“Scoffers will come in the last days”

iStockphoto scoffing-man-2

—they’re already here!


Published: 11 October 2016 (GMT+10)
“A belief in creationism may be a religious belief, and we must allow generous margins to the holding of such beliefs, but creationism falls beyond the spectrum. It should be consigned to the bin of unreasonable, untenable fact-allergic nonsense.”

So ranted Rupert Myers in the Daily Telegraph.1 In an article full of nonsense of his own (see below), this writer revealed his true colours in his objection to Dan Walker being chosen as one of the presenters of BBC Breakfast in the UK. Known as a committed Christian rather than a creationist as such, this slur would seem to reflect an extreme dislike for biblical Christianity in particular; there’s no more sure-fire way to sling mud in today’s media than to label someone a creationist.2 

“That’s an unacceptable level of stupidity from a headteacher.”

“This is horrifying. …tell me this lady doesn’t work in education. Please.”

Less than two weeks earlier, these are just two of the many mocking comments ‘tweeted’ when the headmistress of a Church of England primary school, Christina Wilkinson, had the ‘audacity’ to state on her Twitter account that

“Evolution is not a fact. That’s why it’s called a theory! There’s more evidence that the Bible is true.”3

It seems that it’s open season for people to mock and ridicule believers in biblical creation, or even anyone who would be suspected of the ‘sin’ of rejecting molecules-to-man evolution.

The pot calling the kettle black

We are, of course, quite accustomed to this sort of thing in our ‘enlightened’, secular age. It’s not merely biblical creationists who are mocked. Even to show sympathy for Intelligent Design is “a denial of science”, according to another headteacher.3 While the word ‘theory’ as used by scientists should not be confused with its general use by the layperson (see chapter 3 of Refuting Evolution 2), Christina Wilkinson is absolutely correct in denying evolution the status of ‘a fact’, and in declaring that there is more evidence for the Bible’s truth. Myers’ tirade against Dan Walker was also an insult to his readers. There were too many nonsensical statements in his article to list them all here (see our detailed article instead). However, the hypocrisy of claims that believers in Genesis are science deniers is obvious from the following:

“how [can] someone who believes in the literal truth of Genesis present the news accurately?”

Myers, a professing Christian, explains:

“Of course, in a free society, the margin of respect and tolerance given to religious beliefs should be generous. … But that margin cannot cover disregard for well-established scientific fact in a job where fact is key.”

In other words, creation-believing Christians are ‘beyond the pale’, their views unacceptable and distasteful to humanists.

But Myers was only warming up:

“A belief … that presumably God planted dinosaur skeletons in the ground to give us all something to talk about, goes well beyond the values for which people of faith can demand respect. The only difference between creationism and a church you could set up tomorrow which believes China doesn’t actually exist is that creationism has been around for a longer period of time.”

How this remotely passes for responsible, mature journalism is beyond me. If this wasn’t such a high-profile story, we would hardly bother to dignify it by responding.

“Creationism doesn’t just deny Darwinian evolution, it denies the findings of astronomy and chemistry, the age of the Universe, the scientific consensus that underpins carbon dating, and ice core samples over half a million years old.”

To all of this provocation, we simply reply, read or watch Evolution’s Achilles’ Heels and the wealth of articles at creation.com that easily put the lie to all such claims. To our detractors, we say politely-but-firmly, ‘Stop ignoring the overwhelming scientific evidence that has even convinced some atheists of the bankruptcy of such claims. Non-supernatural evolutionary tales of origins are not merely non-science, they are indeed nonsense.’

But we shouldn’t be surprised!

The Bible has long predicted an escalation of scorn aimed at biblically-minded Christians. In fact, we find plenty of space dedicated to the ‘scoffers’, ‘mockers’ or ‘scorners’, both of God and of those who seek consistently to wear His name. A brief résumé of some of this teaching is very relevant. Zedekiah was one of the many kings of Judah, of whom it was recorded that “he did evil in the sight of the Lord”; but the leaders, priests and people generally were all guilty of this. Out of compassion for them, God sent warnings, but the people just “mocked” and “scoffed” at the messengers and “despised” God’s words. They became ripe for judgement (2 Chronicles 36:15–16). In contrast to these ungodly people, righteous King David taught that a blessing comes upon those who avoid this sort of scornful attitude (Psalm 1:1). His son, King Solomon gave a damning indictment of those who reject the wisdom of God and delight instead in their own scoffing, describing them as “fools [who] hate knowledge”, “proud”, “haughty”, and “arrogant” (Proverbs 1:22; 21:24).

