Controversies have raged for years over science, evolution and the Bible.
Evolution scientists successfully appealed to the court system to expel the biblical creation and intelligent design narratives from being taught in science classes as an alternative to the theory of evolution. Creationist's then made a nationwide drive to allow time for teaching biblical creation as an explanation for the origin of the earth and human life.
To counter this drive, the National Association of Biology Teachers created a Fund for Freedom in Science Teaching for combating any legal challenges to classroom activities. According to Wayne A. Moyer, former executive director of the organization, "No one is saying that religion and scientific views are incompatible. We just don't think students should be taught information that can't be supported by a shred of scientific proof" ("New Battle Over Teaching of Evolution," U.S. News & World Report, June 9, 1980, p. 81).
In a recent episode in Dover, Pennsylvania, broadcast nationwide on PBS TV, creationists were ridiculed and thoroughly trounced again in court. ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) lawyers challenged local school board efforts to include Intelligent Design be taught as an alternative explanation to the origin of the many forms of life on earth. And a Federal judge ruled against the teaching of Intelligent Design, apparently on the grounds that to do so would be paramount to Congress establishing a religion. The U.S. Constitution's First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." But it also says, "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech..."
Religion is defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as "a cause, principle, or belief held to with faith and ardor." According to Robert Jastrow, former director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and a professed agnostic in religious matters: "There is a kind of religion in science; it is the religion of a person who believes that every event in the universe can be explained in a rational way as the product of some previous event. This faith is violated by the discovery that the world had a beginning under conditions in which the known laws of physics are not valid, and as a product of forces we cannot discover" ("Have Astronomer's Found God," Readers Digest, July 1980).
Has science proven the theory of evolution in the 150 years since Darwin published his theory on the "Origin of Species"? Does evolution science really have all the answers? Or is it really just another religious faith held by some scientists? Can lawyers or judges determine what is scientific or religious truth?
The Holy Scriptures admonish,
"Study to show yourself approved by God, a workman that needs not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth..." (2 Tim 2:15-16). "...avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science ("gnosis," knowledge, science) falsely so-called, by which some professing it have erred concerning the faith" (1 Tim 6:20-21).
What is the real truth? Following are some questions one should ask science and atheists about evolution before discounting the biblical revelation.
Many scientists believe in a God based on scientific logic and belief in the laws of cause and effect, which are a foundation of all true science. Einstein, for example, believed, "the existence of God was proved by the laws of nature, that is the fact that there was order in the universe, and that man could discover it" (Have Astronomer's found God).
Scientists admit that it is impossible to disprove the existence of God, so the philosophy of science is to simply exclude anything supernatural from the realm of science, rather than challenge it directly.
Christians don't need to defend God, He is able to answer for Himself and does in His word, the Bible. Nor can anyone prove to or persuade others into believing in the biblical God against their will. This study is about avoiding being deceived by twisted hypothetical philosophies and reasonings of men in the name of science.
Atheist Richard Dawkins in his book, "The God Delusion," simply passes off the biblical revelation with the statement: "Although Jesus probably existed, reputable biblical scholars (? Mat 11:25) do not regard the New Testament (and obviously the Old Testament) as a reliable record of what actually happened in history, and I shall not consider the Bible further as evidence for any kind of deity" (p 97). He could be excused for ignorance, but that puts him in the category of being "blind leaders of the blind" (Mat 15:14).
The Bible admonishes:
"Beware lest anyone seduce you through philosophy and vain deceit, according to the traditions of men, according to the propositions of the world..." (Col 2:8). And "Prove all things and hold fast to that which is good" (1 Thes 5:21).Make no mistake, God, who is invisible (Col 1:15), is able to reveal Himself to anyone, as He chooses, and will in His time, as He has in the past and does in the present (Gen 6:13...; 17:1-7; 1 Kgs 19:8-13; Isa 52:10; 59:1-3; Mat 11:27; 13:10-16; 24:30; John 6:44,64-66; 14:12-17,26; 15:7-15,26; 2 Pet 3:3-9; Rev 20:11-12).
