Is Biblical Creation a Distraction to Evangelism? (article)

Is Biblical Creation a Distraction to Evangelism? by James J. S. Johnson, J.D., Th.D. *

The Institute for Creation Research and other biblical creation ministries are sometimes criticized as distractions from the ministry of evangelism. The alleged concern is that the promotion of biblical creation as taught in Genesis creates controversy by derailing the evangelism process—distracting people from learning about who Jesus is and trusting Him as their Savior.

Does teaching biblical creation truth interfere with a proper presentation of the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior? Before that question can be squarely answered, consider the context of the controversy. Dr. John Morris addressed this issue:

A student once asked, “In your debates, have you ever known of somebody who was saved as a result of the debate?” My father [Dr. Henry Morris] and Dr. [Duane] Gish had several hundred debates. One time we ran a request in Acts & Facts to respond to a survey regarding the debates. One question was a salvation question. Many people responded, saying it was a very instrumental point in their journey to Christ.1

Some would argue Dr. Morris was alluding to favorable anecdotal evidence—that he offered no realistic allowance for the individuals who were “turned off” from seeking God because they were alienated by creation-versus-evolution polemics. Others might fault his report as being too vague. They might say he failed to provide any meaningful qualification regarding how to teach creation. They may question whether teaching about creation “in the beginning” helps or hurts a seeker’s journey, his ability to learn about God, and his willingness to come into God’s eternal sheepfold through His only begotten Son.

Clarification about who our Creator God is helps us appreciate Jesus and how He can rescue human souls as the uniquely all-sufficient kinsman-redeemer of Adam’s fallen race.

Certainly for the one lost sheep who comes to the Good Shepherd, statistics are irrelevant (John 10:1-16; Luke 15:3-7). That truth fits one classroom example, which began with a Christian student’s desire to show a biblical creation movie in the main auditorium of a North Carolina state university’s law school.2 The university granted permission to show the movie on campus, but the student was inept at using the media equipment provided. Providentially, his best friend and study partner was mechanically adept, and he agreed to run the film projector for the event. Ironically, the technically talented friend was a doubter—unconvinced that the Christian faith was truly reliable. The creation movie was packed with scientific information and analysis, proving how purposefully living creatures and their indispensably necessary submicroscopic components—such as DNA and RNA—are designed and constructed and how they operate.

In the movie, the creation scientist Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith explained the material and informational importance of chiral molecules (e.g., the left-handed amino acids needed to build the hardware of life), as well as the mind-boggling complexity and details of human chromosomes.3 A moderated and emotionally spirited discussion followed the showing, with audience viewpoints voiced by both evolutionists and creationists, several of whom were faithful ICR supporters.

But, at the end of the evening, the creation movie’s message was not truly over because the helpful student who ran the projector began thinking about how all of his scientific doubts and excuses were resolved. That conclusion was more than academic—it had logical implications, including some big questions such as: What do I do with the Creator who has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that He is God—the Creator whom Dr. Wilder-Smith declared “became my Redeemer” in the Person of Jesus Christ?

After a time of wrestling with pride and receiving more encouragement to believe in Christ, the mechanically gifted student became a thoroughly convinced believer in the Lord Jesus. The creation apologetics movie was helpful in eliminating excuses that were once barriers to saving faith for that former skeptic—through viewing the movie, he was guided toward becoming a fully persuaded sheep.

Individual experiences may be exceptional cases.4 So the question remains: Does teaching biblical creation with an emphasis on “in the beginning” routinely help gospel evangelism?

Yes—teaching about how God created in the beginning helps us introduce the saving gospel of Christ. In fact, objective evidences in the Bible demonstrate that biblical creation truth is one of the underlying theological foundations for evangelizing unbelievers. For example, consider the role model of Paul’s apostolic ministry. Paul began evangelizing Gentiles with an introductory declaration of God as the Creator (Acts 14:15-17; 17:19-34). But there is even a stronger proof of this point in the introduction of John’s gospel, the only book of the Bible that is explicitly written for an evangelistic purpose:

In the beginning. It is significant that the Apostle John began his gospel with the words: “In the beginning.” He obviously intended that his record should start with the same words as Genesis, that is, with creation. Since his explicit purpose in writing was to win his readers to Christ as Son of God and Savior (see John 20:30-31), he realized the foundational importance of prior belief in special creation of all things by God. People need to know Jesus Christ as offended Creator before they can believe with understanding on Him as sin-bearing Savior and Redeemer. A foundation of true creationism as the only meaningful context for true evangelism is thus revealed through John, under divine inspiration.5

John did not “distract” his readers by beginning with creation (John 1:1-3; 1:10-12). Rather, his gospel authoritatively presents the evangelistic gospel message by introducing Jesus as the incarnate Creator God apart from whom nothing was made that was made (John 1:3; see also John 20:30-31). Therefore, biblical creation truth is the proper theological foundation for evangelism—for explaining how Christ became our Messianic Savior whom we should believe in.

