{"id":18185,"date":"2020-04-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2020-04-08T05:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sugar-land-bible-church.local\/sermon\/2-peter-012-refuting-evolution-part-1\/"},"modified":"2020-04-08T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2020-04-08T05:00:00","slug":"2-peter-012-refuting-evolution-part-1","status":"publish","type":"sermon","link":"https:\/\/slbc.org\/es\/sermon\/2-peter-012-refuting-evolution-part-1\/","title":{"rendered":"2 Peter 012 – Refuting Evolution (Part 1)"},"content":{"rendered":"","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","book":[106],"series_event":[507],"sermon_service_type":[474],"speaker":[6],"class_list":["post-18185","sermon","type-sermon","status-publish","hentry","book-2-peter","series_event-2-peter","sermon_service_type-wednesday-evenings","speaker-dr-andy-woods","no-post-thumbnail"],"acf":{"sermon_title":"2 Peter 012 - Refuting Evolution (Part 1)","sermon_date":"20200408","sermon_month":"4","sermon_year":"2020","sermon_notes":7817,"sermon_slides":7816,"sermon_mp3":7844,"sermon_id":"48202228127591","series_or_event":507,"service_type":[474],"speaker":6,"books_of_the_bible":106,"chapter_and_verse":"3:1-4","sermon_transcript":"2 Peter #12\nRefuting Evolution\n2 Peter 3:1-7\nApril 8, 2020\nDr. Andy Woods\n\nWe continue to move through the Book of 2 Peter. If you have your Bible with you, you might open it up to 2 Peter 3. Usually, I like to title each message that we do. Assuming we get that far, tonight\u2019s title is, \u201cRefuting Evolution.\u201d And you say, \u201cIs that really in the Book of 2 Peter?\u201d Yes, it is. It's in 2 Peter 3\u2014big time\u2014because it refutes the philosophy that evolution is based on. And we\u2019ll talk more about that in just a little bit.\n\nJust to remind you where we've been, we've been teaching our series through 2 Peter. Second Peter is a book written by the Apostle Peter from Babylon. He's writing to some folks there in the north central Turkey area, modern-day Turkey\u2014Hebrew Christians. And he's warning them of false teaching that's coming their direction. In fact, in our passage this evening he\u2019ll say, \u201cFalse teachers will come,\u201d and that's primarily what he is speaking of.\n\nYou'll notice this three-part outline to the book. Part one is chapter 1. Part two is chapter 2. Part three is chapter 3. So, in part one he called his audience to growth. He gave them everything they needed in terms of how to grow as a Christian, because a growing Christian is harder to deceive than an infant Christian or an immature Christian. So how do we leave infancy and move on to maturity? You have an explanation for that and how that happens and what it looks like in chapter 1.\n\nThen, in chapter 2, which is part two of the book, he gives (and this is where we found ourselves the last few weeks) the generic descriptions of false teachers. It\u2019s one of the greatest treatments of false teachers found anywhere in the Bible. And you can take Peter's list and apply it to any generation of false teaching and false teachers. We saw the outline of chapter 2: the false teachers and their predicted arrival, devices, doom, depravity, emptiness, and regression. We left off last time at the end of chapter 2\u2014their regression\u2014having completed chapter 2.\n\nNow we\u2019re moving into chapter 3, part three of our outline here on 2 Peter. Chapter 3 is leaving the discussion of the generic characteristics of false teachers, and now he's going to focus on their doctrine. He focuses in like a laser beam\u2014not so much on their characteristics anymore, as he did in chapter 2. But as the Spirit of God is giving him insight, he's revealing the specific doctrine that they're going to bring. And it's a doctrine called uniformitarianism.\n\nUniformitarianism is a doctrine that really is dominant. It\u2019s probably the most dominant philosophy of the day in the 20th century and in the 21st century, and you yourself could be a prisoner of this philosophy. Your children, if you have them in humanistic education\u2014public schools, etc.\u2014are no doubt hostage to this doctrine as well. And Peter reveals it 2000 years in advance. So, chapter 3 is a discussion of that doctrine. It's actually a refutation of that doctrine before that doctrine even came into existence.\n\nBut before we get into chapter 3, you'll notice that Peter gives here, in 2 Peter 3:1-2, his second purpose statement. He briefly interrupts his train of thought and reminds his audience why he's writing. You might recall he did this in 1:12-15\u2014sort of interrupted his train of thought and gave his purpose statement for writing.\n\nYou might remember what it said back there in 1:12-15. Peter says, \u201cTherefore, I will always be ready to remind you of these things, even though you already know them, and have been established in the truth which is present with you. I consider it right, as long as I am in this earthly dwelling, to stir you up by way of reminder, knowing that the laying aside of my earthly dwelling is imminent, as also our Lord Jesus Christ has made clear to me. And I will also be diligent that at any time after my departure you will be able to call these things to mind<\/em>.\u201d<\/em>\n\nWhat Peter wants to do in this letter is to prepare his audience for false teaching by giving them a reminder before he dies. The Lord told him back in John 21, roughly three decades earlier, \u201c\u2018\u2026 when you were younger, you used to gird yourself and walk wherever you wished; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands and someone else will gird you, and bring you where you do not wish to go.\u2019\u201d<\/em> Speaking of the manner of death in which Peter would glorify the Lord.