What are proofs God exists? David, a great king of ancient Israel and a man who knew God (Acts 13:22), answers:
"The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.'" (Psa 14:2). For, "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament ("raqia," expanse of sky or heavens - Isa 40:22) shows His handiwork" (Psa 19:1).
The apostle Paul also wrote:
"For the indignation of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
"because what may be known of God is manifest to them, for God has shown it to them.
"For since the creation of the world ("kosmos," the universe) His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead ("theiotes," divinity), so that they are without excuse,
"because, although they knew God, they did not honor Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
"Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Rom 1:19-22).
The gifts and miracles of the Spirit, that God gives to those who obey Him, are also a proof (Acts 2:38; 5:32; 1Cor 12:1-11; Eph 4:1-7 - see Does God Really Exist?, Life's Ultimate Question: Does God Exist? & Who is God?).
Evolutionist try to explain the creation as a process of natural forces and random chance, but admittedly cannot explain the origin of the laws and natural forces, or of the energy and matter everything supposedly evolved from. 
Dr. Jastrow explains, "The scientists pursuit of the past ends in the moment of creation. Who or what put the matter and energy into the universe? Was the universe created out of nothing, or was it gathered together out of pre-existing materials? ...science cannot answer these questions. Now we would like to pursue that inquiry further back in time, but the barrier seems insurmountable. For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is able to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries" (Have Astronomer's Found God?).
God asks,
"Who is this who darkens counsel by words without knowledge? Now prepare yourself like a man, I will question you, and you shall answer Me.
"Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me if you have understanding" (Job 38:1-4).
The Creation is scientific evidence and proof of a Creator - nothing can come into existence without a cause (Rom 1:20; Isa 40:25-28; 45:9,12,18,21-22; 46:9-11). But some argue, 'What created God'? God's answers,
"Thus says the High and Lofty One who inhabits ETERNITY, whose name is Holy..." (Isa 57:15). "Have you not known? Have you not heard? The EVERLASTING God, the Lord ("YHVH," or "Jehovah," Lord, meaning Eternal), the Creator of the ends of the earth, neither faints nor is weary. There is no searching of His understanding" (Isa 40:28).Their question is mute. God, who created all things (Col 2:15-17) is ETERNAL, from everlasting to everlasting having no beginning or ending (Rom 16:25-27; Heb 7:3), a fact the finite carnal human mind cannot comprehend, except as God reveals it to them (Rom 8:7; 1 Cor 2:9-14).
The "Law of Biogenesis" states that living things can only come from living things, they cannot generate spontaneously from non-living materials. An earlier theory from ancient times was that life arose spontaneously from non-living substances (abiogenesis). No one has ever been able to demonstrate or prove this, but it was disproved by experimentation in 1668 by an Italian biologist, Francesco Redi, and later by French chemist Louis Pasteur (1800-1800), and other scientists (World Book Encyclopedia, 50th ed.). 100% of all evidence in nature continues to prove that living things cannot come from non-living things. However modern evolution scientists are reexamining the theory of spontaneous generation, as it is at the crux of the theory of evolution.
Atheistic bias seems to be a major reason some evolution scientists ignore or reject proven scientific laws that don't fit their theory. Dawkins, using the convoluted reasoning of a philosopher, writes,
"Scientists invoke the magic of large numbers... Now, suppose the origin of life, the spontaneous arising of something equivalent to DNA, really was a quite staggeringly improbable event. Suppose it was so improbable as to occur on only one in a billion planets...here we are talking about odds of one in a billion. And yet...even with such absurdly long odds, life will still have arisen on a billion planets - of which Earth, of course, is one..."He admits, "Any probability statement is made in the context of a certain level of ignorance..." But, "The beauty of the anthropic principle is that it tells us, against all intuition, that a chemical model need only predict that life will arise on one planet in a billion billion to give us a good and entirely satisfying explanation for the presence of life here... Even accepting the most pessimistic estimate of the probability that life might spontaneously originate, this statistical argument (he proposes the anthropic principle as an alternative to the design hypothesis) completely demolishes any suggestion that we should postulate design (Intelligent Design or Creation) to fill the gap" (The God Dilusion, pp. 136-139).
