You are not welcome at this church

I was told this recently by the pastor. One of the elders at his church wanted me to do a creation sermon. To decide if this topic was appropriate, the elders and the pastor had a meeting. The pastor explained his view, which was as follows:

The fact is, the theory of evolution is not a theory, but a proven fact which is supported by the universal scientific consensus.  Except for a few ignorant creationists, every scientist on Earth accepts the fact of evolution, including the evolution of humans from our common ape ancestor.

The Christian church is not anti-science. Opposing science-fact does not lead people to Christ. Rather it leads them to reject the Gospel. We must focus on preaching the gospel of the saving grace of Christ and the creation issue is n unnecessary  distraction. Once someone has accepted Christ he is assured of salvation. It does not matter then if they believe that God created us or that we evolved.

My concern is the Church has a long history of opposing science which has been an embarrassment for us. Do you believe the Earth is round or flat? Do you accept the science that proves the Earth revolves around the Sun or that the Sun revolves around the Earth as the Church once taught?

My response:

One leading atheist published the following to support the reason why atheists aggressively support evolution. He argued that this issue was important to atheists because Christians who regard the Creation accounts [Genesis 1 & 2] as myths or allegories are undermining the rest of Scripture. He wrote in an atheistic magazine that “Creationists have shown irrefutably if there was no Adam, there was no Fall; and if there was no Fall there was no Hell; if there was no Hell, there was no need of Jesus as the  Second Adam and Incarnate Savior, crucified and risen. As a result, the whole Biblical system of salvation collapses. This is why we atheists push evolution” (from Mattill,  “Three Cheers for the Creationists,” Free Inquiry, Spring 1982).

The common assumption that creationists believe “science is the enemy to the gospel ” is false. It was two creationists, the Polish Catholic canon of Frauenburg cathedral, Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543), and the renowned Christian Italian Catholic scientist, Galilei Galileo (1564-1642), that led the way to the acceptance of the Earth’s rotundity and heliocentrism.  Copernicus and Galileo faced much opposition because they opposed the scientific consensus of their day that taught the Earth circled the Sun.

This geocentric scientific conclusion was developed by leading scientist, astronomer Claudius Ptolemy (c. 100-c. 170). Ptolemy wrote over a dozen scientific treatises, three of which were of central importance to later Byzantine, Islamic, and Western European science.

My field was genetics which has persuaded me that Darwinian evolution is impossible. Modern Darwinism (aka “Neo-Darwinism”) teaches that we, and all life, are the product of billions of damage events to the genome called genetic mutations which are selected by natural selection. The result is the application of the “survival-of-the-fittest” law, resulting in the fitter life-forms improved by mutations were more likely to survive.

These genetic damage events are caused by toxins, including radiation such as gamma rays, along with cosmic rays and mutagenic chemicals. Mutations damage the genes and, as a result, the genes do not function, causing diseases such as cancer. Evolutionists believe that mutations are required to produce the genetic variety that natural selection can select from. Leading scientist, Dylan Evans (Evolution, A Graphic Guide p. 56) stated, “No mutations, no evolution.”

The major problem with mutations is that close to 99 percent that are not repaired are near-neutral, deleterious (very harmful), or lethal. This slight damage adds up in time, eventually causing genetic catastrophe, i.e., death and species extinction. A great deal about mutations is known because they are the leading cause of cancer. Like bone fractures, the break is in the weak spots. Likewise, mutational changes most often occur in a few so-called ‘hot spots’ and do not produce potential improvements, but rather always cause gene deterioration. My academic area was cancer research, and it became clear to me that the core idea of evolution utterly fails to produce positive genetic changes. Without a viable means to produce new genetic information, Darwinian evolution fails.

A strong correlation exists between the rise of Darwinism and the fall of Christianity. Before Darwinism, 99 percent of all educated Westerners accepted the creation worldview.  After Darwin, acceptance of Darwinism has slowly been rising (especially among academicians) until today close to 97 percent of all leading scientists are atheists. It has been well-documented that Darwinism is the doorway to atheism. In fact, Darwin stated that he developed his theory to ‘murder God’. He knew that people believed in God because of the evidence of their senses from observing the designed natural world around us which could only exist due to a Creator God. So Darwin created an explanation for the creation of life that did not require a creator. Namely, evolution caused by natural selection of the natural variations of life that evolutionists now believe are caused by mutations. Churches that accept this view (e.g., the aforementioned pastor’s view) are contributing to the acceptance of evolutionism, and thus the decline of the acceptance of Christianity.

The pastor ruled against my presentation. He concluded that the debate about if humans evolved from some lower form of life by mutational changes, which is the scientific consensus, or if Adam and Eve are literal persons, removes the focus from Christ. As Paul says, “For as in Adam all die, and in Christ all will be made alive.” (1 Corinthians 15:22).