However, it is in the New Testament that we see the particular relevance of this short Bible study. Referring to those who scorn others for their belief in the historicity of the early part of Genesis, the apostle Peter prophesied that “scoffers will come in the last days”. He warned Christians that these people would mock the idea of Jesus’ second coming, saying “all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation” (2 Peter 3:3–4). This is reminiscent of the evolutionists’ mantra, “the present is the key to the past” which always goes hand in hand with the explicit denial of Genesis 1–11 as history. Peter is even more specific in saying that these End Times scoffers will be known as those who “willfully forget” or “deliberately overlook” the following:

  1. the world’s creation out of water by God’s word;
  2. the world’s destruction by a mighty flood (2 Peter 3:5–6).

This prophecy only really began to find fulfilment in the last two hundred years; tragically, many of the scoffers are within the Church itself. Jude (v. 18) warns believers not to forget these very things: “But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. They said to you, ‘In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.’ ”

Final thoughts

These two examples of Christians being vilified in the secular media are merely the latest in an ongoing barrage of insults from the godless. However, for many of them, their real angst is directed at the God of Scripture who sovereignly created this world by His spoken Word, destroyed it at the time of Noah through a watery Deluge, and will one day judge it again, though by fire (2 Peter 3:10). It is well to remember this so that we avoid becoming disheartened. We must keep these secular attacks in perspective and the Scriptures help us to do that. We will not change the minds of opponents of Truth who will continue to claim absurdly that,

“Creationists cannot be trusted to report objectively, or to interact reasonably with their interviewees and with the public.”1

We should be wise to their tactics but not intimidated into silence.

The wealth of information and resources supporting biblical creation, available today in many forms, is a means to a greater end—Christians should be committed to praying that God will graciously use biblical creation to help open many eyes and soften many hearts, that the Gospel of Jesus Christ will again impact our nations. Abigail C. recently e-mailed us this encouragement:

“I’d just like to thank the Creation team for your honest and well researched articles. I believe ALL the Bible, so it’s refreshing to find an organisation like yours which doesn’t cherry pick parts of Bible and ultimately create confusion and lies. I praise God for His generous gift of creation.com and pray that His perfect truth revealed in the Bible will remain undiluted and pure.”

References and notes

  1. Myers, R., Dan Walker’s creationism is an affront to reason, science and logic, telegraph.co.uk, 11 February 2016. Return to text
  2. A comprehensive rebuttal of Myers is, Sibley, A., Campaign to silence BBC presenter Dan Walker for his creationist views, creation.com/silence-bbc-dan-walker, 18 February 2016. Return to text
  3. Sherwood, H., Headteacher mocked on Twitter for claiming evolution is not a fact, theguardian.com, 3 February 2016. Return to text

Helpful Resources

Readers’ comments

Cowboy Bob S.
The remark, “how [can] someone who believes in the literal truth of Genesis present the news accurately?” reminds me of something that I encountered. Someone said that he did not want a creationist involved in space exploration and travel because he might have stupid beliefs that could cost the lives of other astronauts. Such a comment is simplistic prejudicial conjecture (with some bigotry as well). I wonder what the person who made that comment things about creationist Col. Jeff Williams and his accomplishments on the ISS.

Further, although we can clearly see that Myers is an unbiased writer who does extensive research (yes, I'm being facetious), he would have done well to investigate the many life-saving accomplishments of creationist evolution-refuter Louis Pasteur. He said, "The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator.”
Michael M.
Myers said,“A belief … that presumably God planted dinosaur skeletons in the ground to give us all something to talk about, goes well beyond the values for which people of faith can demand respect." Demand respect? It seems to me that Myers is more concerned about the opinions of men than the truth of God's Word. Pride blinds people to the truth.
Dan M.
If evolutionist's are so confident in their so called facts, why don't they beat us over the head with them and make us look silly. Instead they resort to name calling and character assassination like little children and make themselves look silly (hence the rant.)
This is what the pharisees did to Jesus when they could not counter his teaching with THEIR law in John 8:48. They called him a Samaritan, which is a great slander in that day and said he was possessed (delusional).
Solomon was right, there really is nothing new under the sun, Ecclesiastes 1:9.
Philip R.
There's an old story about the preacher's sermon notes that are annotated to say "argument weak here—shout louder". It seems that people like Myers are doing similar: "argument weak here—be nastier".