\n\nThis is a prediction of Peter's martyrdom. Peter knew that that martyrdom was close, and he didn't want to leave this earth without penning this brief letter so that he could remind his audience of the basics. He's not giving them profound new thoughts but the basics of Christianity so that they would not be swept away by false teachers.\n\nHere in 3:1-2 he gives his second purpose statement. Notice what he says there. \u201cThis is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you in which I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, that you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior spoken by your apostles<\/em>.\u201d<\/em>\n\nWhat he is saying here is, \u201cI want you to get back to the basics. I want you to get back to the foundational truths of Christianity. I don't want you to be swayed by people who are going to appeal to your pride and teach you that the basics of the Bible really aren't enough, that you need to go into \u2018secret knowledge\u2019.\u201d And if his audience is grounded in the fundamentals, then they are less likely to be swayed by false teachers.\n\nOne of the things we pointed out when we started this book is how frequently Peter mentions the concept of the need to remind.<\/em> And sometimes, as teachers or pastors or preachers, we think that we need to come up with something novel or new. We need to come up with something that the people have never heard before.\n\nThe reality of the situation is that's really not what people need. Praise the Lord when people get a new insight, or they learn something new\u2014and there's nothing wrong with that. But generally what people need is they need to be reminded of what they already know, and then they need to be exhorted to live according to what they already know. And that's the spirit in which Peter makes his remarks here in his second purpose statement.\n\nHe says, \u201cThis is my second letter.\u201d So, obviously, the first letter would be 1 Peter, where he was preparing his audience for trials and suffering and tribulation: suffering for the cause of Christ in the hope of future glory. Here, in the second book, 2nd Peter, that's not so much his theme; it\u2019s preparation for withstanding the onslaught of false teaching that they are about to experience.\n\nAnd where do you discover these basics of Christianity? Do you go to some conference and sit under the teaching of a guru, after you pay a certain fee? No. It's much simpler than that. Peter tells us where we find these basics in verse 2, \u201c\u2026that you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior spoken by your apostles<\/em>.\u201d<\/em>\n\nHe says, \u201cHere's where you get the truth: you get the truth through the prophets!\u201d And I think, by \u201cprophets,\u201d he is speaking of the Old Testament. And then you get the truth through the apostles. And when he mentions the apostles, \u201cyour apostles<\/em>,\u201d he is speaking of the 27 New Testament books that we have\u2014all of which were written by one of the original 12 apostles or by someone who was closely affiliated with one of the original 12 (so they could give up authenticity to what was being written).\n\nThe Gnostics would come in and say, \u201cYou need secret knowledge, you need special knowledge, and what you have in your Bible is really not enough.\u201d And Peter says, \u201cThat's nonsense. There is no necessity to go into the secret knowledge. All you have to do is get back into these 66 books.\u201d The Hebrew Bible, 39 books, already a closed cannon, and the 27 New Testament books that we have today, which were basically in the process of being compiled as Peter writes these words.\n\nIt is interesting here that he, in verse 2, puts the apostles and the prophets on the same level in terms of inspiration. In other words, the apostles are inspired by God and so are the Old Testament prophets. I find that very interesting, because it's very easy in the Bible to find New Testament passages affirming the inspiration and inerrancy of the Old Testament\u2014there are many, many passages like that, but it's harder to find New Testament passages affirming New Testament writings as equally inspired as well.\n\nAnd the reason that's difficult to find is that by the time the New Testament started coming into existence, you had a completed Old Testament canon and the New Testament was just being developed. So, it's easy to find the New Testament affirming the Old Testament; it's harder to find the New Testament affirming books in the New Testament that are just as inspired as the Old Testament. And yet, Peter does that here. He puts the apostles (New Testament) and prophets (Old Testament) on the exact same level in terms of divine inspiration.\n\nIn fact, slip down to verse 15\u2014same chapter. Peter does this not once in this chapter but twice here in 2 Peter 3 when he says, \u201cand regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you\u2026\u201d<\/em> Peter is going to say that some things Paul says are difficult to understand (more on that down the road).\n\nWe know Paul wrote 13 New Testament books. He wrote the Book of Galatians. He wrote the two Corinthian letters. He wrote the Book of Romans. He wrote the four prison letters: Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, Philippians. He wrote the two Timothy letters. He wrote 1 Timothy, he wrote Titus, then he wrote 2 Timothy. Thirteen books total. And Peter says of Paul's writings, as Paul's writings were coming into existence, that Paul wrote with divine inspiration.\n\nNow, Paul was not one of the original 12, as you know. Peter was. But here Peter is closely connected with Paul, and he gives approval to the 13 books that Paul was writing that were being compiled.