It has been said that, 'Statistics don't lie, but liars use statistics.'
Science can describe chemical processes of life, but can't explain how it began or what life is. The Scriptures reveal that life is a spiritual essence given by God. God says,
"...there is no God besides Me; I kill and I make alive..." (Deut 32:39).
In Job it is written: "The spirit of God has made me, and the breath of the Almighty has given me life" (Job 33:4 - see also Gen 2:7; Isa 42:5; John 5:26; Rom 8:2,11).And in Ecclesiastes: "No man has power over the spirit ("ruach," breath, spirit) to retain the spirit; nor has he power in the day of death..." (Eccl 3:19-20). "For that which befalls the sons of men befalls beasts; one thing befalls them: as one dies, so dies the other; all have one spirit ... All go to one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again" (Eccl 8:8).
According to the fundamental logic of the Laws of Cause and Effect and the Law of Biogenesis, all living things require a Creator and Giver of life.
All true science is defined by the scientific method, which is an objective, non-biased way to discover and prove truth based on the study and discoveries of a highly organized "nature" governed by laws. The scientific method requires 3 basic steps (see Mankind's Greatest Experiment):
Scientific investigation, however, is speculative, sometimes based on hypotheses that are not subject to testing and scientific proof. According to E. Bright Wilson in his book, An Introduction to Scientific Research,
"The collective judgment of scientists, insofar as there is substantial agreement, constitutes the body of science. The fact that there are very large areas of agreement, in spite of the individualistic antiauthoritarian nature of science, is partial evidence for the validity of scientific methods. However, there are cases where universal agreement has been attained for an untruth... Unfortunately, in many fields, especially on the borderlines of science, hypotheses are often accepted without adequate tests..."The difficulty of testing hypotheses in the social sciences has led to an abbreviation of the scientific method in which this step is simply omitted. Plausible hypotheses are merely set down as facts without further ado. To a certain deplorable extent this same practice occurs in medicine as well" (An Intro. to Sci. Res., pp. 26-27,21).
The same is true of evolution, cosmology and geological history. According to geologist William Stokes,
"Most events with which geologists deal were not directly witnessed or recorded by anyone and cannot be repeated at our convenience like a chemical experiment. For this reason, the usual methods of scientific proof involving experiments that can be repeated and mathematically analyzed are not applicable... If the facts are not sufficient to justify immediate and positive answers, the investigator may have to substitute a theory or "educated guess" until additional information is discovered" (Essentials of Earth History, by William Stokes, 1960, p 3,5).
Unfortunately many of these theories and "educated guesses" become accepted as fact and are taught as such in schools even though they "can't be supported by a shred of scientific proof."
Statistical analysis of tests are used to determine scientific significance of a hypothesis. Results such as 99.9% probability (0.01% null hypothesis) would indicate high significant with only 1 possibility in 1000 that the results were due to just random chance. The evidence for life coming from non-living matter is 0.00% probability (or 100% null hypothesis), making the probability for a Lifegiver 100%. Though the odds are 100% against the spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter, evolutionists won't give up trying to prove the opposite, even if they consider it as only 1 chance in a billion as proposed by Dawkins. Is that science or is it a blind faith in Darwinian Evolution?
What is true biblical faith? The order and laws of nature reveal the wisdom of an incredibly complex and intelligent Designer, Lawgiver, Creator, Lifegiver and Sustainer (see Job 38-42; Psa 104:5-30; 139:13-16; Eccl 1:3-13; 3:1-14; 8:16-17; Heb 1:2-3; Jam 4:12).