What I never see is a good reason for why creationists should be pilloried. It's always straw-man stuff like not believing in the findings of science, likening them to flat earthers or (in this case) people who don't believe China exists, claiming they are uneducated or don't understand evolution, etc. Rarely do they actually honestly critique what creationists say. Because if they tried, they would have to admit that it's not actually unreasonable.
Edward P.
2 Peter 3:4 ...for ever since the fathers fell asleep..., This clause lets us know they would be Jewish mockers.

2 Peter 2:1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as "there will also be" false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even DENYING THE MASTER who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves.

Notice that "there will also be false teachers" is future tense. They will secretly bring in.... They will deny the Master who bought them. Predicting the antichrist

Now look at 1 John 2:18: Children, it is the last hour; and just as you "heard" that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour. 2:22 Who is the liar, except the one DENYING THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST? This is "the antichrist", the one denying the Father and the Son.

John declares it to be the last hour and relates that the antichrist that Peter prophesied about has already entered the church.

Jude: 4 For certain persons "have crept in unnoticed", those who were long beforehand marked out for this condemnation, ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and DENY OUR ONLY MASTER, THE LORD JESUS CHRIST.

So, we see that Jude's letter is about warning the church that the antichrist has already crept in. The whole letter refers to what was prophesied in 2 Peter 2 and 3 and the prophesy in Enoch.

May I suggest reading 2 Peter 2 and 3 then read Jude and 1 and 2 John. Then read Revelation 1, where the Father now gives Jesus the Revelation that things MUST SOON take place.
Philip Bell
These are certainly pertinent Scripture passages as we consider the days in which we live and the prevalence of scoffers; false teachers and the need to discern truth from error are dealt with in some detail in From Fables to Truth.
murk P.
“A belief in creationism may be a religious belief, and we must allow generous margins to the holding of such beliefs, but creationism falls beyond the spectrum. It should be consigned to the bin of unreasonable, untenable fact-allergic nonsense.”

1. “must allow generous margins to the holding of such beliefs” is: 1. a belief about an absolute standard of morality – (“we must”); 2. beyond scientific verification.

2. “unreasonable” - Why do you trust your ability to reason that we are unreasonable Mr. Myers? (remember there is no way you can get meaningful thoughts from the movement of matter in your brain – in your espoused universe).

3. Mr. Myers thus reveals he believes that laws/rules that govern all mankind exist. He also reveals that he is wise enough to determine that creationists operate outside these laws “beyond the spectrum”. These laws are beyond scientific verification. He thus reveals he is deeply religious. But can he account for this belief?
Can he justify the standards he appeals to – to undermine creationists? Without betraying his attempt to be an empiricist and without actually supporting the creationist position? Nope.
Dean R.
... [L]ike the tiny basket of reeds that held the tiny babe & the manger that held the Saviour, CMI plays an important role in God encouraging His church with the utilities that he has provided.

Thank you for educating, informing & defending various truths with integrity & humility while the often proud and arrogant boasts continue to lead many astray.
David R.
Just this morning I was looking at what the wise King Solomon said about scoffers. It hit me between the eyes that the opposite of a scoffer is a wise man! This means that any scoffer is actually declaring by his actions that he is not himself wise.
Why do people scoff anyway? Very often it is because they know that they have lost an argument, but will not admit it; so instead of attacking the reasons, they scoff at the opposition since that still gives the feeling of being on top.
Eddie C.
I pray God will protect CMI and other creationist institutes. I pray that God will bless those who have the courage to proclaim his word in these darkening days.
Chuck R.
It's noteworthy too that in Daniel chapter 12 speaking of the end times (running to and fro, knowledge shall increase), it is stated that the power of the holy people is broken, i.e. we lose the ability to affect our world, that this is to be expected (Dan 12:10) "but the wicked shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand."
But we are not to give up hope because "many shall be purified, made white, and refined."
Bruce B.
The last time I looked, Rupert Myers was regarded as a leading barrister, journalist and Christian. One must wonder what sort of Christian he feels himself to be that he could attack a brother in Christ in such an unseemly and bigoted way. Apart from the utter foolishness of his remarks, not one is really worthy of consideration, Mr Myers would do well to find out what being a Christian really means - and what it means to claim to be acting in the name of Jesus when in fact the obverse is true.
Joseph M.
Those who understand and recognize bias will see through the scoffing and mocking. It's not what others do that count, but how a Christian reacts that is important and God may grant the scoffers repentance and a way out.