\n\nSo here's an example where you have the New Testament, two times, not just affirming the Old Testament but the New Testament. Two times (verse 2 and verse 15) not just affirming the Old Testament but affirming the New Testament as well.\n\nAnd let me show you one other interesting place where this happens. It's 1 Timothy 5:18. These things are always interesting to me, because it\u2019s rare to find these in the New Testament. It says in 1 Timothy 5:18, concerning how things are supposed to work in the local church, \u201cFor the Scripture says, \u2018You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing,\u2019 and \u2018The laborer is worthy of his wages.\u2019\u201d<\/em>\n\nIt is speaking there of pastors\u2014not interfering in their work, providing for them, and all that kind of thing. But in the process, Paul quotes two Scriptures. One of them is the Old Testament, \u201c\u2018You shall not muzzle the ox while he is threshing\u2026\u2019\u201d<\/em>\u00a0 That's a quote from the Deuteronomy 25:4. Then Paul, in the same verse, says, \u201c\u2018The laborer is worthy of his wages.\u2019\u201d<\/em> Now he's not quoting the Old Testament anymore; he is quoting the New Testament. He is quoting Luke 10:7. And it's interesting how Paul takes both verses\u2014Old Testament and New Testament\u2014puts them together and says, \u201cBoth are Scripture.\u201d In other words, what's written in the Book of Deuteronomy is Scripture, and what's written in Luke's Gospel in the New Testament is Scripture as well.\n\nThe Apostle Peter here wants to remind his audience to get back to the basics. And the true source of knowledge that they\u2019re to rely on, so they won't be swept into the secret knowledge of the Gnostics that's coming, is the inspiration of both the prophets and the apostles\u2014the Old Testament and the New Testament. And that's basically what you need to develop into full stature as a Christian.\n\nIn fact, you\u2019ll member Peter, back in 2 Peter 1:3-4, made the tremendous statement about the sufficiency of Scripture. Within the promises of God are everything we need for all matters of faith and godliness. So, that would constitute Peter's second and final purpose statement in the book.\n\nNow we move on. After he has interrupted his train of thought, momentarily, to give us his second purpose statement, now he focuses like a laser beam not on the characteristics of false teachers but on what they are going to teach. I've had the opportunity to teach this chapter many, many times to different groups (conferences). When I get a chance to teach this, I usually title it, \u201cThe Relevance of the Future.\u201d Is a knowledge of the future really that big a deal? I mean, is a really important for the Christian to study God's design and God's blueprint for the future?\n\nThat takes us to verses 3-15, which I don't think we\u2019ll complete this evening. What we don't complete this evening, we\u2019ll complete next week. But what you see there is an overview of 2 Peter 3:3-15.\n
    \n \t
  1. Peter describes the heresy of the false teachers that's coming. This is where he describes, interestingly enough, the philosophical basis for evolutionary thought in the 20th and the 21st century.<\/li>\n \t
  2. Also in those same verses (verses 3-4), he describes the motive of these false teachers. Why are they going to teach what they're going to teach?<\/li>\n \t
  3. In verses 5-10 he gives a rebuttal to their false teaching. There's a four point rebuttal there in verses 5-10. And he\u2019s teaching all of these things before the false teachers had ever come on the scene.<\/li>\n \t
  4. Then, when you get down to verses 11-15, he gives four points of application.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nHe'll say in verse 11, \u201cSince all these things are to be destroyed in this way, what sort of people ought you to be\u2026\u201d <\/em>So he doesn't just give knowledge, but he gives application based on knowledge. So, that\u2019s a brief outline, if you will, of 2 Peter chapter 3:3-15.\n\nNotice verses 3 and 4. What is the heresy of these false teachers? What exactly are they going to teach (both these coming Gnostics and also false teachers by way of application into the 19th<\/sup>, 20th<\/sup>, and 21st<\/sup> century)? It's all laid out there in verses 3 and 4.\n\nNotice what he says. \u201cKnow this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, \u2018Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.\u2019\u201d<\/em> Peter says, \u201cWhen these false teachers show up, they\u2019re going to take aim at a particular doctrine.\u201d\n\nAnd the particular doctrine they're going to attack\u2014over and over again\u2014is the return of Jesus Christ. They\u2019re going to say, \u201cWhere is the promise of His coming?\u201d They're going to deny that Jesus is coming back to this earth. The oldest book in the Bible, the Book of Job, tells us in Job 19:25, \u201c\u2018As for me, I know that my Redeemer <\/em>[GOEL] lives, And at the last He will take His stand on the earth.\u2019\u201d<\/em>\n\nZechariah 14:4 tells us that when the Lord comes back, His feet are going to touch the Mount of Olives and the Mount of Olives is going to split. The Bible\u2014over and over again\u2014tells us that Jesus is coming back to this earth. And these false teachers are going to tear down that doctrine. They're going to try to attack it, marginalize it, minimalize it.\n\nIt's interesting. He says, \u201cThey are not going to attack the virgin birth, the Trinity, the deity of Christ, the bodily atonement of Christ.\u201d Now, we know from experience that liberals attack all those things anyway. But the real doctrine that they don't like\u2014that really gets under the skin of these false teachers\u2014is the Second Advent, the bodily return of Jesus Christ to the earth.