The godless believe that all of the cosmos, including the solar system, the earth, and all living forms happened by chance. So man also is a product of chance evolvement from amoeba to segmented flatworm, to tree shrew, to ape, to homo sapiens, who by reason of his scientific know-how will evolve to a higher and higher order until reaching Godhood itself.
This is the so-called mechanistic or atheistic concept of man and his future. It is a simple, direct concept because there is no need for a first cause or director except what the animal mind of man now makes it. This is why Darwin admitted to being an agnostic (a polite word for atheist). He was unable, so he said, to see how an animal mind could possibly conceive of a higher intellect than its own.
1. But what about the so-called theistic evolutionist whom our church community must now recognize as becoming more and more audible? What does he believe and where does this lead? To find an answer we start by saying that he believes exactly what the atheist believes in regard to the method of origination and evolvement of cosmos and life. The only difference is that he gives God credit and acknowledges His day-by-day sustenance. He believes also that man is a special creation made in the image and likeness of God; and that, being sinful, man needs Christ as his personal Savior.
However, the method God used to make man is of no consequence to the theistic evolutionist. He allows himself many options. He does not believe that God literally made Adam out of the dust of the ground or Eve from Adam’s side, thus circumventing Article 14 of our Confession of Faith (Belgic). But, for example, he believes that God took two female animals and by immaculate conception produced Adam in the belly of one animal and Eve in the belly of the other just as Jesus was immaculately conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary, his mother. Of course, there are many other outlandish varieties of this concept. He might also believe that there were many Adams and Eves and that mankind in general caused its own downfall which Jesus came to rectify.
2. Now let us try to see how our evolutionistic brother justifies such conclusions. As we have said, in the first place he must believe that all of the cosmos and what it contains is indicative of evolvement rather than creation of mature forms; and secondly, that no world-wide catastrophe such as the Noachian flood ever happened. He must, therefore, first tamper with or destroy chapters 4 through 11 of Genesis before he can attack chapters 1 through 3 as non-relative. He does this by assuming that what he sees in the fossil world is the result of a uniform, systematic evolvement from simple to the more complex rather than creation and destruction.
It amounts to this that God is playing games with us when He tells tiS that all the tops of the mountains were covered by water and that the earth and all life would be destroyed. The theistic evolutionist discounts the appearance of the rainbow. Having gone this far he is ready to accept the evolutionistic concept of the beginning. He must now believe as a scientific postulate that the solar system, the crust of the earth, and life all initiated at the same time, some three billion years ago. What is of interest to a non-evolutionist is that this is just what Genesis says, except for the time element involved.
The radius of the earth is about 4000 miles, the crust an average of twenty-five miles, the mantle three hundred miles (depending on whom one believes), with the balance being the core. We are concerned only with the mantle and the crust.
3. Let’s analyze what the evolutionistie theory leads to in regard to this. Earth’s crust being twenty-five miles or 130,000 feet on the average, some divide it into 3000 periods of one million years each, totaling three billion years. Thus each million years the earth accumulated a crust of forty-three feet on a uniform basis. This crust comes from the mantle through volcanic action, some of which weathered into sediment, some by celestial fallout. The first forty-three feet of crust must then have had sufficient water and chemical entities capable of initiating life while some of this life in each succeeding forty-three feet of deposits over a period of each succeeding one million years evolved to the more complex by survival of the fittest while the less complex and less adaptive perished.
4. Since evolutionists also postulate that it takes one million years for a species of one kind to evolve into a species o( another kind, this seems a fairly good system. But is it?
The answer must be no. There is no simple-to-complex since the oldest fossils are found in the Cambrian formations; and these are not 20% or 50%, but 100% mature and complete forms representative of modern sea life including jellyfish.
This formation, which was originally about 26,000 feet below the surface, on an average, and is supposed to have been laid down about 600 million years ago now surfaces everywhere, as also the formations above it, due to a world-wide and local catastrophes. The remaining 80% below this formation, represented by two billion, 400 million years on the evolutionistic time clock, and 101,000 feet in thickness, is not only vacant of fossil life, but the amoeba, the one-celled creature, is still with us today as God made it. To this day it has not evolved to more complex. Nor are there forms of two-or four-celled creatures, but only one-celled and multiple-celled.
