven evolution true, that's like dynamite in the foundation of faith.
▬
Now, one thing that I want to make clear is this. The same evidence exists for evolutionists and creationists to examine. But how we interpret this evidence will depend on what we already believe. We interpret information in line with our preconceived world view. There are only two possibilities, a Creator made this, or random chance did.
So what does the evidence point to? I believe that the evidence points to a Creator. Of course, I'm already a Christian, so I'm biased. But so is everyone else. But I'm not alone in my bias. Jesus is with me. When the Pharisees asked Jesus a question about marriage He responded by saying...
"4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’ v 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”" (Matthew 19:1-6 NIV).▬
Jesus considered Genesis authoritative when it came to answering the Pharisees' question about marriage. "Haven't you read", He said, It says it right there in the Bible. At the beginning the Creator made them male and female.
▬
Earlier I said that "origin science" attempts to discover truth by examining reliable eyewitness testimony and circumstantial evidence. When it comes to the origin of our universe and the origin of life, we have an eye-witness who has left us a transcript of what He saw. Jehovah God is that witness, and the Bible is His transcript. Let's hold tightly to HIS trustworthy testimony, and not to the ever changing imaginative opinions of mankind.
▬
We dare not forget what Satan has in his sights when he aims the lie of molecules-to-man evolution. He has the Gospel of forgiveness in his sights. By erasing the Creator, Satan wishes to begin the chain reaction that will erase passages like these...
" all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus" (Romans 3:23-24 NIV).If Satan can kick Genesis out from under us, than these passages will fall also. That is his purpose.
"... the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Romans 6:23 NIV).
" 24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life" (John 5:24 ESV).
Let's not let Satan do this. Instead lets cling to the solid testimony of our Creator. That way we can be sure that in the last day when all eyes see the truth, our eyes will not be filled with terror, but with tears of joy because our final salvation is at hand.
On that final day of judgment, may we all stand in the righteousness of Christ. The righteousness that He offers us through His suffering and death in our place. The righteousness that covers over all our sins, and makes us clean in the sight of God. Forgiven and renewed.
On that final day, the fact that molecules-to-man evolution was a lie will be even more obvious than the rays of the sun, and more obvious than the air that we breath. Amen.
And the peace of God which surpasses all understanding will guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus.
No comments:
Post a Comment