Blog

People who talk to me about origins sometimes find out that I am what you would call a “Theistic Evolutionist”. If you’ve read blog articles on this website about Genesis 1, Genesis 2, Adam and Eve, et. al. that should come as no surprise to you. I typically will defend the validity of the Theistic Evolutionist position by defending interpretations of Genesis 1-3 that are compatible with it, such as in my essay “Why I No Longer Think Walton’s View Of Genesis 1 Functions” and “Genesis 2 & 3: Adam and Eve As Archetypes, Priests In The Garden Of Eden, and The Fall”. Or in posts like “Why Pre-Fall Death Isn’t A Problem For Old Earth Creationism”. So it seems like I’m willing to step up to the bat and defend an evolutionary view of creation, right?

Well, several Christians of the Young Earth Creationist camp have tried to get me to prove evolution to them or to take a swing at some creationist material that tries to debunk the theory, and I typically find some way to wiggle out of it. Why is that? Well, for one thing, I don’t really care what a Christian thinks about origins. If you believe that the Triune God created all that exists, that the second person of The Trinity became incarnate, died on the cross, rose from the dead, ascended and is reigning as King, then I frankly don’t care if you think He made the cosmos 6,000 years ago in a literal week, over the process of billions of years with miracles, or over the process of billions of years through an evolutionary process. You’re giving Yahweh the glory for His creation, and with that, I’m satisfied. If Christ is your King, you are my brother (or sister). I only care about someone’s view of origins if it excludes Yahweh (atheism) or gives credit to other gods (paganism).

Secondly, while I have studied this issue, I don’t feel qualified to talk about it. I never have, even when I was on the anti-evolution side of the debate. I get a case of imposter syndrome when I start trying to pronounce the names of fossils in a lineage that I think serves as good evidence for the development of species over time, and that’s if I can even remember the names at all! I can talk about pseudogenes, atavisms, and endogenous retroviruses to a limited extent. I can also explain why I think it’s unlikely that all dating methods (because there’s more than just carbon dating scientists use to date how old something is, but you’d never know it by the way Young Earth Creationists talk) are all wrong in getting the age of the Earth off by a wide margin of billions of years. But at this point, having not read anything on the science of dating in a good while, I can’t remember how some of these dating methods even work. And as I get older and my memory gets weaker (I’m turning 34 in a little over a month), topics I’m not constantly studying and talking about will only become fuzzier memories. Perhaps I could read Aaron Yilmaz’ book “Deliver Us From Evolution?: A Christian Biologist’s In-Depth Look At The Evidence Reveals A Surprising Harmony Between Science and God” and jog my memory for the next comment section or over-the-phone debate, but see reason 1 as to why I have no interest in doing that. I just don’t feel like I ever know enough about fossils, genetics, and cellular biology to speak authoritatively on this subject. I have opinions formed on the basis of what I’ve read, sure. But if I talk science, I’m much more confident talking about astronomy, physics, or astrophysics than genetics and biology.

The reason why I talk about this issue at all is that it is of apologetic concern. If “macro evolution”, common ancestry, discent with modification, or whatever name you want to slap on it is true, and if people find the evidence for it overwhelming, and if we’ve pigeon holed people into an “It’s either God or evolution. The Bible or science. Pick one” kind of dichotomy, then we are putting an unecessary barrier to people believing in Christ. People like Ken Ham and Kent Hovind are hyper zealous in getting people to believe in Young Earth Creationism, and in their zeal, they constantly make this out to be a gospel issue. The lines are drawn in the sand. If proper biblical interpretation doesn’t rule out an evolutionary view of origins, then if someone happens to be convinced by the scientist’s arguments that evolution is true, I don’t think we should tell them that they can’t become a Christian unless they first give up belief in evolution.

And while I can’t remember much of what I’ve read in the scientific literature, whenever I do tune into a debate between a creationist and an evolutionist, I typically do find the evolutionist to have a stronger case. For example, watch the debate I moderated between Fasale Rana and Aaron Yilmaz titled “How Did God Create Us? Evolution Or Special Creation?” on the Cerebral Faith YouTube channel. And to be honest, it was always that way. When I first started studying Christian Apologetics, I always felt uncomfortable with the topic of evolution. It felt like the Christian Apologist was just trying way too hard to explain away the evidence rather than explain it. And I found myself having to work hard at being convinced in favor of the anti-evolution position. It was exhausting and a bit anxiety-inducing. I don’t have to make myself believe God exists. I don’t have to make myself believe Jesus is risen from the dead. The Apologetic arguments I do use for these claims are ones I am truly convinced by. And I truly do find non-Christians’ attempts at refuting The Kalam Cosmological Argument, The Fine-Tuning Argument, or the arguments for the gospels’ historical reliability ineffective. In my intellectual journey, I have found that the beliefs I have to work the hardest at maintaining are usually the ones that aren’t true. And sooner or later, I find myself shedding those beliefs in light of different ones (like my shift from affirming the view of Hell as eternal conscious torment to annihilation – see my book “Yahweh’s Inferno: Why Scripture’s Teaching On Hell Doesn’t Impugn The Goodness Of God”.) However, for years, I maintained an anti-evolutionary stance because I felt like I had to in order to be faithful to The Bible (and the God who breathed out its contents). I don’t want other Christians (or potential Christians) to suffer from this same needless anxiety, and so, that’s why I defend the biblical and theological tenets of Theistic Evolution. I want people to know that it is an option, and you don’t have to contort scripture.