True biblical faith is a spiritual gift (1 Cor 12:1,4,9), that encourages the same 3 steps as the scientific method, except that the hypothesis is revealed by God in the Bible and through the Holy Spirit (Deut 4:5-8; John 6:63-65; 14:26; 16:13; 17:17).
Not all that is called science is true science, nor is all that is called religion the true religion of God. The Scriptures admonish:
"avoid the profane and vain babblings and oppositions of science ("gnosis," knowledge, science) falsely so-called..." (1 Tim 6:20-21), and avoid error and "deceit after the traditions of men..." whether it be scientific or religious (Col 2:8; see also Isa 8:20; Mat 15:1-3,7-9).
God inspired the Bible as a revelation to provide mankind with a foundation for understanding all truth:
"Thy (God's) Word is truth" (John 17:17; see also 16:13).
King David was inspired to write: "Fear (Reverence) of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, a good understanding have all those that do His commandments..." (Psa 111:10).
"You through Your commandments make me wiser than my enemies... I have more understanding than all my teachers, for Your testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the ancients, because I keep Your precepts" (Psa 119:98-100).
To give some scientists, such as Copernicus and Galileo, the credit they deserve - they disproved some of the errors of authoritarian theologians who stated that the sun revolved around the earth, and the earth was the center of the universe. Theologians have often misinterpreted the Scriptures, even as many still do today. Scientists today also present valid evidence disproving the error of theologians who mistranslate and misinterpret Genesis 1, claiming the earth is only 6,000 years old ignoring the evidence of science (see Question 6).
However, neither scientists nor historians have disproven the validity of the Holy Scriptures. Archeologists continue to unearth more and more evidence verifying biblical history and fulfilled prophecies, which historians had written off as myths by their own myths. But some scientists error today by saying that the theory of evolution is a fact, when in reality it is only many different unproven and often contradictory theories trying to explain the creation without a Creator (see Is the Bible True? & How to Understand the Bible).
Theologians error in trying to account for the mountains of sedimentary strata and ancient fossils buried there in a 6,000 year timeframe. They mistranslate and misinterpret Gen 1:1-2, which should be translated,
"In a beginning God, created the heavens and the earth. The earth became ("hayah," to exist, be or become) without form and void ("tohu," a desolation, and "bohu," and ruin), and darkness upon the face of the deep ("tohom," depth, abyss-as a surging mass of water). And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters."
The strata of the Paleozoic and Mesozoic Eras are evidence of a worldwide flood in Genesis 1:2 that destroyed most prehistoric life, including the dinosaurs, before Adam, caused by the rebellion of angelic spirits who became the adversary of God and man - Isa 14:12-15; Eze 28:12-217; Heb 1:1,14; Rev 12:3-4,7-9). From Gen 1:2 on reveals the beginning of God's restoration to renew the face of the earth to prepare it for man (Gen 1:2-31; Psa 104:29-30; Isa 45:18).
Genesis 6,7 and 8 describe the events of a worldwide flood in Noah's time. The strata of the Cenozoic Era are evidence of this worldwide flood, which contains fossils of the mammals and man created by God in the six days described in Genesis 1.
Scientists today, however, continue to debate how to interpret the flood strata and fossil record. Biology - Concepts and Connections explains,
"Many evolutionary biologists since Darwin's time, and even Darwin himself, have been struck by the failure of the fossil record to conform to the gradualist model. Few sequences of fossils have ever been found that represent gradual transitions of species. Instead, fossils usually appear suddenly in a layer of rocks, and many persist essentially unchanged for the whole time they exist on Earth, finally disappearing from the record of the rocks as suddenly as they appeared" (p. 286).
That's consistant with the biblical record.
