The Creation Couple
Whether challenging secularists on creation or abortion, this dynamic duo packs
a powerful punch
by Don Batten and Jonathan
Sarfati
Summary
Don Batten and Jonathan Sarfati interview husband and wife Dr Stephen Grocott and
Dr Dianne Grocott. Stephen is a leading international research scientist in industrial
chemistry, currently with a major firm in Queensland, Australia. Dianne is a qualified
medical practitioner and psychiatrist. They have spoken on several occasions for
Creation Ministries International. Whether challenging secularists on creation or
abortion, this dynamic duo packs a powerful punch.
Interviewing two people at once was a new one for us, but it helped to have known
Stephen and Dianne for some time. They shared how they each converted to Christ
in their early thirties.
Dianne: ‘I was brought up in the church. I went to an Anglican
girls’ school, where I sang hymns to the Creator at assembly, and learnt about
evolution in the science lab, so at 15 I thought, “God is irrelevant; I’ll
have to look after myself.” That ended any sort of Christian thing for me
for a long time. To have some purpose in life I studied medicine—to help people.
Then I trained in psychiatry because there people were looked at as more of a whole
person. But psychiatry didn’t have the answers either. We were taught “the
truth” according to Freud, Jung, the Behaviourists, and so on. But they contradicted
each other. You picked one that you liked and believed that as “truth”,
but it did not solve people’s real problems. People would confess to us bad
things they had done, and then we’d let them decide whether it was all right
to continue doing them. I realized that I was like a priest, and it scared me. I
tried all sorts of spiritual disciplines, but didn’t find the truth until some Christian
friends invited us to a meeting. I responded to an invitation to follow Christ.’

The Grocott family-Stephen, Patrick (6 weeks old), Rebekah (4), Dianne and Jeremy
(7).
|
Stephen: ‘I grew up believing that we came from the apes.
I didn’t have a Christian upbringing but when I was about 15, I went to a Baptist
youth group for about a year, primarily to play table tennis. I remember thinking,
“I would really like to believe what these people believe, but I can’t.
That’s just not the way the world is.” By my early 30s I had had fantastic
“success”: a high-paid job, world travel, a lovely wife, but no peace;
I was completely empty and without purpose. When Dianne gave herself to the Lord,
I thought it was just another thing which would pass, like Buddhism, and other “isms”
she had looked into. The pastor visited us to go through a tract with Dianne. I
was eating, uninterested. He came to a page with man on one side of a chasm and
God on the other, with the Cross as the bridge—Jesus. He was reading how man
has his struggles, strife, pain, etc. and I thought, “That’s life, big deal.”
And then he said that in God there is peace. Bang! The Holy Spirit “grabbed”
me. But I still had a question about evolution/creation. The pastor said, “The
Bible says creation, so that’s the way it is.” So I just believed that, but
wondered what my friends would say. So to equip myself, I read voraciously. The
materials from Creation Ministries International were just fantastic. For me, creation/evolution
was not the key in coming to the Lord, but it has been so important in strengthening
my faith since. Without that I would be just blown around.’
We asked whether acceptance of six-day creation was important.
Stephen: ‘As a scientist, I try to think logically—I
just couldn’t consider having a Bible where some of it was true and some not—you
believe the whole thing. I never tried to believe the days were long periods of
time, or anything like that. It was just all or nothing. Some people say that we
should leave aside the meaning of the days, that it is a stumbling block, but the
true stumbling block is compromising God’s Word. Becoming a Christian, knowing
that the whole Bible is true and God is the Creator—suddenly the whole picture
made sense. The logic, and the watertight internal consistency of the Bible, and
its consistency with what we see in the world, really impressed me. That’s undermined
by long-age beliefs.’
We discussed the supposed conflict between ‘science’ and the Bible.
