Creation
‘Is evolution compatible with Adam and Eve and the Fall of Man?” as Keller says it is?
This question relates to an article by Time Keller on the Gospel Coalition website. Tim Keller (MDiv, Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary; DMin, Westminster Theological Seminary) is founder of Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Manhattan, chairman of Redeemer City to City, and founder of The Gospel Coalition.
Tim Keller was asked: If biological evolution is true and there was no historical Adam and Eve, how can we know where sin and suffering came from?
His brief answer was: Belief in evolution can be compatible with a belief in a historical fall and a literal Adam and Eve. There are many unanswered questions around this issue.
Keller followed this statement with a detailed article, which is mainly the opinions of theologians about the style of literature in Genesis followed by Keller’s own interpretation of Romans 5 and I Corinthians 15.
Keller states he believes in an historical Adam and Eve but does not explain how this is compatible with evolution, since Darwin himself described evolution as the “war of nature” and claimed that long ages of famine and death brought about “the production of higher animals”. (Darwin, Origin of Species, 1859) This is the exact opposite of God’s description of the original created world as “very good”(Genesis 1:31).
So we wonder if has ever bothered to compare such processes to what God said in Genesis 1 and 2, or if Keller really understands evolution, and the processes claimed to bring it about, so let us do that.
Modern day evolutionists use less emotive terms than Darwin, such as “selective advantage” but the process is still the same. This is a flat denial of Genesis 1, which culminates with God looking at all that He had made and declaring it to be “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Darwin and his successors also regard human beings as simply “higher animals,” which is another complete denial of Genesis. Human beings are unique creations made in the image of God.
Keller tries to avoid the issue by referring to various theologians who clearly do not believe Genesis 1 and 2. For example Keller refers to Bruce Waltke who claims that forming Adam from dust of the ground could mean “the author might be speaking figuratively in the same way, meaning that God brought man into being through normal biological processes.”
Keller and Waltke (and their followers) should take note: there are no normal biological processes that turn dust into people. It works the other way around, i.e. people turn to dust – it is happening all the time, but that is a destructive death process and the opposite of a creative process.
Keller spends a lot of time naming names such as C. S. Lewis and hiding behind their opinions. After meandering through the opinions of such theologians Keller summarises his section on Genesis: “In summary, it looks like a responsible way of reading the text is to interpret Genesis 2-3 as the account of an historical event that really happened.” If that is what Keller really believes, he should say so straight away and affirm what the text actually states.
So let us clearly state what the Biblical text does says. The first thing we are told about the creation of human beings is they were special creations made in the image God (Genesis 1:27-28). We are then given details of how God did this in Genesis 2. Adam was made from “dust of the ground,” i.e. raw materials, not some pre-existing animal, and Eve was created from tissue taken from Adam. This is either an accurate description of what God actually did or it is a fairy tale. If it is a fairy tale it has no authority, and sceptics, liberal theologians and other unbelievers are justified in scoffing at it.
There is a theory promoted by John Stott and others that God somehow “stamped His image” on a pair of the evolving hominins that had come into being by evolutionary processes, but this cannot be reconciled with the description of the creation and man and woman in Genesis. For more a more detailed critique of this theory see the question: HUMAN EVOLUTION? Does it create any problems for Christians who believe it? Answer here.
Anyone reading Genesis 1 and 2 will straight away see that it is not compatible with the evolutionary story of how human beings arrived on the planet, and what a ‘non-good’ state the world was in if evolution was true.
Keller claims he believes in a historical Fall of Man but does not go into details concerning Genesis 3 or the chapters that follow, so let us provide them. After judging the serpent and promising a Saviour who would defeat the serpent, God sentenced Adam and Eve to death and cursed the ground. From then on the living world degenerated into violence, disease and general degradation – all things that are not good. If death, disease and struggle had already been in the world, these would not be punishments. Again, there is a clear incompatibility between Genesis and evolution.
