Wayne Grudem's Foreword

Extract

This is a highly significant book because it persuasively argues that Christians cannot accept modern evolutionary theory without also compromising essential teachings of the Bible.

It may at first seem easy to say ‘God simply used evolution to bring about the results he desired’, as some are proposing today. That view is called ‘theistic evolution’. However, the contributors to this volume, both scientists and biblical scholars, show that adopting theistic evolution leads to many positions contrary to the teaching of the Bible, such as these: (1) Adam and Eve were not the first human beings, but they were just two Neolithic farmers among about ten million other human beings on earth at that time, and God just chose to reveal himself to them in a personal way. (2) Those other human beings had already been seeking to worship and serve God or gods in their own ways. (3) Adam was not specially formed by God of ‘dust from the ground’ (Gen. 2:7) but had two human parents. (4) Eve was not directly made by God out of a ‘rib that the Lord God had taken from the man’ (Gen. 2:22), but she also had two human parents. (5) Many human beings both then and now are not descended from Adam and Eve. (6) Adam and Eve’s sin was not the first sin. (7) Human physical death had occurred for thousands of years before Adam and Eve’s sin – it was part of the way living things had always existed. (8) God did not impose any alteration in the natural world when he cursed the ground because of Adam’s sin.

As for the scientific evidence, several chapters in this book show that deeper examination of the evidence actually adds more weight to the arguments for intelligent design than for Darwinian evolution.

What is at stake? A lot: the truthfulness of the three foundational chapters for the entire Bible (Genesis 1 – 3), belief in the unity of the human race, belief in the ontological uniqueness of human beings among all God’s creatures, belief in the special creation of Adam and Eve in the image of God, belief in the parallel between condemnation through representation by Adam and salvation through representation by Christ, belief in the goodness of God’s original creation, belief that suffering and death today are the result of sin and not part of God’s original creation, and belief that natural disasters today are the result of the fall and not part of God’s original creation. Belief in evolution erodes the foundations. Evolution is secular culture’s grand explanation, the overriding ‘meta-narrative’ that sinners accept with joy because it allows them to explain life without reference to God, with no accountability to any Creator, no moral standards to restrain their sin, ‘no fear of God before their eyes’ (Rom. 3:18) – and now theistic evolutionists tell us that Christians can just surrender to this massive attack on the Christian faith and safely, inoffensively, tack on God, not as the omnipotent God who in his infinite wisdom directly created all living things, but as the invisible deity who makes absolutely no detectable difference in the nature of living beings as they exist today. It will not take long for unbelievers to dismiss the idea of such a God who makes no difference at all. To put it in terms of an equation, when atheists assure us that matter + evolution + 0 = all living things, and then theistic evolutionists answer, no, that matter + evolution + God = all living things, it will not take long for unbelievers to conclude that, therefore, God = 0.

I was previously aware that theistic evolution had serious difficulties, but I am now more firmly convinced than ever that it is impossible to believe consistently in both the truthfulness of the Bible and Darwinian evolution. We have to choose one or the other.

Wayne Grudem - Research Professor of Theology and Biblical Studies, Phoenix Seminary, Phoenix, Arizona, USA

Comments  

 
#6 RE: Wayne Grudem's ForewordJames McAdams 2013-02-12 18:43
Does Dr. Grudem's equation apply to other scientific theories besides evolution? For example, Christians will listen to a weather forecast that explains the weather in terms of air pressure, temperature and humidity and do not think the forecast contradicts scripture that tells us that God directs the wind and the rain according to His purposes - "heat + water vapor + God = weather." But if Christians do not think that meteorology is unbiblical, then what is so different about saying that God uses the processes of evolution in the same way that He uses weather (or gravity or healing) to accomplish His purposes? I hope this book leads to a deeper discussion of the Christian doctrine of providence, and the ways that God uses natural events to accomplish His purposes.
 
 
#5 ConcernedRyan McGoff 2011-07-25 04:09
I agree that evolutionary thought poses challenges for fundamentalist Christian faith, but I disagree that this means it's not true. Any lay person who spends more than a few hours truly investigating the facts sees that macro-evolution is utterly proven - much like gravity or the earth's rotation. We need to use the logic toolkit that the Creator endowed upon humanity. There is nothing holy about disregarding the gift of the human mind.
 
 
#4 RE: RickTim 2011-07-22 18:56
Actually, I think the equation works. The proper mathematical illustration is some say 2+2+0=4, but others say 2+2+God=4, therefore God=0. In your illustration, nobody thinks 2+2+0=10.

