Death to Theistic Evolution?

Steven H. Larsen (103500.1553@compuserve.com)
13 May 96 00:37:31 EDT

Death to Theistic Evolution?
----------------------------
Overview: The problem of death is central to the Gospel and is antithetical to
life. How does Theistic Evolution (TE) handle the theological problem of the
origin of death? I propose that by accepting death before the creation of
humanity the Evolutionist, to remain consistent, should not be prepared to
accept the inspiration of Scripture or the Resurrection of Jesus from the dead.

Definition of Macro-evolution: According to evolutionary theory,
macro-evolution is an upward process that creates life through the normal or
natural processes of initiation, sustainment and cessation. Life is initiated
through a combination of accident, birth or mutation. Life is sustained by the
principle of "survival of the fittest". Finally, life is terminated by death
through predatory or non-violent means. Given enough time and process all life
forms have come into being. The Atheistic preference would be to credit
"chance," whereas the Theistic preference would be to credit divine intervention
or "tweaking." No matter which preference one holds, humankind has come about
in the relatively recent past.

Theological Problem for the Christian Theist: If death was present before
people, then death is a part of the natural created order and is not the
consequence of disobedience to God.

A Chain is Only as Strong as Its Weakest Link
---------------------------------------------
1. The Biblical documents are historically reliable.
2. The Resurrection of Jesus from the dead is attested to by the New Testament
documents.
3. Thus, the statements of Jesus are substantiated by his power over death.
(Jesus becomes the "absolute reference point" that mathematician Kurt Godel
suggests is necessary to ensure that any closed system of logic can be free from
contradiction.)
4. Jesus assumes the Inspiration of the Hebrew Scriptures ("Thus you nullify the
word of God by your tradition") and validates the Genesis account of creation as
being historical ("But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and
female.'" ).
5. Humankind is the focus of the Special Creation because of the revelation that
we have been made in God's image.
6. The problem with Creation is the curse that resulted from our disobedience --
the introduction of death -- not just to people, but to the whole created order.

Consider: If death, both physically and spiritually, is not a consequence of
human disobedience, then the scriptures are in error. If the scriptures are in
error, then why would God send his Son into the world to reverse the curse of
death. Why would Jesus subscribe to receiving the wrath of God for the
disobedience of humanity? Jesus had done nothing wrong, and so did not deserve
to die - he willingly gave himself up for the likes of you and me. Only after
his work had been completed, God's penalty being satisfied, did He rise from the
grave to destroy the works of death and Hades. Please note that the work was
completed on both planes. On the spiritual plane God restored our communion with
Himself and reconciled us through spiritual rebirth and regeneration. In the
physical plane God will reverse the effects of physical death with the bodily
resurrection to come.

Conclusion: By compromising the doctrine of Special Creation with those who are
"in the world" and are not spiritually regenerated, we have made the Word of God
conform to the principles of natural man. This is not an issue of
methodological science, but of philosophical naturalism. The Church, by holding
the Word of God up to the standards of the predominately atheistic scientific
community, has nullified the authenticity and validity of the Scriptures.

To take this to its full conclusion: We are left with a foolish Son of God
going to the cross based on either a delusion or flawed theology. Perhaps, in
this scenario, God would have the power to raise Jesus from the dead - but one
would wonder why if death is simply a natural result of the creative order. I
propose that a Buddhist theology, with its concept of spiritual Evolution, would
be a better fit with Macro-Evolution than would be Christianity. Buddhism can
be practiced either atheistically or theistically, especially in America.

Steven H. Larsen
____________________________________________________________________
Child of God for almost a decade, Christian Apologist & Philosopher,
Husband, Father of three, Deacon, Former Atheist (never fully bought
into Macro-Evolution or New Age Mysticism), Senior Consultant doing
Computer Applications Analysis & Programming at Nike, Inc. Residing
in Salem, Oregon; commuting to Beaverton listening to Ravi Zacharias
& J.P. Moreland tapes. Can be emailed at 103500.1553@CompuServe.COM

"The question is this-Is man an ape or an angel? My Lord, I am on the side of
the angels. I repudiate with indignation and abhorrence these new fangled
theories."
Benjamin Disraeli (1804-81), English statesman, author. Speech, 25 Nov. 1864,
Diocesan Conference, Oxford.