All age dating methods are based on assumptions that certain conditions existed and were constant throughout the period the dating methods cover. Scientists often disagree because science cannot prove the validity or accuracy of the assumptions of the variable conditions of the past. Strata were originally dated by guesstimations based on the assumptions of Uniformitarianism (Essentials of Earth History, Ch. 3 The Uniformity of Change), and fossils were then dated by the age of the strata, and then strata began to be dated by the fossils - circular reasoning all based on the original assumptions and guesses.
Radioactive dating methods hold more promise for accuracy. According to Stoke's (ch. 2, The Measurement of Time), "The theory behind radioactive dating is relatively clear and simple, but the results of its application have been far from consistent and harmonious. The difficultities arise from many uncertainties...
"All radioactive elements are subject to disintegration from the moment they come into existence. A specific atom may disintegrate immediately or it may remain intact for millions of years. The spontaneous behavior of the individual atom is unpredictable... not to be overlooked are radioactive substances that are produced on the earth by powerful cosmic rays coming from space... we assume that disintegration has always proceeded at the same rate no matter what conditions within the earth's crust may have been...
"The radioactive transformations that are most valuable in determining geologic age are uranium to lead, thorium to lead, rubidium to strontium, potassium to agron, and carbon to nitrogen." Half-live of radioactive Uranium (U-238) = 4,510 million years. "The potassium-argon method...appears to be more reliable than the uranium-lead methods... (Radioactive potassium) K-40, has a half-life of 1,350 million years..." Two of the assumptions of the potassium-argon method are: "(1) no argon was trapped within the speciman at the time of its formation, and (2) no potassium or agron was added or subtracted during the lifetime or the mineral."
The half-life of carbon 14, created by the impact of cosmic rays on nitrogen (78% of air - the atmosphere), is 5,568 years making it ideal for dating recent organic materials. According to Stokes,
"We assume that the rate of formation of C-14 has remained constant for a very long time so that production and disintegration have reached a state of balance (equilibrium - the ratio of atmospheric carbon 12 to carbon 14 remaining constant historically). But "If the rate of production, which depends on cosmic ray intensity, has varied in the last 50,000 years, then the method is open to question... in which case the basic assumption underlying the technique is wrong."The ratio of C-12 to C-14 would only remain constant if the amount of cosmic radiation converting nitrogen in the atmosphere to carbon 14 were constant, and carbon 12 levels were constant in the atmosphere. Scientists, however, have shown that this is not true for several reasons, one being huge amounts of atmospheric carbon 12 were deposited as coal, oil and limestone in ages past, as well as being stored in the oceans and glacial ice, which would change the ratio. And now today's atmospheric carbon 12 levels are increasing because of its release from the burning of fossil coal and oil. Another problem according to Stokes is that "tests have found that many substances have had carbon 14 added or subtracted since being buried..." which would cause erroneous dating results.
Stoke's writes, "Geologists cannot conclusively verify by experiment or prove by observation their conclusions regarding the age of the earth... Practically all geologic specimans are dated in a relative way by applying the principle of superposition..." (Essentials of Earth History, Ch. 2 Time and its measurement - see Job 38:4).
Scientist's recently discovered that the universe is made up of about 95% 'dark' energy and 'dark' (invisible) matter. They have never observed it directly, but they observe its effects on what they can observe.
The Bible reveals that Spirit is also invisible, not observable directly by man or his scientific instruments, and therefore is a mystery to scientists. They may reject or ignore it but science cannot disprove the existence of spirit (Rom 1:19-20), or of angels and demons, which are spirit beings (Psa 104:4; Heb 1:7,14). The existence of Spirit and angels is revealed by God in the Bible.
"God is Spirit" (John 4:24). "He (Jesus Christ) is the image of the invisible God... For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible..." (Col 1:15-16; also 1 Tim 1:17; Heb 1:3).Spirit is the power of God (Psa 104:30; Lk 1:35; 4:14; Acts 1:8; 10:38; Rom 15:13,17-19; 2 Tim 1:7), much like electromagnetic energy is the power of the universe from which the elements of matter are created according to Einstein's formula - E=mc2 (Rom 1:20; Heb 11:3).
