• Home
  • About This Blog
  • Contact Me
  • Subscribe
  • Comment Policy

Attempts at Honesty

Reflections on the interplay of the Bible and Culture

  • Westminster Shorter Catechism Series
  • Sermon on the Mount Series
Home Christianity and Culture Teaching Evolution in the Church?

Teaching Evolution in the Church?

Posted on February 15, 2012 Written by Mark McIntyre 2 Comments


This post is in reaction to an article written by Paul Wallace that I read in the Huffington Post. In it Mr. Wallace writes about his efforts at teaching evolution in the Church.

What the author seems to assume is that belief in evolution is the only reasonable response to the question of origin. If evolution is the only reasonable explanation of what we see, then it would be foolish to deny that claim.

I will set aside the difficulties inherent in evolutionary theory because there are many voices more qualified than I to enumerate them. Even if we granted that evolution is an adequate explanation, it is not the only reasonable explanation.

My point is that those who hold that evolution is the only reasonable explanation of origin do so because of their fundamental assumption that there could not be a creator or intelligent designer. They do not find a creator because they assume that he cannot exist and therefore ignore any evidence that he does. The first wrong assumption is that God cannot exist and therefore he could not have created.

The second wrong assumption in this article is that there is a dichotomy between faith and reason. This is the “if you don’t pray in my school, I won’t think in your church” fallacy. God, in Scripture, does not ask us to suspend our reason, he asks us to allow him to transform it. Paul tells us in Romans 12:1-2 that this transformation is the most reasonable response to God. In fact the word translated reasonable (NKJV) is logikos from which we get our word logical.

We do not suspend our reason in order to believe, but we do open ourselves to the possibility of God having acted in the past, present and future of human history. Without this possibility we do not have Christianity. The whole focus of Christianity is Jesus Christ who is God in the flesh who came specifically to intervene in human history on our behalf.

My question for those who would teach evolution in the church is why would you seek to undermine the foundational truths of Christianity and still try to call it Christian? Why call it Christian if you don’t want Christ? Call it whatever you want but it is not Christianity.

Perhaps the drive to undermine Christianity lies in the demands that Christ places upon us. Jesus doesn’t bid us come and evaluate his philosophy, he bids us come and die with him. He does not offer neatly packaged explanations of reality, he offers mystery. He does not offer transcendent conquest of life’s difficulties, he demands surrender and contentment.

At the core, I suspect that this evolution vs. creation debate is more of a submission issue than an intellectual one. If there is a God who is powerful enough to create what we see than it would be foolish to refuse submission to him.

Therefore since we refuse to submit, it is much easier to pretend God doesn’t exist. If I don’t look at him or acknowledge his presence, perhaps God will go away and leave me alone.

But then oh, how alone I would be.


Filed Under: Christianity and Culture Tagged With: Catholic Church, Christ, Christian, Christianity, God, Huffington Post, Jesus

About Mark McIntyre

A follower of Jesus Christ who shares observations about how Scripture should impact the church and the world. Mark is the original author and editor of Attempts at Honesty.

I have the opportunity to go to Istanbul, Turkey this summer to minister to Syrian refugees. If you would like more details about this trip, please use this link Mark McIntyre - Istanbul, Turkey Please note that this trip is fully funded, but I would appreciate your continued prayer. The trip will take place June 27 - July 6, 2025.

Follow Attempts at Honesty

Honesty in your Inbox

On bread, fish and urban ministry

I thought of a little boy who was going to a church meeting carrying his lunch. It was about two thousand years ago when Jesus was teaching the crowds and the disciples came to Jesus suggesting that he disperse the crowd so that they don’t pass out from hunger. Jesus took that boy’s lunch of bread and fish and multiplied it so that everyone could eat.

Don’t play the Korah card

I have been in a couple of situations where concerns were brought to a pastor who then likened the one who brought the concern to Korah attacking Moses. While I understand the temptation for a leader to deal with a complaint in this way, that temptation must be resisted. Not only is it inappropriate, it does nothing to fix the situation (unless of course the leader’s goal is to eliminate any other opinion than his own).

Holly Ordway on obedience

“I learned that obedience also means trust that His will is best, whether I understand it or not, and that the One who had made Himself known to me will not ever forsake or betray me.”

Meatloaf

On the pursuit of pleasure

I am not the first to make the point that idolatry can entail taking good things and making them into ultimate things. Or to put it another way, we should not confuse means and ends. I was thinking about this with reference to physical pleasures. Too often, the response of the church to the danger […]

Question 5

Is there more than one God?

Christianity believes (because the Bible declares) that there is only one God. And as we learned yesterday in Question 4, there are specific things to be believed about that one God as revealed in the Bible.

Post Series

  • Westminster Shorter Catechism Series
  • Sermon on the Mount Series
July 2025
SMTWTFS
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031 
« Jun    

Categories

Archives

Blogger Grid
Follow me on Blogarama

Copyright © 2025 · Focus Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in