\n\nThe Gnostics, of course, would attack this, because the Gnostics believed in Gnostic dualism (that the spiritual world is good, and the physical world is bad). If the physical world is bad, then Jesus could not have had a body. So, many of them taught docetism [from the Greek word DOKEO] that Jesus only seemed\u2014or appeared\u2014to have a body, but He didn't actually have a body. That\u2019s why there\u2019s so much in John's writings about how \u201cWe touched, we saw, we felt the Son of God.\u201d You'll see John trying to refute docetism in 1 John 4:2-3.\n\nAnd if this physical world is bad, not only did Jesus not have a body but how could God come back to this earth? Why would God want to come back to this earth? Because, after all, the physical world is evil. And this gave rise to a terrible doctrine that came into Christendom beginning around the fourth century, the doctrine of amillennialism. \u201cA\u201d is a negation; \u201cmillennium\u201d means the thousand year Kingdom in Latin, and they denied that there was going to be an earthly Kingdom.\n\nHow could there be a physical, earthly Kingdom of God on planet Earth when the physical world is bad? Here Peter is revealing that they're going to attack the event which launches that thousand year Kingdom, which is the physical return of Jesus Christ. And Peter actually tells us how they're going to do it. It's interesting. He says, \u201cKnow this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking\u2026\u201d<\/em> So, they're not going to level a three point or five point intellectual attack on the doctrine of the Second Coming. Basically, what they're going to do is put anybody who believes that doctrine under derision or ridicule.\n\nNow, I think we have a tendency to underestimate the power of ridicule. Nobody likes to be made fun of; nobody likes to be made to feel like they're stupid; nobody likes to be made to feel like they don't fit in with others. So, when we come under ridicule for believing something, we have a tendency to shy away from whatever it is that is subjecting us to ridicule.\n\nAnd that's exactly what Peter says; that\u2019s what these false teachers are going to do. They are going to malign; they are going to make fun of; they are going to deride people who believe that Jesus Christ is coming back physically to this earth.\n\nSecond Chronicles 36:16 describes what the unbelievers were doing to God's prophets just before the demise of the Southern Kingdom of Judah on the eve of the Babylonian captivity. It says in 2 Chronicles 36:16, \u201cbut they continually mocked the messengers of God, despised His words and scoffed at His prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against His people, until there was no remedy.\u201d<\/em>\n\nSo, right to the eve of the Babylonian captivity, the unbelievers in the land of Israel didn't just mock the messengers of God; they continually mocked them. They continually scoffed at them\u2014 same idea, identically, of what Peter is describing. And that's how you know that that particular civilization was ripe for discipline\u2014how they were treating the prophets.\n\nAnd can I just ask you a simple question? How are people today in the United States treating God's prophets? By the word \u201cprophet\u201d I'm talking about people that want to stand and proclaim what these 66 books teach. They are continually maligned\u2014particularly the more they talk about the end times, particularly the more they talk about the Second Coming. And that's how you know\u2014based on how people are treating God's prophets\u2014that we\u2019re at the very end of American civilization. Just like the unbelievers mistreating God's prophets was an indicator that the Southern Kingdom, prior to the Babylonian captivity, had its days numbered.\n\nPeter says, \u201cKnow this: they will come, and it'll be in the last days.\u201d Notice that Peter says, \u201cThey're coming.\u201d And that's different than what Jude is going to say about 4 to 6 years later. Jude is going to say, \u201cThey're here.\u201d \u201cFor certain persons have crept in unnoticed\u2026\u201d<\/em> That's one of the main reasons that we put Jude after 2 Peter.\n\nBut how hard is it today to find people deriding other Christians for simply believing in the return of Jesus Christ. You don't have to look any further than the runaway best-selling book by Rick Warren, The Purpose Driven Life<\/em>. On pages 285 to 286, what you'll discover is ridicule of people who believe in the return of Jesus.\n\nRick Warren builds all kinds of strawman arguments here. I don't have time to read this whole quote, but you can pick up the book yourself. Many people probably have this book on their bookshelf; it was a runaway bestseller a few years ago.\n\nIt's interesting that this criticism of people that believe in the Second Coming is not coming just from the humanists, from the outside; it's coming from professing evangelicals from within. Rick Warren said, \u201cWhen the disciples wanted to talk about prophecy, Jesus quickly switched the conversation to evangelism.\u201d No, He did not. Read Matthew 24 and 25, and you'll see Jesus did no such thing. Quoting Rick Warren, \u201cHe [Jesus] said in essence, \u2018The details of my return are none of your business.\u2019\u201d No. Jesus did not say that. Read Matthew 24 and 25, and you\u2019ll see that that's not true.\n\nHere Rick Warren builds this straw argument that if you're interested in the return of Christ, you\u2019re a date setter. You are speculating on the exact timing of Christ's return. No, we\u2019re not. We will never assign any date for the Lord's return\u2014at this church or in any broadcast you hear from us\u2014because the Bible doesn't and forbids that kind of practice. But you'll notice anybody that has an interest in the subject of eschatology (the study of the end) is somehow lumped in with being some kind of Harold Camping type of date setter.