The evolutionist has other problems also. For example, he must make up his mind whether human remains thus far found are of a great age as indicated by the rock-dating method (thus millions of years) or recent, as indicated by the C-14 dating method, a few thousand years old. He must also choose between the validity of rock-dating showing a variety of ages for the same sample or consider other scientific data which indicate a young creation. He must explain why G. C. Simpson finds a hiatus of sixty million years in his estimate of seventy million years of supposed horse evolution. Also he must tell us why there has been found only about a bushel basket or so of fossils in the so-called Mesozoic formations consisting of a reputed period of 130 million years, represented by a thickness of 5600 feet above the Cambrian formations.
5. It could well be that our evolutionistic brethren are throwing away the baby with the bath water in order to attain intellectual recognition by a godless scientific community. Because how can one believe that a loving God, taking a look on the sixth day at what he had made, could say of a cursed earth which He had initiated four and a half billion years before, and with a crust three billion years old, of which the surface 26,000 feet was a complete mess, a graveyard, saturated with the remains of billions of dead creatures, that it was good and then make man to subdue and have dominion over it?
Evolution or Creation can be argued pro and con. But what argument does our theistic brother have in defense of his bastardization of both? What was it, brother? Three thousand periods of one million years each, six periods of five hundred million years each, or six days of twenty-four hours each and a young creation? Where is the scientist or theologian who can refute the latter?
Life magazine, on May 14, published an article about the Jesus People. One prominent godless father wondered why his Dible-carrying teen-age son could be on the wrong side of the Scopes trial issue. He could understand why his boy should try pot but not his acceptance of the story of creation when brought up to believe in evolution. One wonders how the Spirit works in the hearts of such theologically untrained kids, when some of our own overtrained, onetrack minded, hermeneutically confused ministers and educators have concluded that Moses had his wires crossed. Perhaps our synodical committee on biblical authority should have consulted with these kids!! Out of the mouth
In conclusion, it seems quite evident that in our own church community a systematic rejection of our religious roots forebodes no good. We may well ask, how can a minister serve communion or a communicant enjoy the same when convinced that the flesh and blood of Jesus the Christ, who became like one of us in body, evolved from the brute beast?
Sidney J. Jansma, Sr., of Grand Rapids, Michigan, is president of the Wolverine Gas and Oil Company, Inc.
This is the so-called mechanistic or atheistic concept of man and his future. It is a simple, direct concept because there is no need for a first cause or director except what the animal mind of man now makes it. This is why Darwin admitted to being an agnostic (a polite word for atheist). He was unable, so he said, to see how an animal mind could possibly conceive of a higher intellect than its own.
1. But what about the so-called theistic evolutionist whom our church community must now recognize as becoming more and more audible? What does he believe and where does this lead? To find an answer we start by saying that he believes exactly what the atheist believes in regard to the method of origination and evolvement of cosmos and life. The only difference is that he gives God credit and acknowledges His day-by-day sustenance. He believes also that man is a special creation made in the image and likeness of God; and that, being sinful, man needs Christ as his personal Savior.
However, the method God used to make man is of no consequence to the theistic evolutionist. He allows himself many options. He does not believe that God literally made Adam out of the dust of the ground or Eve from Adam’s side, thus circumventing Article 14 of our Confession of Faith (Belgic). But, for example, he believes that God took two female animals and by immaculate conception produced Adam in the belly of one animal and Eve in the belly of the other just as Jesus was immaculately conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of Mary, his mother. Of course, there are many other outlandish varieties of this concept. He might also believe that there were many Adams and Eves and that mankind in general caused its own downfall which Jesus came to rectify.
2. Now let us try to see how our evolutionistic brother justifies such conclusions. As we have said, in the first place he must believe that all of the cosmos and what it contains is indicative of evolvement rather than creation of mature forms; and secondly, that no world-wide catastrophe such as the Noachian flood ever happened. He must, therefore, first tamper with or destroy chapters 4 through 11 of Genesis before he can attack chapters 1 through 3 as non-relative. He does this by assuming that what he sees in the fossil world is the result of a uniform, systematic evolvement from simple to the more complex rather than creation and destruction.