Stephen: ‘Though I’d been working as a scientist for 10 years,
I really only learnt what science was through Creation Ministries International. Some
of the things people call “science” are really outside the realms of
science; they’re not observable, testable, repeatable. The areas of conflict
are beliefs about the past, not open to experimental testing. Take radioactive dating;
you can measure decay rates and isotope ratios today, but you can’t extrapolate
back to some time in the past when you couldn’t measure it. I’ve been asked if disbelieving
evolution hampers my research. It doesn’t, because I work in real, experimental
science. But belief in creation gave me an appreciation for the beauty of what I
was researching. A proper scientific hypothesis needs only one contrary observation
to prove it wrong. With evolution, you do not observe the predicted accumulation
of information—you see a loss of information. And you do not see the millions
of transitional forms there should be. So, if evolution was a scientific concept,
it’s been falsified. So why do scientists believe in evolution? The same reason
anyone believes in it—because everyone else, including scientists, seems to,
and it’s what you are taught. Also, for a non-Christian, the alternative (creation)
can be unpalatable.’
We enquired about those who say that we should reinterpret the Bible to fit in with
‘science’.
Stephen: ‘That shows a lack of understanding of science.
In science you make observations, you try to come up with a hypothesis, an explanation
that works, and you publish it. But a later experiment may show the hypothesis is
wrong, and so you change it. So science is always changing and you would be constantly
reinterpreting your reinterpretations of the Bible!’
Dianne’s work changed radically, as she shares:
Dianne: ‘It was amazing. The hardest thing was realizing
that I now had the truth, that God had the answers to people’s problems, but
I didn’t know how it fitted with my work. In spite of secular psychiatrists’
gradually recognizing a spiritual component to people’s lives, they basically
don’t deal with that. They might send someone to, say, a meditation course,
but the“spirituality" is very much “New Age”—i.e. "God"
is “everything”, rather than being the Creator who made everything.
Doing a course in Christian counselling made me even more unsettled, because I now
had some tools that I could not use where I was working, in the public service.
I then had children and was out of psychiatry for a while. That was good, because
I had been very evolutionized. Before I could work as a Christian psychiatrist I
had to unlearn a lot of evolutionary thinking. Later I went into private practice
with a group of Christians. It’s great having the freedom to address spiritual
issues, as well as biological, social and psychological ones as appropriate. When
Christians seek help with unresolved spiritual issues, I am free to help. People
know they are coming to a Christian counselling centre, so with people who know
nothing of God but are receptive I can sow seeds or at least pray for them.’
Is the ‘boom industry’ of counselling a symptom of a society that has turned
its back on God?
Dianne: ‘Absolutely. Many people are looking for answers,
but in the wrong places. True life is not found in drugs, addictive behaviours,
the pursuit of possessions or achievement. These contribute to a lot of psychological
distress for which people seek help. Secular counselling and medication are often
helpful but they don’t fix the deep down problems of people who don’t
know God—who don’t have a purpose for living. You have to be reunited with
your Creator for that. Our society, our schools, the media, are telling us we’re
insignificant specks in a meaningless universe, but God says He sent His Son to
die for us.’
Stephen’s work in industry has made him a target for the radical Green movement.
Stephen: ‘I see in it a worship of the creation—it’s
the God-in-everything idea again—not the Creator. God makes it clear that
He wants us to care for His creation, to be stewards of it. That means we are not
to abuse the resources, but to use them sensibly, and for His glory. But in “Green"
thinking, man is not the pinnacle of God’s creation; he is just another evolving
animal. When you see how they value animals over human life, it’s pretty scary.’
Dianne sees the impact of ‘we are just animals’ in her involvement in
the Right-to-Life movement.
Dianne: ‘If we’re just evolved animals, why not have
an abortion if the lady feels like it? Most people don’t really understand
how abortion can affect, not only the baby, but also the mother and the father,
long-term. If you kill your child, you can’t go back to the time before the
pregnancy. You are now the mother (or father) of a dead child. Even non-Christians
feel grief, guilt and loss of self-respect. I’ve seen people who have felt so bad
after abortions, they’ve gone into promiscuity, drug abuse or depression. But I’ve
also seen the Lord forgive, heal and restore lives damaged by abortion.’
In medical school, Dianne was taught the fraudulent ‘embryonic
recapitulation’ theory, in which human embryos were supposed to go through
a fish stage, then an amphibian stage, etc.
Dianne: ‘This idea has been used to persuade women that abortion
is not destroying a human. But those in the abortion industry know they are dealing
with live children who become dead children. That’s why abortion clinics do not
show the pregnant woman the ultrasound of the baby. I have met women who were told
after abortions, “Here is your blob of tissue,” but it was the afterbirth;
the broken parts of the baby went into another bucket. They were lied to, but if
we all just evolved, and the Bible isn’t true, why should an abortionist worry
about God’s commandments against lying—or murder?’
