After reading II Peter 3:3-10, one could not help but think Peter was referring to the State of California in 1990. It seems to be a prophecy being fulfilled before our very eyes! Of course, Peter did not know what the Department of Education in California was going to do in 1990, but, certainly, the Lord who inspired him to write the Book of II Peter did.

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, "Where is the promise of Him coming!. . .

Consider what the California Department of Education and its Superintendent have determined regarding the freedom to teach creation, and then read the prophecy in II Peter. And please keep in mind that if our Christian freedoms are taken away in California, this will spread across America. Some of the restrictions endeavoring to be imposed upon the ICR Graduate School are:

1. ICR has been told that they cannot have a graduate school of science because they teach creation in the science classes. The State Department of Education has determined that creation is not science, but that evolution is. One of the objects of "scoffing" was ICR's insistence on teaching the scientific evidences for a young universe. The State wants ICR to teach the evolutionary view that the universe is over 15 billion years old and the earth around 4.5 billion years.

The evolutionary philosophy teaches that the natural processes that have gone on since the beginning have shaped the universe over these billions of years. Evolutionists obviously don't believe that God created the universe several thousand years ago, as the Bible teaches. The prophecy in Peter tells us that the underlying philosophy of the "scoffers" of the last days will be that natural processes have gone on since the beginning.

. . . for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

The technical term that sums up this philosophy is called "uniformitarianism." "Evolutionary geological uniformitarianism would tell us, for instance, that the rock layers of the Grand Canyon were formed by slow uniform processes over millions of years. Peter's statement certainly can be applied to the humanists today who oppose creation and promulgate evolution.

2. The State Department of Education issued a document that basically tells teachers in California's public schools that evolution should be taught as fact, and creation only taught as a religious view in classes other than science classes. In saying that evolution is a proven fact of science, they deny that there is any scientific evidence for creation, so they call it a religious view. And yet, using our five senses in the present, as all good scientists should do, we note that no one has ever observed life forming by chance from chemicals. In fact, everything we observe makes it obvious that to get "information," one has to start with "information."

A building has to have a designer and builder; a computer does not form by chance. It was intelligence (information) that produced the space shuttle. The information in one set of human genes is far more complex than a space shuttle. This information had to come from more complex information. One could then extrapolate backwards for eternity—the only thing that logically makes sense is that there was infinite information to start with. This has to be the infinite Creator—the God of the Bible.

In fact, Romans 1:20 tells us that the evidence that God created is so overwhelming that those who don't believe are without excuse. Peter states:

"For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the Word of God, the heavens were of old and the earth standing out of the water and in the water."

The phrase "willingly are ignorant" means "deliberately forget" or "choose to disbelieve." In other words, the fact that people reject creation is a choice on their part not to believe what the evidence clearly shows. Those who insist evolution is fact fit into this category. Evolution is not fact, and is not science--but despite the obvious evidence for creation, these skeptics deliberately teach otherwise.

It is also fascinating to read that, as well as rejecting creation, these scoffers will reject that the earth began covered with water. Those who teach evolution also teach that the universe began with a big bang, at least 15 billion years ago. Eventually, they believe, our sun formed, and then the earth started as a hot molten blob which did not have water on its surface until it had cooled down over millions of years. None of the evolutionists were there to see the big bang, of course, but they believe it happened. God, who knows everything, and has always been there, tells us in His Word that the earth was formed before the sun, and it was not a hot molten blob—it was covered with water.

In verse 10 of the passage in II Peter, we read, concerning future judgment of this earth, that:

. . . the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

This makes us realize that the so-called big bang didn’t occur in the past—it is yet to come! Maybe we should be wearing T-shirts with the slogan, "The Big Bang is Coming!"

3. The evolutionists want it taught that most of the fossil record took hundreds of millions of years to form, preserving the record of evolution from chemicals to man. The more creationists have looked at the fossil record, the more they have shown that there is certainly no record of evolution in the rocks (there are no transitional forms), and the evidence indicates that the fossil record formed catastrophically. This would fit with the fact that the Bible tells us that this world has been judged in the past by a global flood. Peter informs us that these scoffers in the last days will not believe there ever was a global flood as described in the Bible.

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that . . . the world that then was, being overflowed with water perished . . .

4. If man evolved over millions of years by properties supposedly inherent in matter, then this has all sorts of implications. For instance, if there was no Creator, then each human being owns himself or herself, so they should be able to make their own rules. If there is no God that judged the world with a flood, then one does not have to worry about future judgment. It would be obvious that those who do not want to accept the fact that God owns them, and therefore they are accountable to Him, would reject any teaching that the scientific evidence supported past judgment (a global flood), thus reinforcing the teaching of future judgment.

As Peter states, these people will also be "willingly ignorant" that:

. . . the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Why would people spend so much time and energy to oppose the small graduate school of science at ICR and attempt to close it down? I believe it is because Satan hates the ministry of ICR because it deals with the foundational teaching that God is Creator, and thus owns the world. One can't get any more foundational than that! Satan knows that if he can discredit and destroy this organization, then other Christian organizations would fall in a domino effect.

This is why it is so important for the Christian public to realize that the attack on ICR and the ruling on the teaching on creation in California is not just another battle. It is one of the greatest battles for Christian freedom in the Western world this century.

Peter has warned us! Beware! In the last days scoffers will come attacking the teaching of creation and the flood. The attack is under way. The enemy has identified itself!