\n\nRick Warren goes on and he says that if you\u2019re interested in prophecy, then Satan has distracted you from your mission\u2014Satan. You're not serious about your mission, and you're not even fit for the Kingdom of God (paraphrase). That's coming from what some have called \u201cAmerica\u2019s pastor,\u201d just ridiculing people who believe in the return of Christ.\n\nHere is a citation from Mark Dever, who is pretty big in the Gospel Coalition and similar type groups. He basically makes the statement in one of his sermons that, \u201cSo if you're a pastor and you're listening to me, you understand me correctly if you think I'm saying you are in sin\u2026\u201d Dever says \u201csin\u201d; Rick Warren says \u201cSatan.\u201d I mean, they\u2019re pulling out the worst descriptors you can think of about people who are interested in the return of Christ.\n\n\u201cSo if you\u2019re a pastor and you're listening to me, you understand me correctly if you think I'm saying you are in sin if you lead your congregation to have a statement of faith that requires a particular millennial view.\u201d If you come out in your church website and say, \u201cWe\u2019re premillennial, which is what our church does... (We go further than that. We don't just say, \u201cWe\u2019re premillennial.\u201d We say, \u201cWe\u2019re pretribulational.\u201d) \u2026then, according to Mark Dever, you're actually in sin for doing that.\n\nNow, these are quotes from people within professing evangelicalism making these comments. It's the outworking of what Peter said here. He said, \u201cKnow this. This will come about in the last days. Mockers are going to come, and they're going to deride people that hold to a literal interpretation of Bible prophecy.\u201d\n\nIt's interesting that in these same verses (verses 3-4), he not only reveals the heresy of these coming false teachers, but he goes a step further. He doesn't just tell you what<\/em> they're going to say; he explains why<\/em> they're going to say it. Essentially, what he does here is gives two reasons: one in verse 3; the second in verse 4.\n\nAgain, notice verse 3. \u201cKnow this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking<\/em> [now watch this],<\/em> following after their own lusts\u2026\u201d<\/em> A person who is following their own lusts is someone that basically is following the desires and the impulses of the sin nature. If someone is living for the sin nature\u2014and not the new nature\u2014let me tell you something: the very last doctrine they ever want to think about is the Second Coming!\n\nBecause the whole concept of the Second Coming implies accountability, and if someone is living a sinful lifestyle\u2014in any way, shape, or form\u2014they're not interested in the Second Coming. Because the Second Coming is a reminder to them of their future accountability. And that becomes one of the reasons why these false teachers are going to attack the doctrine of the Second Coming. It has more to do with their own sinful state than it does anything else.\n\nNow Peter, in verse 4, gives a second reason (or motive) for this coming false teaching. Notice what he says in verse 4, \u201cand saying, \u2018Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues <\/em>[you should underline \u201ccontinues\u201d in your Bible] just as it was from the beginning of creation.\u2019\u201d<\/em> In other words, these false teachers are going to believe in a closed system.\n\nThey\u2019re going to believe in an idea that God does not intervene in His creation. And what they're going to say is, \u201cGosh! Look around the world today. I don't see any pattern of God intervening in His creation. I didn't see that today; I didn't see that yesterday; I probably won't see that tomorrow.\u201d So watch this, now: \u201cTherefore, it's never happened in the past, and therefore it's never going to happen in the future.\u201d\n\nIn other words, the past and the future. How do we know anything about the past and the future? I wasn't there in the ancient past, and I'm not yet there in the coming future. The only way I have any knowledge of those two things, therefore, not being an eyewitness, is that I\u2019m completely and totally dependent upon what God has revealed. I either accept what God has revealed in those areas, or I reject it. And if I reject it, what am I left with? I'm left with my five senses.\n\nMy five senses tell me what's around me today. And uniformitarianism is the idea\u2026 You'll notice the word \u201cuniform,\u201d meaning consistent. Uniformitarianism is the idea that you make a philosophical guess as to what happened in the past and what will happen<\/em> in the future\u2014two things that you weren't there to see\u2014by what you can<\/em> see right now. And you just pretend that what you can<\/em> see right now has always been and will always be. And that\u2019s called uniformitarianism: things will always be as they are now.\n\nAnother way of saying this is: naturalism. Another way of saying this is: evolution. Now, why is it that people believe that this earth is billions and billions and billions of years old\u2014and the solar system that we\u2019re in is billions and billions and billions of years old\u2014when the Bible indicates that it's probably thousands<\/em> of years old\u2014not billions of years old?\n\nFor example, in the moon landing, when you study that out, one of the great shocks that the astronauts discovered was space dust on the moon was very, very thin. They thought that they were going to land on the moon and sink in layer after layer of dust. Why did they think that? Because they thought the moon has been there for billions of years. Given the present rate of dust entering the moon's atmosphere and settling on the moon\u2019s surface, if that's been going on for billions of years then there ought to be multiple level feet of dust.