What all atheists have to believe
Paving the way for apostasy
by Calvin Smith
Published: 17 March 2011(GMT+10)
Illustration Caleb Salisbury
Have you ever had friends, acquaintances or family members who were coming to your
church/youth group/Bible study etc., who began to come less often, until finally
they stopped coming at all? Perhaps they turned hostile or just became distant to
any conversation concerning God/the Bible etc.? Maybe they even used to profess
that they were a Christian, that Jesus was their Saviour, but now they say
they are an atheist. What happened?
Although every person’s story in every scenario like this will have certain
differences, every instance of the journey from professing Christian to apostasy
must include certain intellectual steps (unless the apostate just shuts down his/her
thinking!):
- Belief that God’s Word (the Bible) cannot be trusted as plainly written.
- Belief in millions of years of time having occurred in the past.
- Belief in biological evolution of some sort.
Why? Since all atheists must have a way of explaining how they came into existence
without God, evolution is a requirement for that belief system. Evolution
(from pond scum to people) cannot have occurred quickly, so a belief in millions
of years is also required for atheism. And of course atheists cannot take the word
of God as plainly written because it claims to be the revelation from God,
who they profess doesn’t exist!
The slippery slope to unbelief
Creation Ministries (and other creationist groups) is often attacked by other Christians
or Christian organizations who do not hold to the biblical account of creation in
the same way that we do. These groups sometimes characterize creationists as ‘alarmists’,
saying we should not make a big deal out of this issue, and that we should just
concentrate on ‘the gospel’ etc. Some have even tried to paint creationists
as ‘anti-intellectual’ (a surprise to the scholars and scientists that
work for our ministry) and say that creationists create barriers and mental stumbling
blocks to people getting saved/accepting the Gospel.
But let’s think about this. Any other stance on origins other than biblical
creation (such as theistic evolution,
day age theory, gap theory, framework hypothesis, progressive creationists etc.)
involves millions of years (MOY) and/or evolution.
Because the Bible does not support millions of years and actively teaches against
it, a Christian that accepts that paradigm cannot claim to believe in God’s
Word as plainly written and believes that ‘science’ should tell Christians
what the Bible means.
As soon as a Christian adopts the concept of MOY they have already fulfilled requirements
1 and 2 (above) for accepting atheism. Because the Bible does not support MOY and
actively teaches against it, a Christian who accepts that paradigm cannot claim
to believe in God’s word as plainly written and believes that ‘science’
should tell Christians what the Bible means (‘science’ dictates their
exegesis of scripture).
As soon as a Christian accepts the first two requirements for atheism they are now
intellectually ‘open’ to accepting the third requirement—evolution.
After all, if they accept the secular interpretations of scientific data in one
area (MOY), there is no logical reason not to accept such interpretations in other
areas (evolution).
Now these 3 requirements do not automatically result in apostasy, as there are many
saved Christians who are evolutionists (therefore satisfying all the intellectual
requirements for atheism). But they are much further down the slope leading to unbelief
than their creationist brethren (who would have to skip ahead three steps if they
were to turn from Christ to atheism). And of course many professing Christians who
have already taken these three steps eventually become consistent thinkers and realize
that if they already have a
way to explain all of existence without God (evolution), then why bother
believing in God?
Intellectual barriers?
Christians who do not accept Genesis as plainly written sometimes express embarrassment at us ‘unsophisticated’ Christians who do. It’s as if they think that … us biblical creationists insisting that the Bible is describing these things as reality brings shame on the Gospel and impedes our witness to unbelievers.
Christians who do not accept Genesis as plainly written sometimes express embarrassment
at us ‘unsophisticated’ Christians who do. It’s as if they think,
in our modern scientific age, a belief in a plain reading of Genesis 1–11 (young earth, dinosaurs and man co-existing,
a global flood, a talking serpent) is just too fantastic to believe, and so us biblical
creationists insisting that the Bible is describing these things as reality brings
shame on the Gospel and impedes our witness to non-believers.
But what about the talking donkey in Numbers 22? What about the dead people that came back
to life and the virgin that gave birth in the gospels? Secular ‘science’
doesn’t support those either, so which other parts of the Bible should we
be ashamed of?
Compromising Christians seem to forget that biblical Christianity requires far more
than easy believing. Respected theologian and president of The Southern Baptist
Theological Seminary Dr Albert Mohler (considered by Time.com as the “reigning
intellectual of the evangelical movement in the U.S”, and interviewed in Creation 33(1) 2010) made a great point in
an article:
“ … when we are told that we have to accept and embrace the theory
of evolution in order to escape being considered intellectually backward, remember
the opposition to Francis Collins. It just doesn’t work. When Collins’
elevation to the NIH (National Institutes of Health) post was announced, evolutionary
scientist P.Z. Myers lamented, ‘I don’t want American science to be
represented by a clown.’
“This is the predicament of those who argue that evangelicals must accept
some form of theistic evolution—the guardians of evolution still consider
them clowns.”1
So despite all of Francis Collins’ achievements, qualifications, experience
and the fact that he promotes ‘evolution as fact’ as vigorously as the
most ardent atheist, he is dismissed by his evolutionary colleagues simply because
he believes in God. (See also a review of his theistic evolutionary book The Language of God and a critique of the BioLogos organization he heads.)
As Dr Mohler states:
“Thus, you might think that the scientific world would have celebrated the
elevation of Dr. Collins to the NIH. Not so. Harvard’s Steven Pinker declared
that Collins is ‘an advocate of profoundly anti-scientific beliefs.’
Other leading scientists said far worse. Why?
As The New Yorker reports this week, Dr. Collins is “a believing
Christian.”2
Sin factor
Some Christians claim that intellectual barriers are not the major reason why people
turn away from their faith and claim it is primarily a ‘heart’ issue.
Atheists who were once connected with a church often point to certain hurtful events
which they say caused them to turn away from God. Some have simply confessed that
God’s standards concerning sexual ethics, for example, conflicted with the
way they wished to live, so they rejected the Christian faith. Many could not accept
how God could allow a loved one to die tragically, and so concluded He doesn’t
exist.
All of these stories have a ‘sin’ component to them, whether it was
the person who was hurtful, the sin of the person turning away or the tragedy of
death caused by sin.
However true these reasons may be (although many people have claimed it
was simply intellectual barriers that caused them to drift), once a person is motivated
to jettison their faith, they need a logical way to back up their atheistic beliefs
and so must struggle to find a way to profess steps 1–3 to be able to embrace
their new worldview intellectually. Those who are ‘already there’, so
to speak, have a much easier time plunging headlong into apostasy.
Biblical creation (founded in an understanding of presuppositional
apologetics) is one of the best immunizers against the atheistic worldview,
and it helps Christians to be able to navigate around and through the hurts experienced
in living in a sin-cursed world. And far from being a hindrance to the Gospel, it
is actually one of the ways the Lord uses to win people to the Himself, as
many have testified.
Related articles
Further reading
References
- Mohler, Albert, The Predicament—Francis Collins, Human
Embryos, Evolution, and the Sanctity of Human Life, Friday, September 3, 2010;
The Predicament—Francis Collins, Human Embryos, Evolution, and the Sanctity of Human Life.
Return to text.
- Reference 1. Return to text.
| Refuting Evolution has sold over 500,000 copies! Impressive? But Richard Dawkins’ God Delusion has sold 8.5 million copies. Please support CMI so we can get more of this information out.  | | |
|
