Only one sentence of this latest report from the Church of
Englands Doctrine Commission is likely to be remembered. "Hell is not
eternal torment, but it is the final and irrevocable choosing of that which is
opposed to God so completely and so absolutely that the only end is total
non-being." [p.199] Although the subject of eternal punishemnt is extremely
important, it represents less than one page of the report. Hardly anything else
mentioned in the book has so far been picked up by either the secular or
religious Press. It might therefore surprise many creationists to learn how
much it has to say about the doctrine of creation.
Man, we are told is a psychosomatic unity, the result of
four billion years of evolutionary progress. In essence there is no difference
between the Homo sapiens and the rest of the physical world [10]. The
universe that began with a Big Bang fifteen billion years ago [10] will come to
an end either by collapsing back in or by continuing to expand and cool, a
process that is expected to take tens of billions of years. "But it is as
certain as it can be that within the unfolding history of the present universe,
humanity will ultimately prove to have been a transient episode." [13] This
bleak future (it is argued) strikes a death-blow to any notions of evolutionary
optimism and the writers conclude that "Only God can release the universe from
its bondage to decay (Rom. 8.21)." [13]. Mankinds history may
be cut short, if it is supplanted by a more evolved hominid, just as Homo
sapiens replaced earlier species [14].
On page 52 the Report describes the creation as being
originally good before it was corrupted by an external evil. The creation is
therefore still fundamentally good and capable of being redeemed by God.
Genesis 3 is not a literal account, but rather describes the personal fall that
every human being repeats. Apparently Paul was wrong to think of Adam as a
historical character (Romans 5-6) [53, 135]. Any idea of a state of perfection
before the fall of the first Homo sapiens is dismissed [53]. Death was a
fundamental part of the physical creation for millions of years before dawn of
consciousness in the first human beings. So, "...death cannot be the wages of
sin in the sense that physical death would not have happened apart from human
sin." [53]. Earthquakes, floods and some forms is disease were also part of the
original "good" creation [54]. Moral evil, on the other hand, is the result of
sin [54].
I find it remarkable that after rejecting the traditional
view of creation that the writers should revert to using phrases that are
proved meaningless by their evolutionary assumptions. An prime example of this
is the statement that: "The sorrows and pains of the world will not be healed
finally, to be sure, until the creation of the new heavens and the new earth."
[84]. What kind of "creation" is this process to be? If we are to be consistent
with the argument presented in the Report then the "new heavens and the new
earth" will take another fifteen billion years to evolve. Instead, we learn
later that the "new creation" is the old creation transformed, not remade
[195]. While the present creation is subject to disease and decay as part of
Gods original plan the new creation will not be [194].
Commenting on the growing ecological crisis, the Report
laments that the modern church has stressed saving people at the expense of
concern for the created world. The writers then make what is in my view a
remarkable statement: "To the extent that the Church has responded to this
situation by accepting it and focusing its message exclusively on God as
saviour, it has made a serious mistake, since it is dubious whether belief in
God as saviour can long retain its existential reality where belief in God as
creator is weak." [51-52]. I find remarkable because this is in effect exactly
what the Report does. The writers, having comprehensively dismissed the
traditional doctrine of creation, replace it with one that has no need for a
Creator at all. The Almighty Creator of the Universe is reduced to no more than
a projection of an over active imagination. The unbeliever could not be blamed
for rejecting the idea of God liberating the world from its bondage to decay as
being mere wishful thinking. Perhaps believers dont even have this to
look forward to, if a more highly evolved species replaces us! Creationists
would wholeheartedly agree that "...it is dubious whether belief in God as
saviour can long retain its existential reality where belief in God as creator
is weak." If this Report accurately represents the new doctrine of creation of
the established church in England then it would appear by its own admission
that this churchs days are numbered. It is fortunate that not everyone in
the Church of England believes what the Doctrine Committee says!
©
1997 Robert I. Bradshaw |