Rather than dealing with the actual events of the Fall of Man, Keller goes straight to Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15 and correctly states that Paul believed in a literal Adam and we should too. However, Keller reveals his own “pick and mix” attitude to the Bible when he states:
“The key for interpretation is the Bible itself. I don’t think the author of Genesis 1 wants us to take the “days” literally, but it is clear that Paul definitely does want readers to take Adam and Eve literally. When you refuse to take a biblical author literally when he clearly wants you to do so, you have moved away from the traditional understanding of biblical authority.” (word “days” in inverted commas in original)
What Keller really means is that he doesn’t want to take the days of Genesis 1 literally, presumably so as not to upset those who believe in an old earth and millions of years of evolution.
If Keller wants to use the Bible as the key to interpreting itself, let’s see what it says about the days in Genesis. In Exodus we are told that God spoke and wrote down the Ten Commandments, which include this statement:
“Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labour, and do all your work, 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. 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.” (Exodus 20:8-11)
It is clear from the context God is speaking about real days, not some vague long periods or symbolic times. We would also remind Keller that the Creator who spoke and wrote down these words is Christ, who made all things (John 1:3).
For further details see the question: CREATION DAYS: Were the days of creation, as described in Genesis 1, real 24 hour days? Answer here.
Keller goes on to explain how we can benefit from Christ’s death. He states: “We are in covenant with him, not because we are related biologically but through faith.”
This is half-truth. Yes, we are in a covenantal relationship with Christ through faith, but it is only effective because we are biologically related, and Christ is our Kinsman Redeemer. Only a relative can be a Kinsman Redeemer. If we go back through the generations, the entire human race can be subsumed into Adam. All human beings, including Christ in His incarnate form, are descendants of Adam, so we are biologically related to both Adam and Christ, and that is why the covenant applies to us.
Keller skips over the real link between Adam, Christ and us, and completely ignores how death really came into the world. Paul makes it very clear that Adam’s sin brought death into this world, and Christ’s death and resurrection brings eternal life in the next. This is the real basis of Paul’s “one man” principle in Romans 5. One man, Adam, brought sin and death into the world; one man, Christ, paid the penalty, which made forgiveness and new life freely available for all people.
Finally, we have a challenge for Keller and all evangelical Christians who believe that Christ’s death and resurrection will bring them eternal life in a New Heaven and Earth. Think carefully about this question: What will that new world be like? If God created the first earth through a long process of struggle and death, and declared that to be “very good” can we trust Him to keep those things out of the New Heaven and Earth that Christ’s death and resurrection enables us to live in for eternity? Sadly the Gospel Coalition is increasingly characterised by such half truths concerning the gospel. Wake up guys!’https://askjohnmackay.com/tim-keller-on-evolution-adam-is-evolution-compatible-with-adam-and-eve-and-the-fall-of-man-keller-says-it-is/
Psalm 14:1 “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none who does good.”
‘Let’s be honest. If you believe God created, but that He used evolution to do so, you have to answer a difficult question. Does evolution allow the supernatural to take place?
What is the difference between the scientific evidence needed to accept that evolution occurred without God and that needed to accept theistic evolution? Practically speaking, the physical evidence for both positions should be identical.
Evolution is built on the principle that natural laws determine what happens in the physical world. Evolution rules it out of bounds for God to get involved in the workings of a reptile egg to produce the first mammal-like creature. Evolution says there is no need for supernatural intervention to modify some ape-like creatures into the first human being. As far as evolution is concerned, God’s supernatural intervention could not happen.
There is no physical evidence to support the idea that God periodically intervened in evolutionary development. Nor does the Bible talk about this kind of activity.
A person might accept that God created through evolution. But this belief would not be faithful to the physical evidences that evolutionists claim to have. Nor is it faithful to the statements we find in the Bible. Evolution does not allow the super-natural action of God. Even the Bible itself cannot be God’s Word if there is no supernatural action of God. Thankfully, the Bible is God’s revealed Word and it does offer you an intelligent alternative to evolution.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/does-evolution-allow-the-supernatural-2/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=does-evolution-allow-the-supernatural-2&mc_cid=2c9055c58a&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
John 1:3 “All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.”
‘Nearly 50% of the people in the United States, including many Christians, believe that God did indeed create all things. Unfortunately, they believe He used evolution as His instrument of creation.
