In the movie, the Lion the Witch and the wardrobe, Peter and Lucy were first to experience Narnia.  But Peter meets the witch who promises him Turkish delight if he will be a traitor.  Lucy is innocent and loves the creatures of Narnia.  When Peter and Lucy go back inside the wardrobe Lucy tells Edmund and Susan the incredible wonders of Narnia while Peter denies being there and Lucy is shown to be a childish dreamer.  The wise professor hears the fantastic story of Narnia and of Lucy and Peter, and asks the question, “who is normally more reliable with the truth, Peter or Lucy.”  Edmund answers, “Up until now always Lucy.”

Which has been more reliable?  God’s word or science?

Here is what has happened over the centuries.  God’s word has been questioned when it didn’t seem to be correct.

            There are two ways to evaluate the beginning, one is to take science and try to reconcile the Bible through it.  Or we can take the Bible and try to reconcile Science through it.  Which should we do and why?  

James Barr a renowned Hebrew scholar and professor of the interpretation of Holy Scripture at Oxford University said, "So far as I know there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world class university who does not believe that the writer of Genesis 1 through 11 intended to convey to their readers that a.  Creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience.  b.  the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the Biblical story.  C.  Noah's flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguished all human and animal life except for those in the ark."  Note that many of these world class professors do not believe the Bible.  But serious Hebrew scholars cannot take the first 11 chapters of Genesis as a literal historical account of the beginning of mankind.

Does it really matter what we believe about the first 11 chapters of Genesis?  Why?

            The concept of Original sin and of right and wrong is first spoken of in Genesis.

            If you are married today, why are you married?  Why not just live together?  Genesis 2:23-24.  See also Matthew 19:4-6  When Jesus was asked about marriage where did He quote from?  

What about Homosexuality.  Is it wrong?  Why?  Romans 1:26-27.  What is un-natural about it?  It goes back to Genesis 2.  What is the basis for churches today to have homosexual marriage ceremonies in the church?

            Why do you wear clothes?  If it is only to stay warm what about in the summer or if you lived in the tropics?  If it is only to look nice why not just take off your clothes whenever you wanted in public.  There is a moral basis for wearing clothes. See Genesis 2:25,  Genesis 3:10-11, 21

See Romans 1:25.  THE LIE.  This is the crux of the Matter.  If God is not the creator what is the result? 

In the late 19th century a great wave of liberalism overwhelmed the church.  Coincidently Darwinism was becoming popular in the 19th century too.  Many theologians having problems with some of the miracles in the Bible and having a problem with the Genesis account of creation, the flood, and the tower of Babel saw Darwinism as an answer to their problem:  Just say the first eleven chapters of Genesis are a collection of Hebrew myths.

            Question:  How would the above belief affect the doctrine of original sin?

            See Psalm 51:5, Romans 5:18-19, Ephesians 2:1,5; Isaiah 53:11-12

            Question:  If we dismiss the first eleven chapters of Genesis as a collection of Hebrew myths, what does that do to the rest of Scripture?

            What does it do to King David's theology in Psalm 51:5?

            What does it do to the historical accuracy of the Gospel of Luke?  See Luke 3:38

Consider what denying the first chapters of Genesis does to Paul's writings?

"For as in (the fictitious) Adam all die, so also in (the real) Christ shall all be made alive...Just as we have borne the image of the (fictitious) man of dust, we shall also bear the image of (the real) man of heaven.  (1 Corinthians 15:22,49)

"If, because of one (fictitious) man's trespass, death reigned through that one (fictitious) man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the (real) free gift of righteousness (truly) reign in life through the one (real) man Jesus Christ."  (Romans 5:17)

Why are orthodox Darwinists so sure of their conclusions, when they are ready to admit that the evidence is so incomplete?  The answer is that there is a kind of faith in Darwinism.

            In his forward to a new edition of Darwin's "Origin of Species", Professor L.H. Matthews wrote, "Belief in evolution is exactly parallel to belief in special creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true, but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof."

            John Hedley Brooke quoted Darwin's admission "That he was in a hopeless muddle:  he could not believe that each detail of organic structure had been preordained; nor could he think that the evolutionary process as a whole was the result of chance."