\n\nAnd those astronauts were astonished as anybody<\/em> to discover that the surface of the moon was solid; there was just a few millimeters of dust on the moon\u2019s surface. Why? Because the moon has not been there for billions of years\u2014as everybody thought; it's only been there for thousands<\/em> of years!\n\nUniformitarianism, basically, is the idea that you take a present rate of decay. How long does it take for rocks to form in the Grand Canyon? Well, it takes a slow, long time. And you pretend that that rate has always been and will always be. And if the process that's happening before our eyes is what has always been, and will always be, then you start to develop a mindset that it took billions of years for all these things to develop. And you completely remove from your mind\u2014or you push out of your mind<\/em>\u2014what Scripture reveals concerning a sudden catastrophe called the Flood that you were not there to see. And the only way you know it happened is because God tells you it happened.\n\nSo Peter here is describing uniformitarianism. And he's essentially describing what became the philosophical basis for the theory of evolution in the 19th<\/sup> century, the 20th<\/sup> century, and right into the 21st century. It probably is the most dominant philosophy of our time period. And isn\u2019t it interesting how Peter\u2014as a fisherman, untrained and uneducated, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit as he is warning about false teachers\u2014could see these things coming. He is seeing uniformitarianism develop not only in Gnostic thought, but actually holding the human race philosophically hostage in the 19th<\/sup>, 20th<\/sup>, and 21st century.\n\nSo, most people today believe we\u2019re in a world that's billions of years old. Of course, evolution needs billions of years to work. Just as we Christians have a holy Trinity; evolutionists have a holy trinity. Three things they have to accept by faith; their holy trinity is time, randomness, and matter. Given enough randomness and matter through vast ages of time<\/em>, eventually you could get things to develop to the way they are now.\n\nBut if you take time away from the equation, the whole theory of evolution collapses. It's like scrambling a deck of cards. You put them in a paper bag, shake them up, and you throw them on the carpet. What are the chances of those cards coming out of that bag randomly and forming a card house? What are the chances of those cards coming out of that bag and all landing in a straight line\u2014right side up? And let's say you numbered them, 1 to 52, all coming out lined up 1 to 52? I mean, the chances of that happening are just statistically improbable, if not impossible.\n\nAnd you say to the evolutionist, \u201cWell, if that can\u2019t happen with cards, how could it happen with the DNA molecule and the complexities of the world that we know?\u201d And they say, \u201cGiven enough time, it could happen.\u201d If you just sat there for a billion<\/em> years and kept throwing the cards out of the bag, eventually they would form a card house. Or they would line up in a straight line, correct side up, sequentially numbered 1 to 52. So, if you don't have time in the equation, evolution itself collapses.\n\nUniformitarianism is the basis for putting time into the equation. The rate of decay that you see today is slow and gradual. How long does it take for rocks or fossils or whatever to appear? It takes a long time<\/em>! \u201cAnd if that rate of decay has always been and always will be, then the Grand Canyon must be very, very old.\u201d [They are] ruling out the idea of sudden catastrophe\u2014first through Creation, then through the Fall, then through Flood. So, you can't have evolution without the right philosophical underpinnings.\n\nIt's interesting here that Peter is seeing a connection between protology, the doctrine of beginnings, and eschatology, the doctrine of the end. Look again at verse 4. \u201cAnd saying, \u2018Where is the promise of His coming?\u2019\u201d<\/em> That's the future; that's eschatology. \u201c\u2026\u2018For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.\u2019\u201d<\/em> That's protology: \u201cproto,\u201d meaning first; \u201cology,\u201d the study of. Eschatology: \u201ceschat,\u201d meaning last; \u201cology,\u201d the study of.\n\nShow me your protology, and I'll be able to pretty much figure out what your eschatology is. Show me what your eschatology is, and I'll be able to pretty much figure out what your protology is. You see, the fact of the matter is, I have no problem believing that God is going a return to this earth; Jesus Christ is going to return to this earth, and this world that we\u2019re living in is going to experience a miraculous termination.\n\nIn fact, verse 10 and verse 13 say that it\u2019s going to be destroyed by fire. Now, why do I have no problem believing that? It has to do with my beliefs in early Genesis. God miraculously started this world. God brought judgment upon this world. If God has already done that, then how hard is it for God to do it again in the future? But if you have this idea that everything kind of assembled itself over billions of years, you are going to have a very difficult time believing in a sudden, catastrophic, miraculous ending to our world and our universe\u2014just like it started.\n\nSo, Peter connects the dots. And that's why I like to use the slide of dominoes in a row. That's what this is; that\u2019s what theology is: you knock over one domino, and the others will start to fall. You start to play games with your protology (your doctrine of origins) and it's going to impact your eschatology. You start to play games with your eschatology, and it's going to impact your protology.\n\nPeople say, \u201cWhy are you guys at Sugar Land Bible Church so uptight about certain doctrines?\u201d Part of it is we understand that theology is a seamless garment; whatever you\u2019re doing in one area of theology is going to impact another area of theology. And most people can't see how the whole picture connects. But Peter here is connecting the two together.\n\nWhat he does here in verses 3-4 is reveals the heresy of these coming false teachers, the fact that they're going to take aim at the doctrine of the Second Coming through ridicule. They are going to try to malign it.\n\nThen he goes on and gives the reasons why they're doing this.\n