God chose to first introduce Himself to us as our Creator—that same Creator God who, as Dr. Wilder-Smith gratefully acknowledged, “became my Redeemer” (Genesis 1:1; John 1:1).2 And that is how we should introduce Him to others. When was the last time you showed or gave away a creation movie such as God of Wonders?6 This can be a very nonthreatening way to witness. DVDs like this help us appreciate the glory of our Creator, and they can help us evangelize lost sheep who need to be brought into the fold.

Morris, J. D. The Genesis Flood, Lesson 2, page 30. A transcribed lecture from the Institute of Creation Research’s School of Biblical Apologetics (SOBA). To learn more about ICR’s SOBA (which offers degree programs for M.C.Ed., B.C.Ed., and A.C.Ed.), visit icr.edu/soba. The law school illustration alludes to the use of a biblical creation movie that focuses mostly on explaining creation science rather than providing a gospel presentation. See Wilder-Smith, A. E. 1983. Origins: How the World Came to Be. Origins video series, volume 3. Mesa, AZ: Films for Christ. The movie’s content matches much of what appears in A. E. Wilder-Smith’s book The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution (Costa Mesa, CA: The Word for Today Publishers, 1981; translated from the original German by Petra Wilder-Smith).

The creation science movie featured Dr. A. E. Wilder-Smith, a European young-earth creationist inventor who earned three doctorates in the overlapping sciences of biology, chemistry, and pharmacology. See Wilder-Smith, A. E. and B. Wilder-Smith. 1998. Fulfilled Journey: The Wilder-Smith Memoirs. Costa Mesa, CA: The Word for Today Publishers.

Exceptional results may illustrate God producing good results from not-so-good circumstances, or even from human misbehavior (Genesis 50:20; Numbers 22-24). See the editorial footnote by Henry M. Morris for John 1:1 in Morris, H. M. 2006. The New Defender’s Study Bible. Nashville, TN: World Publishing, 1563. God of Wonders DVD, available through the ICR online store (icr.org/store).

* Dr. Johnson is Associate Professor of Apologetics and Chief Academic Officer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Cite this article: Johnson, J. J. S. 2013. Is Biblical Creation a Distraction to Evangelism? Acts & Facts. 42 (8): 18-19.

No.

As long as people actively attempt to discredit Christianity by discrediting creation, we have to have apologetics focused on providing a defense of creation.

We don’t have to fear science. That’s the bottom line. Just like we don’t have to fear archeology. We don’t have to fear millions of years. Mt St Helens shows us exactly what those walls are - hydrological sorting that happen extremely quickly in a catastrophic event. Why there are marine specimens at the tops of mountains.

Skeptics will be skeptics. Many truly do not want it to be true, the famous paraphrase of a biologist “evolution doesn’t work, but I stay with it because the alternative is personally horrifying” mentality pervades a great deal of these people. With those statements they have already said they will ignore evidence, they will not care even if it’s true when they know their evidence and arguments don’t work, they are refusing it because they don’t want to accept it - not even as a possibility because it’s too terrible for them to consider.

Jesus said you’ll always have the poor with you. He could have easily said you’ll always have people who will refuse to believe, too. Some people lived with Jesus, knew Him, knew who He claimed to be, saw and heard the miracles, and still didn’t believe. Some of those unbelievers even decided to persecute Him. If some today do the same thing to us when we present arguments and evidence, we must not be surprised.

Yes.

What did Jesus ever say about Creation?

Why would creation that took billions of years prevent the Christ from being your savior?

If the Bible is infaillable, is the Bible an infaillable doorstop? Of course not, because the Bible should not be used as a doorstop. The Bible should also not be used as a biology textbook.

You have never thought that the purpose of attacking biblical creation is to discredit the source and cast doubt on other areas of it?

God’w Word itself declares there’s no mistakes in its content, that what is recorded is true and has been kept true. God Himself in the book says He will keep His Word true.

Do you not see this is what they are attempting to do? Cast doubt on the recorded historicity in the bible. Relegating actual events to “stories”. Then wherever something sounds too incredible, or unprovable because they were singular-type events, who’s to say these aren’t stories either? How could Jesus be born of a virgin?

