The greatest irony of Theistic Evolution is that there is nothing Theistic about Evolution. Evolution, particularly in its modern form, is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality.
I have chosen these words quite intentionally. In fact, they are not even my own. Rather, they are the words of ardent Evolutionist, and self-identified ex-Christian, Michael Ruse. In spite of vehemently arguing the opposite under oath, Ruse admits what Christians have always known to be true: Evolution is a religion, but it is not one based on divine revelation. Rather, it is all but explicitly designed to rule out the Biblical God, both as Creator of Heaven and Earth, and as the just and Holy judge of all mankind.
Now, perhaps I should not say "all but explicitly". After all, Ruse is not the only Evolutionist to say the quiet part out loud. Richard Dawkins, a more famous Evolutionist, wrote that "Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist." (1). Whether or not this was Darwin's goal is debatable, however Darwin himself, if ever he had faith at all, certainly rejected the Christian faith on the basis of Evolution. As he wrote in his autobiography, "During these two years I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, & I remember being heartily laughed at by several of the officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come, by this time, to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, rainbow as a sign, etc., etc., and from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian."
Darwin's erroneous view can no doubt be attributed to another misotheist, Charles Lyell, of whom Darwin said "I never forget that almost everything which I have done in science I owe to the study of his great works". But Lyell, quite famously, was a man with a motive. That motive was to free the science of geology, which in his day was a primarily Christian field of study, from Moses. In other words, he sought to push what he called his "anti-Mosaical conclusions" on the world, which unfortunately he succeeded in doing. In fact, as Evolutionist Warren Allmon admitted, "As is now increasingly acknowledged, however, Lyell also sold geology some snake oil. He convinced geologists that because physical laws are constant in time and space and current processes should be consulted before resorting to unseen processes, it necessarily follows that all past processes acted at essentially their current rates (that is, those observed in historical time). This extreme gradualism has led to numerous unfortunate consequences, including the rejection of sudden or catastrophic events in the face of positive evidence for them, for no reason other than that they were not gradual." (2).
Clearly, therefore, Evolution was designed with an agenda; an agenda to get rid of God, and the faith He delivered, in favor of a new religion. An anti-God religion. One in which man, not God, makes the rules.
But in spite of all this, there are a shocking number of Christians who not only swallow the lie that Evolution is a scientific fact that represents the true history of the universe, but will even defend it as vehemently as any doctrine. There are Christian apologists, and even whole ministries, dedicated to its defence, as if it was not only true, but even sacred. As if it is something we should embrace. As if it is the future, a benefit to our souls, perhaps even divine revelation.
To me, this doesn't even make sense if you happen to believe it. I will never understand the motivations of Old Earth apologists, simply because aside from being utterly false, it would otherwise be irrelevant. It makes sense for Biblical Creationists to defend our views. To begin with, if nothing else, the authority of Scripture is at stake. If the word says "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day...." (Exodus 20:11a), and Christians come along and say "actually, no He didn't", what we're saying is that the Bible is wrong. Or worse, it's lying. And that erodes other things, too. If the Bible is wrong about one thing, and especially if the atheists are right and Evolution is both obvious and irrefutable, then how can we defend the rest of it?
And Creationism does happen to be tied to the rest of it. Various doctrines are tied to the truth of Genesis. There's the Sabbath, there's the marriage covenant, there's even the origins of sin and death, as well as the protoevangelium (first Gospel). Adam, aside from being a literal ancestor of Christ, is also typological of Him. There is so much tied to the doctrine of Creation that it just makes sense to defend the doctrine of Creation. By contrast, Evolution wasn't even made up until quite late in our history. No Christian believed in Evolution before the so-called "Enlightenment". Our brethren have historically opposed old Earth dogmas that put the age of the Earth above 10,000 years, you want me to believe they would tolerate 4 billion? It would have been ridiculous to them.
But perhaps they would seem ridiculous to unbelievers. We don't want people mocking Christianity because we're ignorant of science, do we? Well, here's a question: Do they not find everything in our faith ridiculous already? Does Scripture itself not tell us plainly "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." (1 Corinthians 1:18)? I'm sorry, but atheists don't believe Christ was born of a virgin. They don't believe "The blind see and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up and the poor have the gospel preached to them." (Matthew 11:5). Know what else they don't believe? That Christ, having died for our sin, got up out of His tomb and ascended to sit at the right hand of the Father until His enemies are made His footstool. An unbeliever will look at the literal cornerstone of our faith as nothing more than a fairy tale. So you want to compromise on the foundation thereof in the hope our faith won't look ridiculous to them? What's the point?
Ultimately, what you'll notice about Theistic Evolutionists is not only do they not have a clear motive for what they're preaching, they don't even have a solid foundation from which to preach it! When they argue, they argue like atheists. They don't open the Bible and say "thus saith the Lord" (except when they misquote 2 Peter 3:8), they say "science says". They argue as if "science", not the word of God, is infallible, and that as long as atheists tell us the evidence for Evolution is incontrovertible, we should agree with them.
But if they argue like they're atheists, even in defence of the same things, doesn't that mean they basically are atheists? Imagine if we did the same with other religions. Lump what the Bible says, God cannot be a Trinity because the Qur'an tells us "say not three". But wait, if I'm taking the Qur'an as my authority over the Bible, doesn't that make me a Muslim? In the same way, if you take atheistic snake oil over the infallible word of God, what business have you to call yourself Christians? As the Good Lord says, no man can serve two masters; you will love one, and hate the other.
Well my brethren, I call on you to choose your master. I have no doubt, many Theistic Evolutionists are just atheists with instincts. Unable to suppress their inherent knowledge of God, they cling to Him, but in no greater way than the Pharisees. "All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition." (Mark 7:9). But having been there myself, I know that it is equally possible to be a faithful believer clinging to egregious error, whether through ignorance or curable malice. Some Theistic Evolutionists are Christians, and Theistic Evolution is just one more sin to nail to the cross. I say nail it now. The Christian faith cannot be reconciled with the devil's lies. Look at His book and tell me, what basis do you find for Darwinism, and the horrors it brings? Don't look at "science". It's not science! Science is the practice of studying the natural laws God has put in place. They work now. They can be observed. Tested. Repeated. Evolution? It's a myth about history. And it's not even a convincing one. Indeed, had we not all been raised with it, we would likely shun it as surely as we would refuse to wipe with a shared sponge on a stick!
It is imperative that all Christians repent of Old Earth heresy. It's not true, and it was specifically invented to oppose our faith. Therefore, let us take on board the words of Jude: "...contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 1:3). Our faith was complete, delivered to us once for all, long before atheists had any kind of foothold on society. It is as true today as it was when God revealed the details of His creative acts to Moses, and when Christ repeatedly affirmed that Moses got it right: "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?”" (John 5:46-47). How indeed? Therefore choose. Will you receive Christ and Moses together, or reject them both alike? There is no third, Evolutionary option.
References
1. Dawkins, Richard - The Blind Watchmaker, 1987
2. Allmon, W.D. - Post Gradualism, Science 262:122–123, October 1, 1993