But inserting God doesn't *do* anything, likewise, within the evolutionary paradigm God isn't involved. In fact, the vary concept of 'evolution' as espoused by many theistic evolutionist is an undirected process. On their view, necessity (natural selection) and random variation (mutations) are at play. But God isn't causing mutations or intervening in any other way. By sheer logic, God can have no part in guiding an unguided process. So I think Grudem is right. On this view, God become superfluous.
 
 
#3 RE: Wayne Grudem's ForewordFrancis 2011-07-19 13:38
Speaking as a Christian, evolution only "leads to many positions contrary to the [LITERAL] teaching of the [Genesis narrative]."

It is simply not true that evolution is "secular culture’s grand explanation, the overriding ‘meta-narrative’ that sinners accept with joy because it allows them to explain life without reference to God, with no accountability to any Creator, no moral standards to restrain their sin..." There is a distinction between a personal explanation (as found in the Genesis narrative, where God creates a world for its goodness) and a scientific explanation (how that creation was accomplished).

Evolution is by far the best SCIENTIFIC explanation for the form and diversity of life. Simply look at the evidence.

It is an unhealthy thing to make people choose between the Book of God's WORD and the Book of God's WORKS, as the Christian believes that they are both written by the same author.
 
 
#2 W Grudem: Should Christians Embrace Evolutionadrian ruffhead 2011-07-05 13:54
I have just read your comments on your web page about Mr Grudem's latest book & I am breathing a sigh of relief. Thank goodness, someone is speaking up for biblical truth. I am in the UK & I have spent the best part of 30 years as a Christian dealing with this issue & each time a new objection to belief in Genesis is proposed I consider it but always come to the same conclusion: nothing changes the fact that Genesis 1 is a basically factual account of how the world, universe & life was made. Evolution is the basis for atheism so we need to remember that this is all the atheists have. If evolution falls as a proposition, atheism goes with it, hence the amount of effort that goes into keeping it going. I happen to believe that evolution is in reality on life support as God pushes it back through the twin means of Western decline & post-modern rejection of modernism.
www.allaboutjesus.org.uk
 
 
#1 RE: Wayne Grudem's ForewordRick 2011-02-03 15:13
This could be a significant book. I do appreciate Prof. Grudem's summary of the problems attending evolution. However, he should drop the equation illustration. I don't think it works.

Let's substitute the equation 2+2+6=10. If someone else were to say, no, 2+2+0=10, we would insist that that is wrong (a mathematician could here substitute a much more complex equation the problem of which wouldn't be so obvious). Would any reasonable person conclude that 6=0?

This may seem a trivial complaint, but, for the theistic evolutionist, obviously God does not equal zero; they say He played a crucial role. The fact that naturalistic evolutionists could conclude God=0 doesn't make the theistic evolutionist wrong. We don't base our theory on what someone else might (wrongly) do with it.

None of this, however, undermines the theological difficulties Grudem named, nor does it suggest the theistic evolutionists are right. It's just a small detail.
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

Infomation

Book Price: £9.99
Paperback 192 pages
ISBN 9781844744060
Published 20/11/2009

Edited by
Norman C. Nevin
Foreword by
Wayne Grudem

Latest Comments

  • Wayne Grudem's Foreword
    Does Dr. Grudem's equation apply to other scientific theories besides evolution? For example, Christians will listen to a weather forecast that explains the weather in terms o... Read More
    12.02.13 18:43
    By James McAdams
  • Creation, Redemption and Escha...
    Thank you for meeting and available very nice articles. Read More
    22.05.12 10:04
    By Sanghyun Park
  • The Fall and Death
    You object to the idea of death before the Fall. Paul speaks of the cross of Christ and the Fall of Adam as parallel events. We accept that the cross is an eternal event that ... Read More
    25.04.12 14:03
    By Ruth Campbell
  • Wayne Grudem's Foreword
    I agree that evolutionary thought poses challenges for fundamentalist Christian faith, but I disagree that this means it's not true. Any lay person who spends more than a few ... Read More
    25.07.11 04:09
    By Ryan McGoff
  • Wayne Grudem's Foreword
    Actually, I think the equation works. The proper mathematical illustration is some say 2+2+0=4, but others say 2+2+God=4, therefore God=0. In your illustration, nobody thinks ... Read More
    22.07.11 18:56
    By Tim
RSS