Creation, the Media, and Lordship

(© Very Rev. Curtis I. Crenshaw, Th.D.)

11 March 2015

bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ” (2 Cor. 10:5)

How many times have I heard media persons say: “But that is a religious statement.” Or, when some atheist debates a theist on TV, he will say: “You can’t use religious statements because they are unscientific.” In other words, man is autonomous and sovereign over his own thoughts and how to interpret the world. There are compartments in our thoughts, and Jesus is allowed in some areas (mainly the church, for now) but never in the culture as a whole.

With secular people, and especially enlightenment thinking people, the Triune God takes second place (or last place) to humanist thought. God has created us in His image, and we are returning the favor.

We can see this in Scott Walker in England recently (he’s running for president of the USA), having to answer a media question “correctly” about evolution. He said something like this: evolutions is “a question a politician shouldn’t be involved in one way or the other.” In other words, he was fearful of their response if he confidently stated: “I am a creationist.” If I were in his shoes, I tell myself I would say, “I just can’t believe in something as unscientific as evolution.” Of course, I would be laughed out of the presidential race. It would seem that the “intelligentsia” require a Creedal answer, the Creed being what I have coined as The Chaos Creed, which may be conceived this way:

“I believe in god the chaos almighty,

random maker of heaven and earth;

but not in Jesus Christ His only Son,

because of the Virgin is not a real birth.”

 And notice how embarrassed some Christian scholars have become over Genesis 1:1-2:4, the creation history account. Even some of the best, conservative Christian scholars are intimidated by that passage that allegedly is unscientific. Then the historic theology of the Church has to be further compromised. Who then is Lord over Genesis 1:1-2:4 and its interpretation? It is not the Bible itself, the real Creator, true science, or the historic Church but secular thought. Creation is a watershed doctrine, and if we deny it, here are other dominoes that will fall: Incarnation, crucifixion, resurrection, Ascension, and enthronement of Christ as King of the Universe. I read where one scholar (name escapes me) said that if we can get passed the first verse of the Bible (“God created the heavens and the earth.”), all else is downhill. So true.

The Openness of God movement is an example of embarrassed Christians. They are beyond Arminian, not holding to the sovereignty of God in any meaningful way. They say that God only foreknew who would believe, but that He did not determine it. Problem: if God knows all things, then He knows who will believe and it is still certain (but now man determines the certainty). Thus, they need to get rid of a God who knows all things. They say that God is in process, just like us, not knowing all things. Now we’re back to the chaos god ruling all things, ruling our thoughts, even God’s thoughts.

Moreover, the word-faith movement also despises the sovereignty of God. Their whole theology—if one can call it that—assumes that man is in control of his own destiny, and if he has enough faith he can speak positive words into the air and bring prosperity and health. In other words, faith without cash is a dead faith. It one has enough faith, he can even make his own providence.

Most Christians today are Arminian, believing in the sovereignty of God as long as it does not interfere with their plans and “free will”; otherwise, they become angry. I’ve seen otherwise good Christians become red faced and shouting angry if their pretended sovereignty was challenged. These Christians are embarrassed that God predestined His universe, especially evil. But consider that God uses the sin of His creatures to accomplish His goals yet without being the Author of sin:

for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place. (Acts 4:24 ESV)

He even determines who will believe:

Now when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and glorified the word of the Lord. And as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed (Acts 13:48).

Here is what is presented as intellectual and scientific, even though none of these things are true science, which is repeatable and observable:

  • Life came from non-life; life-came from non-life only once since all life is allegedly related.
  • Protozoa (one cell animals) gave rise to Metazoa (many cell animals).
  • Invertebrates (no back bone) gave rise to vertebrates (animals with backbones).
  • Sea animals gave rise to land animals.
  • Molecules in motion just before the alleged Big Bang gave rise to the immaterial laws of science; they also gave rise to the immaterial, invariant, and universal laws of logic that we all use.
  • Moreover, how can the non-personhood of chaos give rise to personhood?
  • Then think how convenient it was to have both male and female evolve at the same time and that each knew how to use their sexual “plumbing” to get pregnant, to carry the baby nine months, and to deliver it.
  • Moreover, though there is variation within a species (Chihuahua to Great Dane), there are no examples of one species becoming a new species.
  • Then consider the complexity of the human body. What parts could we live without until everything evolved to working order? Moreover, as Michael Behe, a micro-biologist, has said in his book (Darwin’s Black Box), there must be an irreducible complexity for everything to work together. In other words, you can’t have part of an eye; it must all be there and functioning.

The point is that once the assumption of chaos enters sinners minds, they think they can do what they please because there is no final judgment. They can create their own meaning. But they are frustrated because the new lord cannot account for persons, for relationships, for new species, for ethics, or any kind of order. To try to create our own order from chaos is to be our own lord. Welcome to the 21st century.

The arrogance of the modern scientist who thinks he is the measure of all things is rebellious to the Triune God. The idea of an alternative view of creation that is really “design” by random chance is so ridiculous that one hardly knows what to say. We are in a war over the minds of creatures, and who will be Lord over our thoughts. As John Dryden once said, who was the 17th century English Poet:

 “For those whom God to ruin has design’d,

He fits for fate, and first destroys their mind.”

AMEN. Ὡ

2 thoughts on “Creation, the Media, and Lordship

We welcome your comments

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s