Doesn't it bother you how more and more evangelical churches, especially here in Europe and the UK, refuse to confront evolution issues? They seem to be afraid.
UK Apologetics Reply:
Yes, it bothers me greatly. They can only get away with this approach because nobody ever raises the subject in-congregation. Attenders become sort of cowed into not raising a topic which ministers obviously don't like, or prefer to shy away from. Now this does not apply to all, a few UK pastors have contacted me in the last two years in an attempt to increase their knowledge in this area and they have successfully done so.
For myself, I can't get away with simply ignoring this issue. Why? Because we have thousands of site visitors, not just 20-150 people sitting in a particular local congregation. Many of our site visitors are not yet Christians and they want to see this thing confronted which is entirely reasonable. It should be confronted - this is what Christian Apologetics is all about; we should be preaching, explaining and defending the Christian Faith. Evolutionary teaching has now changed and is now usually more actively atheist than it once was; we should take up this challenge. So this issue should be tackled and I have repeatedly showed how it can be done.
A Christian man once said this to me, "Apologetics is your field, that's fine, but I am only interested in being a Christian, not in explaining anything." Had he never read 1 Peter 3:15? On this website I have to be prepared for the fact that some site visitors are very well-read and well educated. These people have read Dawkins and I have to be ready to respond accordingly.
I will now offer just a few points to show how evolution can be tackled.
1. Don't be Afraid or Intimidated.
I was told of one church which had a noted scientist in the congregation, the pastor would not confront the issue of evolution because he did not want to end up with 'egg on his face,' or to offend this man or his family. Then the scientist and his family left to go to another part of the country. His parting words to the pastor were, "tell me, why do you never ever mention evolution? People are being taught lies and half-truths; surely you need to at least occasionally mention this topic in a sermon. I am a scientist but I know that evolution is wrong." To put it mildly, apparently the pastor was shocked. He had avoided the subject in case of causing difficulties with this man but this scientist within his congregation did not believe in evolution anyway! Of course, we often hear the nonsense that all scientists support evolution - they don't! It's the propagandists who make those claims. Of course, we speak here of macro-evolution, not micro-evolution. So I say, don't be afraid: it only takes a little study to show how macro-evolution (see point three) can be tackled and explained and Christian Creationism defended. We should not be lazy about this, the subject is too important for that.
2. "We Only Preach the Bible and Spiritual Matters - Not Science"
Yes, I have heard the above and you have too. Okay, I have to say that this is very lame and it just will not fly. I'm afraid I am going to upset a few of you pastors here. The point is: evolutionary teaching now goes much farther than it once did. Propagandists on evolution (like Richard Dawkins) will now say, "of course, we now know that the idea that God created the world is a nonsense, science has shown otherwise." But science has not shown "otherwise" at all and is not even capable of doing so. This, of course, is a plain lie. An older generation of scientists and science teachers used to say, 'we cannot explain the things of God, that is outside of our remit. Things of the spiritual and supernatural are beyond the scope of science.' Now that is very honest, but anti-God philosophy has increasingly got mixed into 'science' (when this happens 'science' becomes 'scientism'), they now go further and reject God, but to go further is to tell lies to the general public; Christians should be reacting to this much more than they are!
3. Understanding The Terms 'Micro-evolution' and 'Macro-evolution.'
This is a big key to handling evolution issues. Look at this chart:
Established and Scientifically Observable.
This area presents no problems and is in full agreement with Genesis. This is the area of natural selection, variations occurring often due to climate or local variations. Unfortunately this area is saddled with the word "evolution," but it is not evolution at all. The information for variations within cats, dogs, cattle, tomatoes, potatoes and yes, people too is already genetically inbuilt.
"Millions of years" are not required for anything here. Animal breeders and plant breeders work within this area all the time. Moreover, all the areas above have strict boundaries which cannot be broken, nothing can suddenly become something else; a dog will always be a dog, a horse will always be a horse. If a plant or animal appears about to become something else, barrenness occurs. As Genesis stated, things only reproduce 'according to their kind.'
Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. (Genesis 1:11).
The area of Micro-evolution (yes, a bad name) is what we all observe all the time. It is self-evident.
Theory and Conjecture Only. It Cannot be Observed Nor Replicated in any Laboratory Experiment.
This is the area of theory, conjecture and speculation yet still no proof or even really compelling evidence is available. This is the grand philosophical theory that mankind arose from some primitive organism through very small genetic changes over countless millions of years. Scientists like to point to micro-evolution as some sort of evidence of macro-evolution when it is nothing of the kind because micro-evolution plainly does not allow plants or creatures to gradually become something else.
With this very plain difficulty, evolutionists now rely on mutations to explain the countless changes which needed to have occurred, however, it is known that mutations are 95% damaging, they are not constructive, they cannot build something new or better.
Another very serious problem (which evolutionists like to sweep under the carpet) is that the fossil record plainly does not support macro-evolution but strongly suggests that all life occurred around the same time (the Cambrian explosion).
The area of Macro-evolution is theory, conjecture and speculation only, even though the public are assured that this is how we all got here. Teachers and lecturers can be fired for challenging this official version of the beginnings of life, yet macro-evolution is not self-evident, on the contrary, compelling evidence is seriously lacking.
Absorbing the main essentials in the chart above will greatly assist one in being prepared for questions in this area.
4. You Don't Have to Become An Outstanding Expert!
It is not necessary to become a top expert to tackle the main evolution issues and to defend Creationism, try to stick to 'the trunk of the tree.' The chart outlining the two forms of evolution should give the broad guidelines, but don't wander into areas where a lack of in-depth knowledge might be exposed. The trouble is evolutionists have become adept at 'blinding one with science' but one needs to find a way around that, stick to the main points. Evolutionists like to kid everyone that established science is on their side but actually it is not; strip away the hype, theory and speculation and it is no more than a house of cards. We have over a hundred articles on the issue of evolution, also there are a few creationist websites out there with more detailed articles and some will answer specific questions.
Robin A. Brace. December 30th, 2016.