The Vatican and evolution: Creationist responds (OneNewsNow.com)

The Vatican and evolution: Creationist responds

Pete Chagnon - OneNewsNow - 3/6/2009 5:00:00 AM

OneNewsNow recently published an article dealing with the Vatican debate on evolution -- an article that prompted a heated debate in the "reader comments" section. OneNewsNow decided to give Dr. Terry Mortenson of Answers in Genesis, whose comments appeared in the original article, a chance to respond to readers.

Read original article: 'Vatican, apologetics ministry at odds on evolution'

Latest from AP: 'Vatican evolution conference snubs creation believers'

Comment: To debate over creation vs. evolution diverts us from the most critical point of the Christian Faith. Christ came, he died for us and by his grace, his salvation is available to us. Why do different [C]hristian groups have to focus on minute differences rather than what unites us all as Christians?

Mortenson: Well, I would say that first of all the Book of Genesis is foundational to the gospel of Jesus Christ. The Bible tells us that the world was created in perfect condition; there was no sin, no death. Genesis 3 tells us why death came into the world and gives us the very first promise of the Messiah in Genesis 3:15; and in 1 Corinthians 15, Paul talks about the fact that Jesus Christ is the last Adam, and Adam is the first Adam, and he says for as in Adam all die even so in Christ shall all be made alive. So Paul connects the work of Christ to what happened in the Garden of Eden. And he builds his doctrine of marriage on the fact that God created Adam and Eve.

So the gospel message is built on the foundational truths of Genesis. We also have the statements of Jesus himself when he was asked about divorce in Mark 10; he took the Pharisees back to Genesis. And when he was talking to the Pharisees on another occasion in John 5, if you believe Moses you would believe my words for he spoke of me. So Jesus and the apostles clearly tie the ministry and the gospel of Jesus Christ to Genesis -- and it is foundational to the gospel.

Comment: Genesis can't even give a coherent account of Creation -- we get two different stories just in the first two chapters. Not to mention oddities like 'light' being created several days before the sun, moon, and stars. Yet you want to take this as inviolate fact? And you think evolution is a total fantasy? Right.

Mortenson: We need to be very careful to pay attention to details of Genesis 1 and 2. They are not two contradictory accounts of creation. Genesis 1 is what I like to call a wide-angle-lens view of the whole six days of creation. Genesis 2, from verse 4 onward, is a telephoto zoom lens looking at some of the events of Day 6. They are not contradictory. Genesis 2 does not say anything about the creation of the earth, the creation of the sun, moon, and stars, the creation of sea creatures; they're just not parallel accounts -- and people who say that just are not reading the text carefully.

Secondly, as far as the sunlight being created before the sun, when people raise that objection I'm sure they're well meaning, but they're really reasoning like an atheist because behind that question is the assumption that God cannot produce the phenomenon of light without the sun. But of course the Bible makes it very clear that God can do that. He blinded Saul on the road to Damascus in the middle of the day. It wasn't the sun; it was another source of light and Paul tells us later on that he saw the risen Christ.

In the book of Revelation it says in the new heaven and the new earth there will be no more night; but there will be no sun either -- and God will be our light. Genesis 1, I don't believe the light in verse 3 is God because it is a created thing. He said let there be light and there was light. But it's some kind of light source to create the phenomenon of an evening and a morning, and then on the fourth day that light was either removed and replaced by the sun, moon, and stars or somehow distributed -- we don't know. But the fact that we don't know or fully understand everything that we would like to know doesn't mean that the text is vague or not telling us the truth. The text is very clear that God defines what a day is in verse 5, and then he calls them second day, third day, fourth day and the Fourth Commandment in Exodus 20 God says you work six days because I created in six days.

Comment: Background radiation in space proves the universe is about 12.5 billion years old. The big bang doesn't have to contradict the Bible unless you want it to. You just make Christians look foolish when you try to argue that the universe is only 6,000 years old.

Mortenson: Well, first of all the background radiation does not prove the universe is 12 billion years old, the number that seems to be the most quoted by the evolutionists. The background radiation only shows you background radiation, it doesn't say anything except if you interpret as a leftover remnant of the big bang. But then you're assuming the very thing that is in question.

Is it just quibbling over details? Well, no -- the details of Genesis are important; the details of the Word of God are important because every word of God is inspired, and so we have to look at the details and not just gloss over it. And it is impossible to harmonize the big bang scenario with Genesis because God says in Genesis 1 that he created the earth before light and before the sun, moon, and stars. Right there you have a flat contradiction in the order of events. And then the evolution story says that in terms of biological life over millions of years, that sea creatures came into existence before land plants, and dinosaurs came into existence before birds -- those are just flat contradictions with the order of events in Genesis one. And so, the...details matter.

Comment: Is there a difference between Darwinian evolution -- one species changing into a completely different species -- and evolution that involves minor genetic changes within species?

Mortenson: Well, evolutionists are notorious for changing the meaning of the word in the middle of a sentence or an argument. Evolution, Darwinian evolution -- the evolution that all of our universities and schools are teaching -- is molecule-to-man evolution. It is that all of the different plants and animals living today are descended over millions of years from a common ancestor, the first living creature which was a single-celled creature which popped into existence from nonliving matter.

And so in the evolutionary view, all the mammals living today descended from the first mammal which evolved from a non-mammal. All of the birds today are descended from the first bird which evolved from a reptile -- most evolutionists think a dinosaur....What is often confusing is that people will talk about variation within a kind or species. The variation of dogs, we have wolves, dingoes, jackals, wild dogs, and then we have all the domestic dogs. That's not evolution -- that is simply variation within the dog kind. And Genesis teaches us that God created separate kinds to reproduce after their kind. And we can see it in mankind. We don't all look exactly alike, but that diversity was all in the genetic information of Adam and Eve's DNA. And so we're all descended from Adam even though we have people who are very dark-skinned, people that are very light-skinned. That's not evolution -- that is just human variation within the human genome.

Comment: In a previous interview we talked about acceptance of evolution with the Catholic religion in regards to a debate at the Vatican. However, this is not just a Catholic issue. Acceptance of evolution is widespread in the Protestant realm, correct?

Mortenson: Absolutely. Most theologically liberal [people] -- I would probably say all theologically liberal people -- would accept evolution, the whole ten yards. But even among evangelical Christians, there are professing evangelicals who believe in evolution, biological evolution. There are others who reject Darwinian evolution, but accept the geological ages and the big bang. And then there are Christians who reject all of this evolutionary thinking and accept what Genesis says as true and straightforward history.

And so there's a huge controversy within the church, and I've spoken on this subject in 19 countries and it varies from country to country. And in some countries most Christians would believe in young earth creationism, but they wouldn't know how to defend that view. In other countries most of the evangelical church would accept all of evolution, the big bang, geological ages, and Darwin's theory. So it varies from country to country, but it's a worldwide issue.

Mortenson concludes that is possible to be a Christian and believe in evolution. But that belief, he says, is contrary to the Word of God and the details of Genesis. He adds that Christians must build their thinking on the Word of God.