And of the angels God says:
"Who makes His angels spirits and His ministers a flame of fire... Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation" (Psa 104:4; Heb 1:7,14).Few have seen angels, but they have manifested themselves to men at times as evidence of their existence (Gen 19:1; Dan 8:15-19; Mat 28:2-7; Lk 1:11-20,26-38; John 20:12). If a famous scientist witnessed to seeing angels or demons today he would be laughed to scorn and discredited as a scientist (2 Kgs 6:17; 1 Cor 2:14). Spiritual blindness and deception and much of the evil in the world is overwhelming evidence of Satan and demon spirits (Gen 3:1-7; Mat 17:14-21; John 8:44; 2 Cor 4:4; 11:3,13-15; Eph 2:2-3; 6:12; Rev 12:9; 13:2-15; 16:13-14). Scriptures reveal that they are angels who rebelled against God (Isa 14:12-15; Eze 28:12-17; 1 Pet 3:19-20; 2 Pet 2:1-11 - see Mystery of Angels and Evil Spirits, Is there Really a Devil? & Mysteries of Satan...).
Scientists could prove the existence of God and Spirit through observation of the effects (evidence) and logic, just as they discover invisible forces such as electromagnetic energy, electricity and dark energy and matter. Intelligent Design scientists are more objective and use observation and logic to do just that. But scientists biased against God and the Bible are blinded by the adversary of man and God, called the "god of this world" (2 Cor 4:2-4), who deceived Eve (Gen 3), and "who deceives the whole world" (Rev 12:9), causing mankind to reject and become cut off from the true God (Isa 59:1-2; John 8:44; Rom 8:7; 2 Cor 11:3,13-15; Eph 2:2-3; Heb 11:6).
Some may ridicule and distort the truth, but they cannot disprove the existence of Spirit and spirit beings. Evidence revealed by the Scriptures including the gifts of the Spirit: true faith, miracles, answered prayers, prophecies, etc. are all manifestations and proofs of the workings of God's Spirit (see John 3:2; Rom 1:19-20; 1 Cor 2:7-14; 12:1-11; 1 Kgs 18:30-39; Mat 1:20-23; Gal 5:22-23; Heb 11:6).
Evolution theories date back to ancient times. Anaximander (611-547 B.C.), a Greek philosopher, developed a theory that man evolved from fish. Charles Darwin (1809-1882) published his theories, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection," in 1859, and "The Decent of Man," in 1871, ignorant of Gregor Mendel's (1822-1884) discovery of the laws of heredity. Since then great progress in the science of biology and molecular genetics has revealed that DNA is the genetic material accounting for the highly complex design and development of every living cell and organism, and that DNA is what transfers hereditary characteristics from one generation to the next.
DNA is a long molecular chain made up 2 polynucleotide strands, bearing a four letter biochemical code for codifying the genetic blueprints of every living organism. Scientists abbreviate the 4 molecular letters of this code as T, C, A and G. These 4 basic molecules encode the sequence for amino acids in the design and manufacture of thousands of different proteins and other components of cells, and provide coded instructions for building and assembling cells into complete organisms including humans.
How much genetic information does it require to create a perfect bacteria or a human? A human cell has about 1000 times more DNA than bacteria. Human cells have 23 sets of paired chromosomes containing approximately 3 billion nucleotide pairs (6 billion code letters) on its DNA, which if stretched out would be about 3 meters in length, all of which is cleverly packed into each microscopic cell. Scientists have determined the human DNA genome has about 30,000 genes, which carry the design code for all the proteins, enzymes, etc. essential as building blocks of cells, tissues, organs and secretions of the body. In addition to the 30,000 genes, more than 80% of the DNA is in non-coding regulatory sequences (regulating the process of turning genes on and off to provide what's needed during various stages of development, growth, activities and adaptation to changes in the environment, etc.).
