Creation or Evolution?

ON OCTOBER 24, 1996, Pope John Paul II issued a written statement to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences concerning the theory of evolution. He said, “Fresh knowledge leads to recognition of the theory of evolution as more than just a hypothesis.” The New York Times, in reporting on this statement, said, “Nearly a century and a half after Darwin’s ‘Origin of Species’, Pope John Paul II has put the teaching authority of the Roman Catholic Church firmly behind the view that the human body may not have been the immediate creation of God, but is the product of a gradual process of evolution.

“Neither the Pope nor the Vatican elaborated on the ‘fresh knowledge’ that prompted the Pope’s statement. The church has never formally condemned the theory of evolution, but its strongest statement of concern came in the encyclical letter, ‘Humani Generis’, issued by Pope Pius in 1950.

“That encyclical strongly cautioned that while evolution as such might not be objectionable, it played into the hands of materialists and atheists who sought to remove the hand of God from the act of Creation.

“But Pius raised no objection to the promulgation of Darwin’s views as a ‘serious hypothesis’ that could be embraced by Catholics as long as it was not presented as ‘certain doctrine’. John Paul’s statement is unlikely to change significantly the teaching in Catholic schools in the United States, where it is already a standard part of the curriculum. But in public schools, where the teaching of evolution and creationism is a contentious issue, the Pope’s statement is seen as supporting the idea that religious faith and the teaching of evolution can easily coexist.”

The article also mentioned that in 1992, in a similar statement to the Academy, a group that advises the Papacy on scientific matters, the Pontiff sought to rectify one of the Church’s most infamous wrongs toward science, the persecution of Galileo for asserting that the earth moved around the sun. This latest press release also appears to be made in the spirit of removing opposition to science and has served to awaken in the minds of people everywhere that Darwin’s views have long stood as an emblem of conflict between reason and dogma, faith and science. It is true that Darwin’s publications, which were issued in 1859 and 1871, have created a controversy in all Christian faiths. For more than a century Christian churches have struggled to reconcile the scientists’ conclusion that man evolved over millions of years with the account in Genesis of the six days of Creation, involving the preparation of the earth for habitation and human beings.

Protestant fundamentalists have firmly continued to oppose the Darwinian view, and have taken a literal view of the Creation texts of Genesis. They have promoted the teachings of creationism in public schools in place of evolution, continuing a vigorous campaign in this direction. The questions raised by this latest press release are: “How scientific are the proposals of Darwin and his followers? What have Christian churches retained in the Creation account of Genesis? What does the Bible say about Creation? Are the Protestant fundamentalists correct in making a literal interpretation of the Bible?”

EXISTENCE OF A SUPREME, INTELLIGENT CREATOR

On the last two questions we note that the Bible’s approach to the subject of Creation starts with the reasonable assumption that a Creator—an intelligent First Cause—already existed: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.” (Gen. 1:1) While many scientists lack faith in the existence of a personal Creator, attributing all the Creative works to the operation of natural law, there are many others who admit their inability to explain the operation of natural law except from the standpoint that back of it there is an intelligent Lawgiver. And many scientists today freely admit that the Darwinian theory of evolution has not been proven, hence should not be accepted as the answer to the problem of Creation.

Professor Beale, of King’s College, London, a distinguished physiologist, said: “There is no evidence that man has descended from, or is, or was, in any way specially related to any other organism in nature, through evolution, or by any other process. In support of all naturalistic conjectures concerning man’s origin, there is not, at this time, a shadow of scientific evidence.”

Professor Virchow, a naturalist of worldwide fame, said, “The attempt to find the transition from the animal to man has ended in total failure. The middle link has not been found and never will be. Evolution is all nonsense. It cannot be proved by science that man descended from the ape or from any other animal.”

Sir William Dawson, an eminent geologist of Canada, said, “The record of the rocks is decidedly against evolutionists, especially in the abrupt appearance of new forms under specific types and without apparent predecessors. … Paleontology furnishes no evidence as to the actual transformation of one species into another. No such case is certainly known. Nothing is known about the origin of man except what is told in Scripture.”

A moment’s reflection upon the immensity and grandeur of the universe should suffice to convince us that behind all this display of intelligence and power must be the design of a great Being who is not only the Creator, but One who is worthy of our reverence and worship as God. Well did the prophet write that only the foolish say in their hearts, “There is no God.” (Ps. 14:1; 53:1) David wrote: “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handiwork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge.” (Ps. 19:1,2) Surely no truer statement of fact than this has ever been written!