2 Timothy 2:24-26 ESV
"And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil, correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will."

The article that Rupert Myers in the Daily Telegraph wrote will be a historical recording and show the unreasonableness in him and those who allowed it to be published.

When replying to unreasonable fallacious bias one of the numerous scriptural passages to remember is:

Philippians 4:5 ESV
"Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand;"
John P.
Who does this Myers think he is? Fulfilling Bible prophesy on the wrong side of the ledger he thinks he's wise but is showing himself to be foolish. He would probably not examine creation as it would challenge his own faith in humanism and materialism. Quite honestly his opinions are not worth the paper they are written on, nor is his newspaper worth reading.
Evolution is a philosophy and a fairy tale for the humanist intelligentsia; the Hindus and Greeks had the same story and it was basically how the devil scammed Adam and Eve in the Garden. His lie was that if they ate the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil they'd become like God.
Guy W.
Praise God for your courage Christina! Rupert Myers' antics are more akin to a sketch of Monty Python's Flying Circus! However the fact is that he is an employee of the Daily Telegraph and in that way he represents the views and opinions of that newspaper. Myers simply does not have the guts to review the matter himself because if he did he might discover something to challenge his foolish conclusions, not to mention his conscience. In discussing man's origins the Theory of Evolution is a conclusion established upon ignorance of the subject under discussion. Once I was travelling in the Milne Bay Province of PNG and I met and discussed the 'theory' with an anthropologist who had come to see why Trobriand Island girls chase the men rather than the other way round. I asked him for conclusive, hard empirical proof that would make the Theory science. He said that while there was no actual proof, the consensus of so many scientists should be accepted as proof because they had qualifications. I told him that 91% of the German people (an entire nation) thought Hitler and National Socialism were the best thing for Germany and Europe and that it cost around 37 million people their lives and the total destruction of Germany before they were convinced otherwise. Maybe this is a precursor of the last days and Evolution denial [will] be the platform of persecution at the very end. Anyway I don't think I will buy the Daily Telegraph any more.
M. K.
I don't know how can he writes an article saying that creationists believe God planted dinosaur fossils. Has he even ever heard anything any creationist has ever said? Also, he talks about carbon dating. I wonder if he believes that carbon dating proves the Earth is millions of years old? If he accepts carbon dating, does he also accept the carbon dates on dinosaurs? Really, creationism is like believing China doesn't exist? Seriously, China is observable, evolution is not, evolution goes against observable facts like genetic entropy. Doesn't the Telegraph have any quality control at all? And why should his belief about creation have anything to do with the news?
W. R.
Praise the Lord for a wonderful ministry such as CMI, which brings into light some of the cumbersome topics about Creation & Evolution. I totally agree with Christina.

Hans G.
Can you see the fear in those evolutionists? A terrifying wiggling in their theory to gain some room of breathing, the burning need to attack a person because the truth is untouchable.
Ian H.
I don't care what Meyers says or thinks, it is immaterial. Talking to people both privately and on Market Stands promoting Creation I have found that what the very vast number of people want is INFORMATION. Most people are totally unconvinced about Evilution and are more than willing to examine a point of view that starts with 'Science is observable and repeatable, you can't do science in the past - so Evilution is just A STORY about the past. Showing people evidence that Dinosaurs did not die out 65 M years works very well also. Meyers will one day face Jesus but until then “Say not ye, There are yet four months, and then cometh harvest? behold, I say unto you, Lift up your eyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already to harvest.”
Leon M.
Amen to what Abigail C has said. CMI your ministry is God-led.

Comments are automatically closed 14 days after publication.