      \n \t
    1. They\u2019re stuck in their own lusts, living for their own sin nature. They don\u2019t like the idea of accountability inherent in the doctrine of the Second Coming anyway.<\/li>\n \t
    2. Beyond that, they\u2019ve bought into this closed system concept. \u201cI don't see any miracles today; therefore, they\u2019ve never occurred in the past and will never occur in the future. And I evaluate what happened in the past (that I wasn\u2019t there to see) or what's going to happen in the future (that I'm not there yet to see) by slow, gradual processes that I can see through my five senses\u2014uniformitarianism and the philosophical basis for evolution.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nBy the way, I hope you haven't been deceived into thinking that somehow evolution is a scientific fact. It is not a scientific fact because how can you ever determine what happened billions of years ago through the scientific method? Any first year student in science\u2026 Believe me, I was no stellar science student in junior high school and high school (probably because my major was basketball at the time). But even I remember what the scientific method is.\n\nFor something to constitute as science it has got to be observable, testable, and repeatable. If something is not observable, testable, and repeatable, you can't call it a scientific fact. For example, the law of gravity is a scientific fact. Objects fall at 32 ft.\/s because we can test it. Here's my pencil. I can drop it. And I can test it, and repeat it, and observe it over and over again; that's a scientific fact.\n\nBut if you're telling me something that happened a billion years ago\u2014that I wasn't there to see, and I can't test or repeat\u2014you\u2019re no longer in the realm of scientific fact. You are in the realm of philosophical extrapolation. And the extrapolation is uniformitarianism, pretending that what you can see in front of you has always been and will always be\u2014ruling out miracles, ruling out catastrophe. So, evolution is not a scientific fact; evolution is a philosophy.\n\nYou say, \u201cDo you think it's okay to teach kids evolution?\u201d I'm completely in favor of teaching kids evolution if you teach it to them correctly. You should never tell them the way it was rammed down my throat, \u201cThat it's a scientific fact and if you don't believe it, you're not a true scientist.\u201d\n\nYou should tell them, \u201cThis is what people do and this is what people believe, but they\u2019re philosophizing when they come up with their beliefs. And they have reasons for getting into philosophy; they don't like accountability. Obviously, a knowledge of God as Creator and Judge would up the game in terms of accountability. And if you're walking in your own lusts and you love your sin, you're not going to want to deal with things biblically.\u201d So, that's what Peter is doing there in verses 3-4.\n\nNow we move into verses 5-10, where he begins to give a rebuttal to this uniformitarianism thinking that's on the horizon. He argues from history (verses 5-7). He argues from Scripture (verse 8). He argues from God's character (verse 9). And he argues from divine promise (verse 10). What he is doing is saying, \u201cUniformitarianism is coming, and here's how you refute it before it even shows up. Here's how you demonstrate that it is a nonbiblical approach, using history, Scripture, God's character, and divine promise.\n\nIn other words, \u201cWhy can't you evaluate things by what you can see in front of you? Why can't you develop a belief about how things started and how things will end based on slow processes that you can see in front of you?\u201d Peter gives a historical argument against that, a scriptural argument against that, a divine character argument against that, and a divine promise argument against that.\n\nWe just have a few minutes left, but let's see if we can at least touch on his historical argument. Look, if you will, at verses 5-7. He reminds his audience of two events. Verses 5-7. He says, \u201cFor when they maintain this\u2026\u201d<\/em> What is \u201cthis\u201d? It\u2019s uniformitarianism, that all things continue ever since the fathers fell asleep from the beginning.\n\n\u201cFor when they maintain this, it escapes their notice\u2026\u201d<\/em> I'm reading out of the New American Standard Bible. \u201cEscapes their notice\u201d is a very poor translation. I think the King James is much better here where it says, \u201cFor this they willingly are ignorant of\u2026\u201d<\/em>\n\nThey are willfully ignorant. Because when you look this up in Greek, it's the Greek verb THELO, which means \u201cwish or desire.\u201d In other words, people don't believe in Creation and they don't believe in a global Flood not because of insufficient evidence, but they push these things deliberately out of their minds. Why are they doing that? Because they are living in their own lusts<\/em>, and a reminder of Creation and Flood is a reminder of divine accountability.