It amounts to this that God is playing games with us when He tells tiS that all the tops of the mountains were covered by water and that the earth and all life would be destroyed. The theistic evolutionist discounts the appearance of the rainbow. Having gone this far he is ready to accept the evolutionistic concept of the beginning. He must now believe as a scientific postulate that the solar system, the crust of the earth, and life all initiated at the same time, some three billion years ago. What is of interest to a non-evolutionist is that this is just what Genesis says, except for the time element involved.
The radius of the earth is about 4000 miles, the crust an average of twenty-five miles, the mantle three hundred miles (depending on whom one believes), with the balance being the core. We are concerned only with the mantle and the crust.
3. Let’s analyze what the evolutionistie theory leads to in regard to this. Earth’s crust being twenty-five miles or 130,000 feet on the average, some divide it into 3000 periods of one million years each, totaling three billion years. Thus each million years the earth accumulated a crust of forty-three feet on a uniform basis. This crust comes from the mantle through volcanic action, some of which weathered into sediment, some by celestial fallout. The first forty-three feet of crust must then have had sufficient water and chemical entities capable of initiating life while some of this life in each succeeding forty-three feet of deposits over a period of each succeeding one million years evolved to the more complex by survival of the fittest while the less complex and less adaptive perished.
4. Since evolutionists also postulate that it takes one million years for a species of one kind to evolve into a species o( another kind, this seems a fairly good system. But is it?
The answer must be no. There is no simple-to-complex since the oldest fossils are found in the Cambrian formations; and these are not 20% or 50%, but 100% mature and complete forms representative of modern sea life including jellyfish.
This formation, which was originally about 26,000 feet below the surface, on an average, and is supposed to have been laid down about 600 million years ago now surfaces everywhere, as also the formations above it, due to a world-wide and local catastrophes. The remaining 80% below this formation, represented by two billion, 400 million years on the evolutionistic time clock, and 101,000 feet in thickness, is not only vacant of fossil life, but the amoeba, the one-celled creature, is still with us today as God made it. To this day it has not evolved to more complex. Nor are there forms of two-or four-celled creatures, but only one-celled and multiple-celled.
The evolutionist has other problems also. For example, he must make up his mind whether human remains thus far found are of a great age as indicated by the rock-dating method (thus millions of years) or recent, as indicated by the C-14 dating method, a few thousand years old. He must also choose between the validity of rock-dating showing a variety of ages for the same sample or consider other scientific data which indicate a young creation. He must explain why G. C. Simpson finds a hiatus of sixty million years in his estimate of seventy million years of supposed horse evolution. Also he must tell us why there has been found only about a bushel basket or so of fossils in the so-called Mesozoic formations consisting of a reputed period of 130 million years, represented by a thickness of 5600 feet above the Cambrian formations.
5. It could well be that our evolutionistic brethren are throwing away the baby with the bath water in order to attain intellectual recognition by a godless scientific community. Because how can one believe that a loving God, taking a look on the sixth day at what he had made, could say of a cursed earth which He had initiated four and a half billion years before, and with a crust three billion years old, of which the surface 26,000 feet was a complete mess, a graveyard, saturated with the remains of billions of dead creatures, that it was good and then make man to subdue and have dominion over it?
Evolution or Creation can be argued pro and con. But what argument does our theistic brother have in defense of his bastardization of both? What was it, brother? Three thousand periods of one million years each, six periods of five hundred million years each, or six days of twenty-four hours each and a young creation? Where is the scientist or theologian who can refute the latter?
Life magazine, on May 14, published an article about the Jesus People. One prominent godless father wondered why his Dible-carrying teen-age son could be on the wrong side of the Scopes trial issue. He could understand why his boy should try pot but not his acceptance of the story of creation when brought up to believe in evolution. One wonders how the Spirit works in the hearts of such theologically untrained kids, when some of our own overtrained, onetrack minded, hermeneutically confused ministers and educators have concluded that Moses had his wires crossed. Perhaps our synodical committee on biblical authority should have consulted with these kids!! Out of the mouth
In conclusion, it seems quite evident that in our own church community a systematic rejection of our religious roots forebodes no good. We may well ask, how can a minister serve communion or a communicant enjoy the same when convinced that the flesh and blood of Jesus the Christ, who became like one of us in body, evolved from the brute beast?
Sidney J. Jansma, Sr., of Grand Rapids, Michigan, is president of the Wolverine Gas and Oil Company, Inc.