Christians often adopt this idea because they are unaware that there are thousands of scientists who believe God created the entire universe supernaturally in six days. Many are unaware that good scientific reasons exist to accept God’s work of creating just as it is described in the Bible. While it doesn’t get much media attention, the work being done by these creation scientists is challenging evolutionism. The work of creationists has appeared in scientific journals. Scientists who believe the truth of the Bible’s account of creation are involved in the professional scientific dialogue that continually goes on among science professionals.
At seminars conducted by these scientists, I have heard smiling, joyful people telling everyone they saw, “I didn’t know that the Bible offered an intelligent alternative to evolution. I didn’t know there were so many well-educated scientists who were creationists! What I have heard today shows me that I can be a more faithful follower of my Lord Jesus Christ and give up belief in evolution!”
There are no ‘facts” that demand that an educated person accept evolution as fact. The testimony of thousands of believing scientists confirms this. The instrument of God’s creation was not natural law, but His Son, who took our form upon Himself in the Person of Jesus Christ for our salvation!’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/did-god-create-by-evolution-2/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=did-god-create-by-evolution-2&mc_cid=d9f244d1e3&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
Genesis 1:14 “And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:”
An explosion causes material to be distributed randomly, and, on average, fairly evenly in all directions. But deep-time astrophysicists have a problem because their alleged Big Bang would appear to have produced a universe with a considerable amount of order.
Now it is important to be fair on secular astrophysicists. Although the dichotomy that I have set up is the impression of the Big Bang held by the average person, with only High School scientific training, we should remember that serious astrophysicists view things differently. They do not believe in an explosion that filled up space with matter; they believe in a rapid expansion, from nothing, of space itself, as well as the material in it. But the general accusation still holds. The Big Bang theory cannot account for the structure of the universe.
The universe is highly structured. Stars are grouped into galaxies. The galaxies themselves are not uniformly distributed but arranged into clusters of galaxies.
Of the many models suggested to overcome this problem, most involve material in the universe cooling, so that gravity could draw clumps of material together that would eventually begin the nuclear fusion required to form stars.
While research into gravitational fields and stellar motions is justified, we know that the relevant forces and structures were caused by design. It is God who put the stars in place and who orders their motions. The structure of the universe is fully consistent with God having created it according to His good purpose.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/structure-in-the-universe/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=structure-in-the-universe&mc_cid=42297a9061&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
2 Samuel 17:29 “And honey, and butter, and sheep, and cheese of kine, for David, and for the people that were with him, to eat: for they said, The people is hungry, and weary, and thirsty, in the wilderness.”
‘As a child, I often pondered this deep question that has the most profound historical and cultural ramifications. Who first looked at the solid substance on the surface of a vessel of milk that had gone off and said, “That would be tasty, eaten with a cream cracker”? But the answer to the question would not have stopped me doing likewise. I have always loved cheese. I love hard English cheeses, soft French cheeses, and I love blue cheeses, especially that king among cheeses – Blue Stilton.
It was a surprise to find that cheese is mentioned in the Bible. The reference in Job 10:10 is not particularly flattering to the product, as Job complains that his treatment by God is like the process of milk going off. But in 2 Samuel 17:29, we find cheese on a list of good foods provided to David and his followers.
Cheese essentially preserves many of the important nutrients from milk, but in a much more concentrated form and with a longer shelf life. Its importance can therefore be seen, particularly in a world before the development of refrigeration. Preservation is achieved by the conversion of milk sugars into lactic acid. This is achieved by the addition of rennet – a material from the stomachs of ruminants which is rich in enzymes.
The existence of cheese is testament to the way that God has endowed humanity with ingenuity and inventiveness so that we can have dominion over the world that He has made.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/cheese/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=cheese&mc_cid=611f4f97b6&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
I attended a public high school and thank the Lord I had a biology teacher that spent only one hour in seeking to explain evolution. However, I do remember when she was sick for several days and we had students from the University of Iowa substitute and they sought to push the evolutionary theory during those few days. Now, I wasn’t a real knowledgeable student in creation science or the Bible back then but I did ask questions which made the substitute teachers just a little upset. Anyway, as I grew in my faith and researched things I became more and more convinced that in the beginning God….