And although many YECs doubt it, I really am concerned with knowing the truth. I am one of the most conservative Theistic Evolutionists you’ll ever meet. I affirm the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. I think The Bible is inerrant in all that it intends to teach. I even like arguments for God that do use science; I already mentioned The Kalam Cosmological Argument and The Fine-Tuning Argument, but I’m even favorable to some irreducible complexity arguments, and the “Signiture In The Cell” argument, which argues that DNA is a four digit code that tells amino acids how to make proteins, information only comes from an intelligent agent, and so the DNA information that tells amino acids how to make proteins must have been designed by an Intelligent Designer. Just as I couldn’t make myself skeptical of common ancestry, I also can’t make myself skeptical of these design arguments, even if it does make me the black sheep among other Theistic Evolutionists (like those in the Answers To Answers In Genesis Facebook group). I can’t be one of the “cool kids” like Dennis Venema or Dennis Lamourex and diss these arguments as psudeo-science.

Finally, as I mentioned in my post “I’m Specializing – Here’s Why”, as I get older and have less time on my hands to research and study (and then write about and debate about what I’ve researched and studied), I feel the need to specialize. And I’ve chosen to specialize in biblical apologetics. I would rather master a few subjects than have general knowledge of dozens. In the realm of positive apologetics, I plan on defending the reliability of the gospels and the resurrection of Jesus (A Maximal Data Approach), and I’d like to look at an independent case for the historical reliability of The Old Testament. Defensively, we can respond to The Problem of Evil by looking at what The Bible teaches concerning the origins of evil, the nature of evil, certain stories in the biblical narrative (e.g the Joseph narrative in Genesis 37-50, the book of Ruth, the book of Job), how faithful people deal with suffering in their relationship with God (Psalms), and so on. The Bible has a lot to say about this subject. We can respond to objections to God’s goodness from the doctrine of Hell by looking at what The Bible does and doesn’t say about it (this was the entire thesis of my book “Yahweh’s Inferno” where I make a case for annihilationism to undercut the “Good God wouldn’t torture people forever objection” as well as answering questions about “what about those who have never heard of Jesus?” and whether infants and mentally handicapped people go to Heaven or Hell). Since I want my head to be in biblical studies anyway, this seems like a good way to go apologetics-wise. Not that philosophy is unimportant (indeed, I was in a recent Zoom call where I drew on the philosophical insights of William Lane Craig to defend the doctrine’s logical coherence). But my goal going forward will be biblical apologetics, theology, systematic theology…. I basically just want to have my head in Logos Bible Software at all times and mine God’s word for all that it’s worth. Then, afterwards, tell you guys what I’ve learned.

Speaking of Logos, they’ve recently made me an ambassador. All you have to do is click this link right “HERE”. The Logos Ambassador program extends a free extended trial to those in my community and allows me to earn additional revenue for those who utilize my link for a trial or any purchases. Logos Bible Software has really revolutionized the way I study scripture. I love using the Logos mobile app for straight reading, and the desktop version is great at heavy duty in-depth research. Whether I’m studying or preparing an essay, book, or teaching series, Logos has me covered. There is a bit of a learning curve, but Logos has tutorial videos built into the desktop and mobile versions of the software so that you can learn how to use its various features. So click the link and get your extended free trial today!

In conclusion, if you try to get me to debate you about the scientific validity of Darwin’s theory of evolution, I will most likely decline. The reason isn’t that I secretly know you’re right and don’t want to admit it. It’s basically that if you already affirm Yahweh as the Creator, everything else is just working out the details. I also don’t feel confident enough to talk about the intricacies of cellular biology and genetics and even what I do know may already be outdated information for all I know. If I were to sum up my attitude, it would be that I would much rather defend the central tenets of the Christian faith and what The Bible teaches than arguing over how and when God made life. I would rather talk about the Rock Of Ages than the age of rocks, to riff on something William Jennings Bryan said. But if you want to tell someone they have to choose between science and faith, then I will definitely have something to say about that.