I hope you see where this leads, unchecked.

And more so, do you not understand that everything rests on genesis.

God Created everything.

God created mand from the ground. Physically formed him out of earth. Breathed His spirit into him. Billions of years is not the same thing.

God made woman from Adam. Not the same as billions of years.

There was no death in this world until man sinned and fell. Not the same as billions of years (of death).

God reveals that one day He will bring a kinsmen Redeemer to set things right (genesis 3) - a point ahead to Jesus Christ.

Genesis is a foundation of the faith. The concept of billions of years undermines key concepts that Genesis puts down that undergird the rest of a Christians faith. THEY know that and that’s why they attack it. If they can get people doubting it they can make them doubt the bible in other areas.

I am unclear why you don’t see their tactic for what it is. Nor how effective it’s been because we haven’t had people who could respond to someone who’s been exposed to it, by a college prof who has the intent on destroying as many Christian kids’ faith as they possibly can.

The concept of billions of years undermines key concepts that Genesis puts down that undergird the rest of a Christians faith.

But how do you explain away scientific evidence that supports "the concept of billions of years"? For example, there are quasars out in space that are more than 20 billion light years away--that is, it took more than 20 billion years for their light to reach Earth.

Gravitational Time Dilation - per Albert Einstein - seems to be the best explanation for apparent long ages of the Earth and Universe.

There are many things which science can not still fully explain with neither a creation nor evolution basis, but the appointed authorities don’t like to discuss any inconvenient facts.

101 Evidences for a Young Age of the Earth...And the Universe
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth

I will answer your question with a question. Did Jesus grow and ferment the grapes before turning the water into wine? The universe was created through a miracle and with apparent age. Same as the loaves and fishes. The fish were not caught, nor did they evolve first from pond scum while the 5 thousand waited to be fed. The bread was not baked by hand, but was given to feed the 5 thousand miraculously.

Lots of things appear to be old but are not.

If we had not had video and photographic evidence of Mt St Helens carving out canyons in a day, but appearing exactly like the Grand canyon “layers” tey claim took millions of years to make, but hydrological sorting in a day can make identical canyons with the same kind of layers...

If you look at polonium in minerals, if you understand you can under great pressure and energy make petrified wood in a few days, if you understand the fact that all dating methods assume things that may not be true, such as air and atmospheric temperatures being the same as today, and that there are flaws in dating methods, if you look at the fact they are finding organic material (marrow, blood cells) in animals they claim were dead millions of years - conflicting with their own certainties that that is not possible to have organic tissue and cells surviving in millions of years old remains...

Someone mentioned einsteins time dilation for certain reasons why we can see the universe the way we do.

All I know is that things may appear to be older than they actually are. Given bad assumptions and limitations of dating methods, I am open to the idea there are problems with man’s measuring methods. I believe that a reasonable person can look at the evidence and how the evidence is measured that they can have problems with the measuring and the assumptions that go along with the meadurement methods, and based on other evidence of nature being able to create things that if we did not observe, some would look at and say it took millions of years to do, but in reality took far shorter time to create, I believe it supports the concept that the biblical creation account happened the way it is described.

I thought the purpose of evolution as a theory was to explain changes in animal forms found in geograpical strata.

The oil company geologists have been finding oil for over a hundred years by looking at various fossils, and determining how far down they need to go to find oil. The same sequence of fossil changes keep being found, indicating that the living creatures evolve.

The alternative is a combination of
1. Special creation of each form of creature we find and
2. Special delivery to detect each form where we find them.

All I know is that things may appear to be older than they actually are. Given bad assumptions and limitations of dating methods, I am open to the idea there are problems with man’s measuring methods.

Why is it a given that the assumptions are bad? Aren't you simply substituting one set of assumptions for another that has even less supporting evidence behind them?

The standard way of explaining it, is a mature, created-in-place universe...i.e. that light radiating from very distant stars and galaxies was created in place at the same time as those distant objects. Another approach, is not assuming the speed of light is constant...

The most creative method, imho, is postulated by an orthodox Jewish physicist from Israel...which says, since Einstein’s relativity law shows us that time is relative to the observer, one could have 6 literal, 24 hour days pass to an observer traveling at very nearly the speed of light...with 15 BILLION YEARS (estimated age of the universe)passing for others.

Sure. We still have celocanths swimming around. We have every civilization recording encounters with what we’d classify as dinosaurs. Those pics on cave walls weren’t just make believe. These people were recording events. You can’t just say some were events and some that don’t fit my preconceived world view are fantasy or these we’ll regard as actual events and these we won’t because we believe that’s impossible.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.