Genesis 7:2 “Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.”
‘Christians and non-Christians alike sometimes assume that natural selection is an inevitable part of Darwinian evolutionary theory, and that if we reject Darwinism, then we need to reject natural selection also. This is not so – natural selection, correctly understood, is a friend of creationism and is actually incompatible with evolutionary ideas.
All living things contain genetic information, leading to a wide variety of possible traits. Consider mammals, which have white fur (which is actually usually transparent fur without pigmentation, but which looks white from a distance). Such species may well be acclimatized to cold, snowy environments. For example, the Arctic Fox and the Red Fox have developed from a common ancestor. This is NOT evolution. Foxes – which are part of the dog-wolf kind, or baramin – contain information to produce different levels of fur pigmentation. Foxes with little or no fur pigmentation would not easily be seen, either by predators or prey, on a snowy background. Those foxes were more likely to survive there, so we say that those genes were naturally selected from a large range of existing genetic information. But this is not evolution because no new genetic information appeared.
In the past, we might have called this process “micro-evolution”. Micro-evolution is a misleading term, so we recommend that it is not used anymore; use the term speciation instead. New species are produced by natural selection, but only within an existing biblical kind or baramin. Natural selection happens. Evolution never happens.‘https://creationmoments.com/sermons/natural-selection/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=natural-selection&mc_cid=5c3f6d6578&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
Genesis 1:26 “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.”
‘One of the enduring myths popularized by evolutionary biologists is that there is a large amount of evidence to show that human beings evolved from apes. Of course, evolutionists are up in arms immediately – “We don’t believe humans evolved from apes!” they cry. “We believe humans and apes have a common ancestor!” But was that common ancestor human? We would suppose not. So the evolutionists do believe that the common ancestor was a non-human large primate. In any other circumstance, the word ape would satisfactorily label such a creature.
Another problem for evolutionary anthropologists – those who study human beings – is that their “evidence” keeps changing. One recent article, for example, suggested that three species of ape-men lived in the same area at the same time – homo erectus, paranthropus, and australopithecus. This is because evolutionists have changed the dates for homo erectus, making it older than they previously thought. Not content with re-writing the myths about human evolution, the report on the CNN website had to nod at another popular science icon, stating:
During the time all three species lived in the same area, they endured climate change as it shifted from warm and humid to cool and dry.
We have commented that ape-men are really completely ape or completely human. Homo erectus was completely human – not another species – while the other two species were apes. The constant redating is only evidence of an unwillingness to accept the logical biblical framework for these discoveries.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/new-studies-on-ape-people/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=new-studies-on-ape-people&mc_cid=8f6067eaec&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
Psalm 74:16 “The day [is] thine, the night also [is] thine: thou hast prepared the light and the sun.”
‘In recent years, a number of news articles have announced that our sun is shrinking. Scientists have been examining records kept since 1750 at the British Royal Observatory. They have concluded that the sun appears to be shrinking at the rate of one-tenth of one percent per century.
If the sun is shrinking at this rate, it would have been twice as large as it is now only 100,000 years ago. And 20 million years ago, the surface of the sun would have touched the surface of the Earth! The dinosaurs, or more accurately their descendants, would have been cooked, to say the least. No life would have been possible on Earth! This obviously poses a huge problem for evolutionists.
Evolutionists wanted to escape the hot water created by too large a sun. So they suggested that perhaps the sun alternately shrinks and expands. There is evidence of a very small pulsation, but overall the shrinkage is undeniable, and at any rate of shrinkage, this places the maximum age of the Earth sustaining life at only thousands of years. Some evolutionists have now suggested that the earlier studies were wrong and the sun is not shrinking at all. The matter is still under study.
Whatever results from this debate about the sun, we need to remember that God, as Creator, is in charge. Just as the sun must obey His wishes, so the few thousand years of world history that begins in Genesis can be trusted as His handiwork that serves Him faithfully for our good as well.’https://creationmoments.com/sermons/cooked-dinosaur-2/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=cooked-dinosaur-2&mc_cid=9bb0813e1b&mc_eid=00c1dcff3c
whatyareckon 