Theistic evolution has emerged in recent years as the “go to” explanation that attempts to accommodate the historical narrative of Genesis with the evolutionary theory of life. Even though theistic evolutionary proponents claim to uphold the inspiration of the Bible, they typically undermine its integrity by yielding to so-called scientific conclusions thus diminishing the authority of God’s Word.
Biologos is the primary mouthpiece popularizing and disseminating theistic evolutionary propaganda to the general pubic. Under the “Questions” page the curators summarize their position by differentiating theistic evolution from atheistic evolution, intelligent design, and creationism, by writing,
Theism is the belief in a God who cares for and interacts with the creation. Theistic Evolution, therefore, is the belief that evolution is the way by which God created life.
On the webpage where the Biologos Foundation outlines what they are about and what they believe as a group, they write under point 1,
We believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. We also believe that evolution, properly understood, best describes God’s work of creation [emphasis mine].
Here we read a clear statement from the Biologos Foundation affirming a devotion to the inspiration of the Scriptures, and that is important to note, because the Bible specifically defines for us the word “inspiration.” In 2 Timothy 3:16, 17, Paul writes, All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
The word translated in our English Bibles as “inspiration” is a Greek word meaning “God breathed.” Some English translations even render the word as “God breathed.” In other words, Paul is saying the Bible – the Scriptures – is a written, divine revelation directly from God.
Paul goes on to identify the effectual nature of Scripture. It is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness. Now, the constituency of Biologos would argue Paul’s description of Scripture pertains only to moral issues of a spiritual nature. The daily issues a pastor will encounter when shepherding the Church of God. Hence, when the Bible addresses ethics, morals, and spiritual values of the Christian life, it is a reliable source of information. When the Bible addresses physical reality, however, areas of the world where modern day scientific theory attempts to assert itself as the dominant authority, it isn’t particularly useful and in some instances may be mistaken.
But, if the whole of Scripture is, as Paul describes, God-breathed, then such would imply the whole of Scripture is invested with a uniquely divine authority. The Scriptures, being breathed out by God, would certainly bear the qualities of God’s attributes. The most important of those attributes as it pertains to Scripture is God’s truthfulness. In God dwells all truth.
The Scriptures themselves repeatedly declare God is the source of all truth. For example, Deuteronomy 32:4 says God is called A God of truth. Psalm 31:5 states the same thing about God. Through out the Scriptures, the Word of God is called God’s truth and to obey God’s Word or to keep His law is equated to obeying the Truth. See for example Psalm 86:11 which says, Teach me Your way, O LORD; I will walk in Your truth; Unite my heart to fear Your name. Also, Psalm 119 describes God’s Word as truth and obedience to His Word by believers as “walking in truth” five times in verses 30, 43, 142, and 160. Those are just a smattering of passages from the OT.
The NT states the same thing about God’s Word. Jesus, in John’s gospel, calls Himself the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6). When He prays to the Father, Jesus says God’s Word is truth and that truth sanctifies the believer (John 17:17, 19). The Holy Spirit is called a “Spirit of Truth” in John 14:17 and 15:26. It is also important to note that “walking in light” is seen as walking in truth and is contrasted to “walking in darkness” which is described as error or deception.
Several more passages in both the OT and the NT could be considered, but it is clear the Bible identifies God and His Word as being “the truth,” and it is “truth” identified with God’s character.
So. When God breathes out His revelation it will always be truthful in all the matters it addresses. That can be the only possible conclusion one can draw from Scripture if we take it seriously as a divinely given document. If the Bible is God-breathed and, as its own pages proclaim, it is truthful, then it has to be without error because being by its very nature God-breathed, the Bible is invested with God’s character which is truth.
Returning back to Paul’s words to Timothy, the apostles states “all Scripture” is God-breathed. “All” means more that just those things only pertaining to spiritual or moral values. That means God’s Word is without error when it speaks to physical reality and historical matters. There isn’t a dichotomy within Scripture where some is God-breathed and other portions are not.
In other words, God’s Word cannot be God-breathed yet filled with error or deception at the same time. It cannot be both inspired yet errant. If Scripture is inspired or God-breathed it has to be inerrant and infallible in all that it addresses both in spiritual matters and physical and historical matters.
The presence of any error in the Bible with regards to physical matters (read “science”) and historical matters (read “origins”) would impugn God’s character with either intentional deception or making a series of mistakes. If either one of those scenarios are true the Bible could no longer be confidently believed as trustworthy or said to be infallible.
The drafters of the Chicago Statement on Inerrancy recognized inspiration and inerrancy are wed together as one in the historic orthodox doctrine of Scripture. Those two doctrines stand or fall together and cannot be separated. Under article 11, the drafters state,
We affirm that Scripture, having been given by divine inspiration, is infallible, so that, far from misleading us, it is true and reliable in all the matters it addresses.
We deny that it is possible for the Bible to be at the same time infallible and errant in its assertions. Infallibility and inerrancy may be distinguished but not separated.
and under article 12 they write,
We affirm that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.
We deny that biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creaton and the flood.
Even though the folks at Biologos claim they affirm a high view of Scripture, they regrettably reject the unity of inspiration and inerrancy in the one orthodox doctrine of Scripture. Though they say they believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, they reject inerrancy. They are acknowledging an inspired, but errant Bible, especially when it addresses the subjects of our World’s creation and man’s origins.
One has to wonder if theistic evolutionists recognize how their position speaks against the character of God. They are unintentionally saying that God breathed out a divine revelation that was inscripturated in the Bible, but what God revealed was misleading, deceptive, or mistaken.
If theistic evolutionists insist they believe in a divine, sovereign God and that the Bible is inspired, I would expect them to explain the numerous theological problems their position creates. The disconnect between an inspired, yet errant Bible and God’s character being just the first among many. In a handful of up-coming posts, my objective will be to highlight those problems and consider whether theistic evolution really reflects a high view of God, let alone a high view of Scripture.
What I have seen so far from theistic evolutionists, particularly the people at Biologos, is unbelief. A full out denial of Christian orthodoxy. In a manner of speaking, it is a form of stealth atheism.