Of all Christian doctrines the most difficult to understand is that of creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing). This doctrine is the complete opposite of ancient and modern evolutionary cosmogonies affirming that the universe and even the gods, emerged or evolved out of a pre-existing substance such as primordial matter or the watery chaos, which begs the question of where the pre-existing substances came from. The living, personal Godâ€™s miraculous creation has itsâ€™ foundation in the fact that He spoke all things into existence from nothing. Early Church Father Augustine fully embraced creatio ex nihilo, as did others. Church Father Irenaeus comments,
â€œGod, in the exercise of his will and pleasure, formed all thingsâ€¦out of what did not previously exist.â€
Over and against creatio ex nihilo is evolutionism, one of the principle doctrines of ancient evolutionary cosmogonies such as the Enuma Elish as well as Hegel's dialectic, modern naturalistic science, Marx's dialectical materialism, Communism, National Socialism, secular humanism, transhumanism, occult spiritual New Age and Modernism. In 1907 Pope Pius X dubbed Modernism and it's principle doctrine evolution â€œthe synthesis of all heresiesâ€ in his encyclical Pascendi Dominici gregis.
Along with Pope Pius X there were a good many intrepid and honest souls in the nineteenth century, including the English theologian G.H. Pember and the English Catholic priest Robert Hugh Benson who understood the reality that the Genesis account of creation ex nihilo and the doctrine of evolution were in direct conflict and would result in the radical reinterpretation of the Bible should the Church accept evolution.
The heresy of Modernism was inspired by tendencies prevalent in liberal Protestantism and secular philosophy:
â€œIt was influenced by nineteenth-century studies by Kant and Hegel, by liberal Protestant theologians and biblical critics (such as Schleiermacher and von Harnack), by the evolutionary theories of Darwin, and by certain liberal political movements in Europe. The centers of Modernism were in France, England, Italy, and Germany. Two of its leading figures were Fr. Alfred Loisy, a French theologian and Scripture scholar, and Fr. George Tyrrell, an Irish-born Protestant who became a Catholic and a Jesuit, though he was dismissed from the Jesuits in 1906.â€
(Modernism, James Akin, http://www.ewtn.com/library/HOMELIBR/MODERSM.TXT )
Already entrenched within the liberal Protestant church, the fears of nineteenth century watchmen were realized when forty-three years after Pope Pius X, the evolution heresy found an opening into the Roman Catholic Church when Pius XII cautiously stepped away from Pius Xâ€™s unflinching stand even as he advised that his opinion not be adopted as though it were a certain, proven doctrine. That said, in his encyclical Humani Generis (1950), Pius XII stated that there was no opposition between evolution and the doctrine of the faith about man and his vocation, on condition that one did not lose sight of several indisputable points, the most essential being: If the human body takes its origin from pre-existent living matter, the spiritual soul is immediately created by God.
In his article, "Creation vs Evolution--the New Shape of the Debate," Dr. Albert Mohler note thats,
"...even some among the honored and orthodox â€œPrinceton Theologiansâ€ attempted to argue that there was no necessary conflict between Genesis and Darwin. They were so convinced of the power of empirical science and of the authority of Scripture that they were absolutely sure that the progress of science would eventually prove the truthfulness of the Bible."
Today the evolution heresy contaminates most of the Church, from the Roman Catholic and Eastern Othodox to old mainline Protestant and Evangelical.
The widespread acceptance of the evolution heresy has taken hold of and conditioned the minds of Westerners in a very peculiar way. One of the hallmarks of satanism is the inversion of reality, and notes Frank Baumer, evolution has inverted reality itself. Evolution has,
"....persuaded people to think of everything in nature as the fruit of a gradual growth rather than an original creation." The sweeping acceptance of evolutionary thinking means that it is "now difficult if not impossible for an educated man to conceive of a primitive revelation such as traditional Christianity taught, or even of an original natural religion from which men had declined." This difficulty arises because "in an evolving world, perfection obviously lay, not in the past, but in the future." (Religion and Rise of Skepticism, p. 147)
In its most common form, the accomodation of the Bible with the evolution heresy amounts to "theistic evolution," the idea that the evolutionary process is guided by God to accomplish his divine purposes.