\n\nToday, when they want to throw creationism out of the schools and all these things, they stand on their misinterpretation of the United States Constitution. They try to make some grand philosophical argument; they pretend like they\u2019re objective and neutral. Peter says that they are not objective about anything! In fact, neutrality is a myth; the human heart has an agenda.\n\nYou start teaching creation science in school? We can\u2019t have that! Because that reminds me of accountability\u2014divine accountability. God created this world and has already judged this world through the global Flood. And He is going to judge the world again! I mean, if He did it in the Flood, He could do it again, couldn\u2019t He? So that becomes the basis\u2014not the Constitution\u2014not science\u2014for pushing it all out of the schools.\n\nSo, Peter says they're actually willfully ignorant about these things, verse 5. \u201cFor when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water\u2026\u201d<\/em> How did this world come into existence? Latin, ex nihilo: something out of nothing. God spoke and it instantaneously came into existence.\n\nHe goes on in verse 6, now talking about the second historical event, \u201c\u2026through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water.\u201d<\/em> So, the God that spoke the heavens and earth into existence is the same God that spoke again and judged creation through the global deluge during the days of Noah.\n\nVerse 7, \u201cBut by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men.\u201d<\/em> You want to refute uniformitarianism and pretend like a slow process that you can see in front of you has always been and will always be and there will be no miraculous termination to this world?\n\nPeter says, \u201cThe reason they think that is they've (THELO) pushed out of their mind two historical events. Number one, Creation, and number two, the Flood. And what do both have in common? What they have in common is God speaks and the event happens! God spoke and Creation happens. God spoke again and judgment took place, demonstrating God is sovereign over His creation and interferes with His creation, contrary to what uniformitarianism teaches.\n\nAnd Peter's point, as you get down to verse 7, is one of these days God is going to speak again! And the same word that brought everything into existence (Genesis 1), the same word that judged everything (global deluge) is the same word that will come forth from God's mouth that will take this world and melt it down by fire. And if God has done it twice in history\u2014Creation, Flood\u2014is hard for God to do it a second time?\n\nIt's interesting how Peter keeps connecting Creation with eschatology. Protology relates to eschatology. Eschatology relates to protology. And I would just say to you that as you look at the evangelical church today, those are the two areas under greatest assault. I mean, churches say, \u201cWe can't take a position on Creation, because that would be divisive! We can't post our eschatology on our website, because that would be divisive!\u201d So, they take an allegorical view of what God says happened and will happen.\n\nIf you\u2019re literal, you wind up in the camp of young-earth creationism\u2014that we\u2019ve been here for thousands of years, not billions of years. And you also wind up in the camp of dispensational pretribulational premillennialism. Both of those belief systems arise out of a commitment to taking God at His word, applying the literal method of interpretation that you use to decipher any other part of the Bible to Genesis 1-11 and the prophecies related to the end times.\n\nBut, you see, what people are saying is, \u201cWe can't take a position on those things.\u201d So they\u2019re denying the history that's necessary to come out correctly in the subject of eschatology. So, Peter connects the dots for us here. And it's very interesting to note that those are the two areas where evangelicals are getting very, very weak and very, very soft.\n\nIt's so important to take God at His word at the beginning of the Bible because that will dictate whether you're going to take God at His word at the end of the Bible<\/em>! So, Genesis 1-11 actually is a big deal! Psalm 11:3 says, \u201cIf the foundations are destroyed, What can the righteous do?\u201d<\/em> You chop out Genesis 1-11, and you have no Garden of Eden and you have no constant sin terminated by death. And if there is no constant sin terminated by death, there is no need for a Savior; and suddenly your Christology (or your doctrine of Christ) becomes challenged.\n\nSo, that's why I so appreciate what Peter is doing here. And we\u2019ve just scratched the surface with this history lesson. The next time I\u2019m with you, we\u2019ll take a closer look at verse 5 (Creation), a closer look at verses 6-7 (the Flood). Then we\u2019ll move into Peter's scriptural argument (divine character argument and divine promise argument) as he is teaching us how to refute what's imprisoning the mind of your grandchildren right now.\n\nWhen your grandchildren or your children come to you and they say, \u201cThe teacher at the school says it's from the goo to the zoo to you over billions of years,\u201d are you equipped to defuse those arguments and to set your children and your grandchildren, whom you love so much, on the right path? That\u2019s where we\u2019re going with this, and that's why what Peter says is very important.\n\nLet me close in prayer.\n\nClosing Prayer<\/strong>\n\n\u201cFather, we\u2019re grateful for what You\u2019ve revealed to us here in 2 Peter 3. I just pray we\u2019ll continue to understand these things so we can understand the times in which we live. We\u2019ll be careful to give You all the praise and the glory. We ask these things in Jesus\u2019 name.\u201d God's people said, \u201cAmen.\u201d","series_sermon_number":""},"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t