It is my belief that our denomination will speak clearly against the teaching of evolution in the upcoming General Assembly, as we have done so consistently in the past. We are reminded, however, of the necessity of vigilance and prayer. I hope this material will help you to be informed against false teaching and that you will pray for our church and denomination to continue to stand boldly on God’s Word in years to come.

About a year ago, a controversy arose over evolution during a homeschool convention held here in Greenville. That controversy centered on criticism from Dr. Ken Ham of the Answers in Genesis ministry for the teaching of Dr. Peter Enns. Both Ham and Enns were presenting during the convention, and Ham expressed concern for Enns teaching of evolution and especially for a new children’s Bible curriculum that Enns was authoring from that perspective. The offshoot of that particular controversy was the removal of both Ham and Enns from future venues of that convention.

The controversy over theistic evolution has not gone away in the meantime, however, and this year’s General Assembly of our denomination, the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) will see several overtures clearly stating our opposition to this teaching. Evolution, as most will know, is the theory that posits an unguided process of natural selection as the origin of the human race. Theistic evolution is the teaching that God created all things, but chose to do so by means of evolutionary processes.

Throughout its forty years, the PCA has taken a strong stand against theistic evolution, believing it to be contrary to Scripture. In the late 1990’s, the PCA commissioned a study committee (on which our own Dr. Patterson participated), the result of which included a clear prohibition against the teaching of evolution in the PCA. Nonetheless, the last few years have seen a remarkably strong movement in favor of accepting evolution within the broader Evangelical and Reformed academic community, with the support of some well-known teachers and leaders in the PCA. As a result, a fresh response to this challenge to biblical authority will be necessary in the years to come.

What, you may wonder, are the arguments being used by Bible-believing Evangelicals in support of theistic evolution?

The first claim of those Evangelicals supporting theistic evolution is that a failure to embrace the prevailing scientific paradigm will undermine the credibility of Christians in our culture. Some voices are demanding that Christians accept that science has definitively proven evolution as a theory.

The problem with this, as our own Creation Study Group frequently demonstrates, is that it simply is not true. It is true that many cultural voices claim that evolution can no longer be denied, but there is no reason for Christians to agree to this statement in the face of so much evidence to the contrary.

Christians who support evolution have made the argument that we need to rethink the way we read the opening chapters of Genesis, in order to remove the apparent discrepancy between evolution and the Bible. The historical Christian understanding of Genesis 1, for instance, teaches the very opposite of evolution. So how will we rethink Genesis 1 to make room for evolution?

The main answer is to assert that because of the way Genesis 1 is structured, with the repeated refrain, “there was evening and there was morning” it should be considered as poetry. The idea is that if Genesis 1 is poetry, the events recorded in the chapter should be considered as figurative and not literal. The first problem with this argument is that Genesis 1 does not employ the parallelism that is the chief feature of Hebrew poetry. Instead, Genesis 1 bears all the marks of historical narrative – i.e. the kind of writing that intends to record events that really happened.

The second problem is that even if Genesis 1 was poetry – which it is not – there is no reason why it could not record historical events, as so many examples of Old Testament poetry do (e.g. Ex. 15:1-2 and Jud. 5:1-31). Therefore, Genesis 1 continues to teach a very different view than what is taught under evolution and, so long as we retain a high view of the Bible’s truth and authority, there remains no reason for Christians to entertain evolutionary teachings.

A similar attempt is being made today to make Genesis chapter 2 compatible with evolution. Here, the “problem” is Gen. 2:7, which says that “the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.” Pro-evolution scholars are suggesting that this verse might metaphorically summarize millions of years of evolutionary progress, in which case the Bible would not be considered anti-evolution. Notice, however, that there is nothing in the text itself to suggest such a view: the evolutionary paradigm is simply imposed upon the Bible. This shows that support for evolution requires Christians to accept secular teaching as a higher authority to Scripture, which we would be willing to accommodate as the unbelieving world requires. It is hard to imagine what kind of Christianity we will be left with if evangelicals are willing to embrace such a low view of God’s Word.

Genesis 3 also poses a deadly threat to evolution, since it teaches that death came into the world as God’s punishment for sin. Therefore, death is considered our enemy, which Christ came to overthrow (see 1 Cor. 15:26, “The last enemy to be destroyed is death”). Evolution, in contrast, teaches that death is a positive force for improvement, since it is through death that the survival of the fittest improves our race. While there are many examples of how evolution conflicts with Christian teaching, the evolutionary view of death shows how opposed this doctrine is to the entire Christian worldview. Pro-evolution “Christian” scholar Peter Enns recently went so far as to suggest that Christians embrace the value of sexual promiscuity and violent aggression should be rethought in light of their value in an evolutionary scheme. To his credit, Enns is consistently applying the logic of evolution, while making the point that Christians can only embrace such secular teaching at the expense of our entire religion.

It is my belief that our denomination will speak clearly against the teaching of evolution in the upcoming General Assembly, as we have done so consistently in the past. We are reminded, however, of the necessity of vigilance and prayer. I hope this material will help you to be informed against false teaching and that you will pray for our church and denomination to continue to stand boldly on God’s Word in years to come.

In Christ’s Love,
Pastor Rick Phillips

Rick Phillips is a Teaching Elder in the Presbyterian Church in America, currently serving as the Senior Pastor of Second Presbyterian Church in Greenville, SC. This article first appeared on the church’s Facebook page and is used with permission.