Ross Douthat, author of "Bad Religion" falls within this category. In order to accomodate the Bible with the idea that man finally appeared after "millennia upon millennia of evolution" Douthat has had to reduce God's Revelation to mere metaphor. (Dawkins to Christian Writer Ross Douthat: Are You Saying what You Really Believe? http://patriotsandliberty.com/?p=18576 )
What none of these Christian intellectuals and theologians recognize said Mohler, is the naturalistic bent of modern science:
"The framers of modern evolutionary theory did not move toward an acknowledgment of divine causality. To the contrary, Darwinâ€™s central defenders today oppose even the idea known as â€œIntelligent Design.â€ Their worldview is that of a sterile box filled only with naturalistic precepts." ("Creation vs Evolution--the New Shape of the Debate, Mohler)
Mohler explains that the Dogma of Darwinism,
".. is among the first principles of the worldview offered by the New Atheists. Darwin replaces the Bible as the great explainer of the existence of life in all of its forms. The New Atheists are not merely dependent upon science for their worldview; their worldview amounts to scientism â€“ the belief that modern naturalistic science is the great unifying answer to the most basic questions of human life." (ibid, Mohler)
Christians who uncritically accept the evolutionary heresy have given no thought to whether Biblical and naturalistic (neo-pagan) claims are compatible. For instance said Joe Carter, to be a â€œtheistic evolutionistâ€
â€œ..in the sense that modern science will accept, requires one to adhere to polygensism (the theory that Adam was not one historical man but, rather, a euphemism for â€œmankindâ€). That position, however, is not compatible with the teachings of the Bible, the Church, or of Jesus. The polygensism problem is, for me, the biggest stumbling block to uncritically accepting the theory of macroevolutionâ€¦â€ (Can A Christian Accept Evolutionary Theory Uncritically? Joe Carter, First Things, Oct. 18, 2010)
The uncritical acceptance of the evolution heresy places theistic evolutionists in the position of having to compromise and even reduce to allegory, Genesis 1-11. And to compromise the Genesis account is to compromise the whole Bible, which in turn compromises the Biblesâ€™ main theme: manâ€™s need of redemption.
The Genesis account speaks of manâ€™s relationship with God starting at the pinnacle of Creation week in the Garden of Eden after which degeneration commences. Theistic evolution turns the Genesis account upside-down by teaching that man started out at the bottom and only after "millennia upon millennia of evolution" according to Douthat, evolved his way to the top via the old macroevolutionary "amoeba-to-fish-to-dinosaur-to-ape-to-man story," meaning that possibly millions of lifeforms arose and died before man finally appeared. But if this account is true, then all men are genetic stewpots of everything from seaweed to tumble bugs and lizards...including the line of David. In perhaps the most satanic inversion, it also means that God the Father is a God of death, not life. As such, man needs to be saved from Him, not by Him.
Either man started at the top and fell, as Godâ€™s Word and His prophets who long ago declared the fall of man and his need for a Savior declare, or he started at the bottom and slowly evolved to the top, as evolution indicates. Both cannot be correct. Scripture teaches that manâ€™s fall is the reason for sin, degeneration and death. But if man is not fallen, then Original Sin does not exist and there was no need for Jesus Christ, the Son of God, to come to this planet and suffer a cruel death on the cross.
Additionally, Scripture emphatically declares that time has a beginning and an end. In this view, history is the unfolding of time and events that will end with the Kingdom of God. The evolution heresy turns all of this upside-down by placing time, events and man on an eternal Escalator going â€œup, up, up.â€ Mary Midgley coined the phrase â€œthe Escalator Mythâ€ to refer to the idea that humanity is everlastingly riding an evolutionary escalator smoothly, progressively, ever upward toward some imagined state of perfection. (Scientific Mythologies, James A. Herrick, p. 100)
Now Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God Himself. But if evolution is true, then what becomes of Jesus Christ? Is there to be a future being greater than Him?
â€œSurely evolution will not have to reverse itself and concede that it reached its zenith with the birth of the Christ child a long, long time ago. Surely this colossal system will not have to concede that it is less able now to produce a greater than Jesus than it did produce two thousand years ago. If evolution is not now able to produce a greater than Jesus, then it seems the system has ceased to be evolution and has become devolution, at least in one sense (Taylor, 1974, quoted in â€œCan a Christian Still be an Evolutionist? Brad Harrub, Ph.D. ApologeticsPress.org)
Finally, if the heresy of evolution is true and man really is a stew-pot of genetic material, it stands to reason that since some of mansâ€™ prior â€˜kinâ€™ were neither male nor female then logically, no man is really either male or female. Once again we see the inversion and destruction of the Genesis account:
â€œMale and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.â€ KJB
Jesus Himself stated in Matthew 19:4 (cf. Mark 10:6):
â€œHave ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female.â€
But if the evolution heresy is true then Jesus Christ is either a madman or a liar. And as long as we are tossing aside the Genesis account and Jesus Christ, then why not toss out all references to the Creation, starting with the gospelsâ€”Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John:
â€ â€¦ we also would have to throw out John, because the first few verses of chapter one review the beginning and Creation. Other scriptures such as Acts 4:24, Acts 17:25, Romans 1:20, Colossians 1:16, 1 Timothy 2:13, Hebrews 1:2, 1 Peter 4:19, and Revelation 4:11 also would be called into question if the Creation account is merely a â€œnice story,â€ but not historically accurate. As a matter of fact, the only books that do not refer to the first eleven chapters of Genesis in some form are the books of Philemon, and 2 and 3 John.â€ (Can a Christian Still be an Evolutionist? Brad Harrub, Ph.D. ApologeticsPress.org)
In the end we are left with two choices. Either Godâ€™s Revealed Word, creatio ex nihilo and Jesus Christ or the evolution heresy, which satanically inverts creation, destroys Godâ€™s Word and turns Jesus Christ into a liar. As it turns out, Pope Pius X was right to define Modernism and itsâ€™ principle doctrine evolution â€œthe synthesis of all heresies.â€