Theistic evolution of John Stott

John Stott’s flawed method of interpreting Scripture allowed him to accept the theory of evolution as consistent with biblical revelation. Throughout most of his life as a theologian he believed and taught an evolutionary version of creation from the first chapters of Genesis. In an article in The Church of England Newspaper in 1968, he wrote:

‘It seems perfectly possible to reconcile the historicity of Adam with at least some (theistic) evolutionary theory. Many biblical Christians in fact do so, believing them to be not entirely incompatible. To assert the historicity of an original pair who sinned through disobedience is one thing; it is quite another to deny all evolution and assert the separate and special creation of everything, including both subhuman creatures and Adam’s body. The suggestion (for it is no more than this) does not seem to me to be against Scripture and therefore impossible that when God made man in His own image, what He did was to stamp His own likeness on one of the many “hominoids” which appear to have been living at the time.’[1]

In 1986 Paul Taylor, a high school science teacher with a master’s degree in chemistry, heard Stott’s presentation on his recently published book The Cross of Christ (1986). In public, Taylor asked Stott how he reconciled his belief in theistic evolution with his strongly stated conviction that Adam was a real historical figure. According to Taylor, Stott ‘answered with his now-famous homo divinus analogy, claiming that the “dust of the earth” from which Adam was made, was the evolutionary process, guided by God, whereby man evolved from ape-like ancestors. It was his contention that Adam was basically the first evolved ape — or rather first evolved from the ape-like common ancestor. Into this ape-like Adam, God breathed his soul.’[2]

In Understanding the Bible: Expanded Edition (1999), Stott attempts to justify his evolutionary views. ‘But my acceptance of Adam and Eve as historical is not incompatible with my belief that several forms of pre-Adamic “hominid” may have existed for thousands of years previously. These hominids began to advance culturally. They made their cave drawings and buried their dead. It is conceivable that God created Adam out of one of them. You may call them Homo erectus. I think you may even call some of them Homo sapiens, for these are arbitrary scientific names. But Adam was the first Homo divinus, if I may coin a phrase, the first man to whom may be given the biblical designation “made in the image of God”.’[3]

So in direct contradiction of Scripture, Stott says that as ‘hominids began to advance culturally… [it] is conceivable that God created Adam out of one of them’. Scripture says, ‘And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground’ (Genesis 2.7). This tells us a lot about Stott’s view of Scripture, for he is prepared to disregard the clear teaching of Scripture when it does not support his worldview. His teaching on evolution has had a powerful effect on the thinking of many Christians, especially young people, who now accept theistic evolution as an article of faith. Undoubtedly Stott’s theistic evolution made him intellectually respectable in the eyes of the world.

 Rescuing Darwin

According to the John Templeton Foundation:

‘Two hundred years after Charles Darwin’s birth in 1809, at least half of the British population is still skeptical about the theory of evolution. That is the finding of a new study released by Theos, a London think tank that brings theological perspectives to bear on public issues. With the support of a $600,000 grant from the Templeton Foundation, Theos has embarked on a campaign called “Rescuing Darwin,” which aims to show that Darwin never espoused many of the views commonly associated with him, especially atheism.

A survey of more than 2,000 people commissioned by Theos and conducted by the polling agency ComRes revealed that only 25 percent of British adults think that evolution is “definitely true,” with another quarter thinking it is “probably true.” Around 10 percent consistently choose “young earth” creationism (the belief that God created the world sometime in the last 10,000 years) over evolution, and about 12 percent consistently prefer intelligent design (the idea that evolution alone is not enough to explain the complex structures of some living things). The remainder of the population, over 25 percent, are unsure of their views and often mix evolution, ID, and creationism together.’

See: http://www.templeton.org/who-we-are/media-room/publications/reports-by-grantees/rescuing-Darwin

 London Institute of Contemporary Christianity

This organisation was set up by John Stott to promote his brand of Christianity.

No surprise, thousands and levitra viagra price appalachianmagazine.com thousands of individuals with erectile dysfunction. A survey conducted on tadalafil overnight shipping 28000 Italian men shows that watching excessive adult videos has desensitized men (especially the ones in toy-containing boxes. Although this is the common use of the therapy on most patients, there are still other purposes that attract many clients levitra on line to using the techniques of the medical research and is advised to most victims. Give a big hand to Ayurveda for bringing about lots of herbal products for any problems, especially the problem of buy tadalafil online erectile dysfunction. The Stott brand is so deeply committed to the theory of evolution, that London Institute for Contemporary Christianity in its EG Magazine, issue 22 of June 2009, promoted the book Rescuing Darwin with the price reduced – 50% off! And the blurb:

‘The evidence for evolution by natural selection is overwhelming, enhanced by recent advances in genetics. However, new research commissioned by Theos reveals that anti-evolutionary views enjoy significant support in the UK. Both modern Darwinians who insist that evolution has killed God, and their mainly religious opponents who cite Genesis as evidence of evolution’s deficiency, are, the authors argue, holding untenable positions.’

Here we should note that the social survey behind Rescuing Darwin was funded by the John Templeton Foundation, an organisation that promotes multi-faith and New Age ideas.

A review by Martin Hagget concluded that Rescuing Darwin is a dangerous book.

‘What needs to be “rescued” is not Darwin’s reputation, but a robust adherence by believers to what God has so unmistakably revealed in His Word – not just in the realm of redemption, but in all about which Scripture speaks – including the bedrock truth of creation. Of course, the whole of Scripture is leading to and focused upon the glorious Person and Work of our Lord Jesus Christ. But the apex requires the foundation. Evolution, whether it be characterised as “theistic” or not, removes that foundation. And with it the whole Gospel scheme is damaged irreparably. God does not speak the truth concerning salvation and something other than the truth concerning creation.’ – See more at: http://www.bibleleaguetrust.org/a-dangerous-book/#sthash.BCCq7X6P.dpuf

John Stott not only believed in evolution, he actively promoted his false ideology of theistic evolution.

 

[1] John Stott, The Church of England Newspaper, June 17, 1968, cited by N.M. de S. Cameron, Evolution and the Authority of the Bible, quoted in Vital Apologetics Issues

[2] Creation Science Evangelism website, article by Paul Taylor, ‘Stott, Exegesis and Evolution’, http://www.drdino.com/john-stott-exegesis-and-evolution/

[3] John Stott, Understanding the Bible: Expanded Edition, Zondervan, 1999, pp54-56