An appreciation of the infinite power of the Creator and of our littleness should make us teachable. And how marvelously is the power of God manifested in his Creative works! Think for a moment of our own solar system, which is but an infinitely small part of the universe. We would stand appalled at the great power of the Creator did not the Scriptures assure us that he is as loving and kind as he is wise and powerful.

THE CREATIVE DAYS

The six days of Creation outlined in the first chapter of Genesis are descriptive, not of the creation of the earth, but of its gradual preparation for vegetable and animal life. Genesis 1:2 explains that, as originally created, it was “without form, and void”; that is, its ultimate contour, as God designed it, had not been developed, and it was empty of all forms of life. There were neither mountains nor valleys, trees nor shrubs, rivers nor oceans; but the earth “was.”

A recognition of the division made in Genesis between the creation of the earth and its later preparation to be the home of man eliminates all need for controversy between science and the Bible concerning the age of the earth or the length of time required for its creation.

It is the so-called fundamentalist viewpoint of Genesis which is in sharp conflict with the well established facts of science. This viewpoint, briefly stated, is that approximately six thousand years ago the sun, moon, and stars, together with our own planet, Earth, were created in six twenty-four-hour days. Such a view cannot be substantiated in the light of science today.

But this does not mean that the Bible itself, surveyed in the light of its own revealing testimony, is not scientifically correct. If science can prove that millions of years elapsed during which this earth came into being as a shapeless, empty mass, well and good. The Scriptures neither deny nor affirm these guesses and near-guesses of the scientists, but state simply that “in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”—Gen. 1:1

And what is even more important for the student of God’s Word to note is that the six days of Genesis, during which the earth, already created, was undergoing stages of gradual preparation for human habitation, were not short periods of twenty-four hours. They were, rather, epochs of time sufficiently long to permit the accomplishment of the work assigned to each.

THE LENGTH OF A CREATIVE DAY

In view of the wide Scriptural use of the term ‘day’, it is strange anyone should conclude that the Creative days of Genesis were only twenty-four hours in length—in fact, Genesis 2:4 refers to the entire Creative period as one “day.”

The Bible speaks of the “day of temptation in the wilderness” (Ps. 95:8), which was forty years long. It prophesies the coming of “a day of [God’s] wrath” (Zeph. 1:15), a period of time at this end of the age in which the selfish kingdoms of this world are set aside preparatory to the establishment of Messiah’s kingdom. The Bible also refers to “the Day of Judgment” (II Pet. 3:7) which is to be a thousand years long. It will be during that thousand years that Christ will reign over the earth to bestow God’s promised blessing of life upon a sin-sick and dying world.

Not only in the Bible, but outside of it as well, the term ‘day’ often relates to a period of time longer than twenty-four hours. We speak, for example, of Washington’s day, Lincoln’s day. It is in this sense that the term is used in Genesis. That the Creative days were not twenty-four-hour periods, the length of which is controlled by the relationship of the earth to the sun, is apparent from the fact that the sun was not made to rule the day until the fourth Creative epoch.

Another internal evidence, substantiating the fact that the time divisions of Genesis called days were not twenty-four-hour periods, is found in the description of what occurred during those days. Concerning the fifth day, for example, we read that “God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.”—Gen. 1:21

It should be observed that the fish and fowl were not merely created during the fifth day in order to bring forth their own kind in later days, but rather, they were created and brought forth during that one ‘day’. This language clearly indicates a lapse of time sufficient to permit the waters in a natural way to swarm with fish, and for a plentiful supply of birds to multiply. The development during the other days similarly indicates the passing of long periods of time.

GEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE

The Genesis sequence of progress from one epoch to another harmonizes with the findings of geology, which indicate that there was a slow and orderly progression in the appearance of plant and animal life. First came the lichen and mosses, then grasses and herbs, while fossils of trees and other higher forms of vegetation are found for the first time in a stratum immediately below that in which feathered birds made their initial appearance.

Geological evidences clearly reveal, even as the Bible states, that the first forms of animal life upon this planet were creeping sea creatures. Their remains are found in the lowest stratum, rare and fully preserved. In the Cambrian rock stratum next above are found fossils of trilobites and other shellfish in abundance. Immediately above this appear the fossils of fish of a very low order, without backbone or skeleton, but possessing fins which enabled them to swim.

Then, in the layer next above are found fish of a higher order—vertebrates with full skeletons—similar to many of the varieties with which we are familiar today. Above these are found amphibians—froglike or lizard-like creatures which were able to live both in the water and on the land. Then came reptiles, then birds, then mammals, and finally man, who was the crowning feature of God’s earthly creation.

Click here to go to Part 2

| Home Page | Table of Contents |