Beware of Alexander

Attention: open in a new window. PDFPrintE-mail

Beware of Alexander: Denis Alexander has written a book entitledCreation or Evolution, Do we have to choose. He is a member of a prominent English evangelical church. The book is endorsed by well-known theologians and church leaders, including the Bishop of Oxford and Prof. J. I. Packer.

In spite of Alexander's claim to be an evangelical Christian who believes in the authority of Scripture, his book is clearly aimed at fitting Scripture into evolution, rather than examining evolution in the light of Scripture. The book covers a range of issues but does not add anything new to the debate. According to a review by Paul Taylor of Answers in Genesis, Alexander's book promotes evolution and denounces six day creationism with the same "tired old bromides" that have been used by theistic evolutionists for many years. For example, Alexander claims "the biblical understanding of creation is not primarily concerned with how things began, but why they exist." This can easily be refuted by reading Genesis 1, in which God tells us why he made the lights in the sky, but is otherwise a plain narrative of what God did and in what order, with no comment on why God did anything. Alexander defends evolution with the peppered moth, sickle cell anaemia, and antibiotic resistance in "superbugs" and makes the usual evolutionists' assertion that "virtually no biologist in the research community actually doubts evolution."

Alexander really gets carried away with his efforts to fit Scripture into evolution by referring to the parable of the sower in Matthew 13 and claiming that "Jesus himself used the same idea in his famous parable of the sower who needs to scatter far more seed than will ever germinate and lead to a good crop." As Paul Taylor comments: "This is merely an artificial way of introducing Jesus into a godless argument."

In spite of his assertion that he believes in the supremacy of Scripture, Alexander also brings up the old argument, used by liberal theologians, that "Genesis 1 – 2:3 may be read as a polemical and sometimes satirical attack on the Babylonian and Sumerian creation stories that were widespread in the Near East during the period 500-2000 BC." This argument assumes that the Babylonian creation myths pre-date Genesis, rather than Genesis being the original.

Alexander pours scorn on those who point out the inconsistencies between evolution and creation with judgemental statements such as: "One of the deep mysteries of life … is why people spend their time going round churches telling people that they don't believe evolutionary theory." (p.131). "Christians who make it their mission to attack evolution . . . are embarrassing and bring the gospel into disrepute." (p.352). In fact, it is books like Alexander's that do the gospel the most harm by dismissing the historical Adam and making the Fall of man into a theological theory, rather than a real event in real history. Paul Taylor summarises the problem: "If Adam's death was just figurative or "spiritual", then why did Jesus have to die a real death? Jesus died a real death because there was a real Adam in a real Garden who committed a real sin against a real God. This sin is now imputed to you and me (and we continue to sin on our own), so we need a real Saviour to die a real death on a real cross."

Paul Taylor's review here.

Editorial Comment: Denis Alexander's opposition to those of us who defend the plain truth of Genesis reminds us of another Alexander, whom the Apostle Paul referred to as having done much harm by strongly opposing Paul's message (2 Tim 4:14-15). Paul's message to the pagan Greeks, who believed evolutionary ideas, was that they must put away their false beliefs and turn to the one true God who made Heaven and Earth and all that is in them. Paul also taught that Christians must not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of their minds. Dennis Alexander's book is a classic case of being conformed to the prevailing evolutionary world view. Compromising Scripture always undermines its authority, and one only has to look at the lack of interest in the gospel and decline in respect for Biblical based laws that has occurred since Church leaders refused to stand up to the anti-Christian doctrine of evolution, to see the damage such compromise has done. (Ref. evolutionism, theology, compromise)

Evidence News 12 Dec 2008

q_and_a2
crc_youtube
outdoor_museum_panel
free_audio2