Many think oil takes millions of years to form. But Stephen has been researching
the rapid formation of oil from rock.
Stephen: ‘You can heat the organic precursor to oil, kerogen
(a polymer derived from plants and algae, and found in certain rocks), in the absence
of oxygen and get oil in seconds. And even at temperatures less than 300°C,
this will happen by “hydrous pyrolysis”, in the presence of certain
clay minerals, which are as common as muck. You get such conditions beneath the
earth. I am not saying it takes seconds to form kerogen, then oil, but it certainly
does not need millions of years—under the right conditions it only takes months,
decades or hundreds of years.’
Both Stephen and Dianne see lots of evidence for a Creator in their fields.
Stephen: ‘I see the beauty of the way that molecules go together,
the systematic nature of chemical structures and the laws that govern their formation
and arrangement. I look at that and I say, “Man, this is complex, but it fits
together by all these really neat rules. Where do they come from?” The chemistry
of life is scarily complex. That people can even contemplate it making itself staggers
me. Speaking to colleagues about it, they often get themselves into a logical corner,
and then it gets down to the bottom line—a spiritual issue. It is wilful unbelief.’
Dianne: ‘I see “design” in the way human beings
are meant to relate to God and to each other. I see people who are angry, sad, guilty,
perturbed and distressed in many different ways. When people get right with God
a lot of problems often improve. Over time their relationships with others improve,
and as their symptoms improve they may not need as much, or any, medication. Some
psychiatric illnesses have a biological basis (genetic mutations have been accumulating
since the Fall). Getting right with God allows people to cope better with illness
and other challenges. There is increasing research showing that people with faith
enjoy better mental health and relationships. Evolution-based attitudes (“the
strong wipe out the weak”—opposite to what God has designed) favour
violence, exploitation and abuse, which do not lead to peace and joy.’
Stephen and Dianne found that their marriage took on new meaning and stability when
they both submitted to Christ:
Dianne: ‘As an evolutionist, I believed that marriage was
basically getting what you need from the other person, so you have to enter into
a sort of contract. You’re constantly in a state of tension, trying to make sure
that you get as much as you need without losing too much. Christian marriage is
not like this. It is God helping two people be together and be one, and when you
get to the point where God meets your needs, you can be free to serve each other.
To each I would say, “Look to God to meet all your needs, and be prepared
to lay down your life for your spouse, to give all on the mission field of his or
her life, and God will supply your needs.” Doing that, marriages start to
really change. And the closer couples get to God, the closer they get to each other.
I have seen that in the counselling room and in my marriage.’
Stephen: ‘Before we became Christians, we might have had
another couple of years left and then it would’ve been all over. As Christians
now, we say that God has written the rulebook about marriage, and about everything
else, in His Word. Sometimes you don’t want to do what He says, but you do it and
when you see the results you have to say, “Wow!”’
A Handy Argument Against Evolution
For his Ph.D., Dr Stephen Grocott worked on optically active compounds (these can
exist in mirror-image forms of each other, like right and left hands). Life depends
on having only pure forms of these (only one ‘hand’). But if life began
in a chemical primordial soup, there was no means of supplying the necessary ‘single-handed’
compounds. When Stephen synthesized optically active compounds, he always had to
start with an optically active substance that was ultimately derived from a living
source. With a bit of warming, his optically pure solution would decay back to a
50:50 mixture of right- and left-handed forms. He says:
‘Even if there were some source of optical activity in a primordial “soup”,
it would quickly disappear anyway. The recent idea of polarized light from a nearby
galaxy doesn’t help. They talk of it possibly causing a slight imbalance, say 51%
right-handed and 49% left-handed. But in time that will decay anyway, and you need
100% pure, not just a slight excess.
‘I enjoy seeing the mental gymnastics of people trying to explain the origin
of life. Most researchers in the area are honest enough to say they haven’t
got the faintest idea how life began from non-life. The mind boggles at the complexity
of the simplest single-celled organism-and the more we learn, the more complex it
looks.’
[Ed. note: see
colour diagram of chirality and Origin of life: the
chirality problem]
|
|