As stated in Biology - Concepts & Connections, by Compbell, Mitchel & Reece, p. 230,
"The sheer quantity of DNA in our cells is truly astonishing, but consider what is contained in the approximately 3 billion (paired) nucleotide human genome. Every nucleus in every...somatic cell contains a full inventory of instructions for building and maintaining a complete human being."If we consider that the Bible is written with approximately 5 million alphabetic letters, then the 6 billion code letters of the genetic masterplan on the human DNA would, if written in a book, be equal to over 1000 volumns the size of the Bible.
What would be the probability that a monkey sitting at a typewriter could have written the Bible in any amount of time? How much less would be the probability that particles of dust could come together into molecules and form a genetic code and then organize over millions of years into a chain of DNA of 3 billion paired nucleotides long with a perfect design for building and maintaining the 70 trillion cells of a complete functioning human being with brains capable of scientific inquiry and designing complex computers and analyzing our own DNA, all through random mutations and natural selection?
Yet this is exactly what biologist Richard Dawkins and many evolution scientists believe as a philosophic tenet of their Darwinian faith. Dawkins rejects any idea of design in nature, calling it just an illusion of design, for design would require a Designer. He writes,
"We live on a planet where we are surrounded by perhaps ten million species, each of which independently displays a powerful illusion of apparent design. Each species is well fitted to its particular way of life... We really need Darwin's powerful crane to account for the diversity of life on earth, and especially the powerful illusion of design... We can deal with the unique origin of life by postulating a very large number of planetary opportunities. Once that initial stroke of luck has been granted...natural selection takes over: and natural selection is emphatically not a matter of luck."Nevertheless, it may be that the origin of life is not the only major gap in the evolutionary story that is bridged by sheer luck, anthropically justified... Mark Ridley in Mendel's Demon (The Cooperative Gene) has suggested that the origin of the eucaryotic cell (our kind of cell, with a nucleus and other complicated features such as mitochondria, which are not present in bacteria) was an even more momentous, difficult and statistically improbable step than the origin of life... events like this might be explained by the anthropic principle, along the following lines. There are billions of planets that have developed life at the level of bacteria, but only a fraction of these life forms ever made it across the gap to something like the eucaryotic cell... The anthropic principle states that, since we are alive, eucaryotic and conscious, our planet has to be one of the intensively rare planets that has bridged all three gaps." (? Where are the proofs for this philosophical theoretic anthropic principle?)
He continues, "Natural selection works because it is a cumulative one-way street to improvement (? proofs?). It needs some luck to get started, and the 'billions of planets' anthropic principle grants it that luck. Maybe a few later gaps in the evolutionary story (fiction) also need major infusions of luck, with anthropic justification. But whatever else we may say, design certainly does not work as an explanation for life..." (p.139-141). In summary he points out, "One of the greatest challenges to the human intellect, over the centuries, has been to explain how the complex, improbable appearance of design in the universe arises... In the case of a man-made artifact such as a watch, the designer really was an intelligent engineer. It is tempting to apply the same logic to an eye or a wing, a spider or a person..." (? According to the scientific method, logic is a natural universal principle of cause and effect that applies to all things equally, which only the supernatural can possibly defy.)
"If the argument of this chapter is accepted, the factual premise of religion - the God Hypothesis - is untenable. God almost certainly does not exist" (p.157-158).
If evolution is not true, why do so many scientists accept it? The answer in part is in the illusion of evolution fostered by man's intellectual ego nature to classify, explain and organize everything into neat categories. Then there is also an illusion of evolution created by the variations of living things in nature, which actually result from the multiplication of living organisms through the natural sexual recombinations of genes to form many variations of the created kinds into races, breeds, species, etc, according to the laws of heredity recognized and described by Mendel and others, including Jacob over 3,500 years ago (Gen 30:27-43).
Darwin observed that plant and animal breeders created new varieties and breeds by artificial selection and mating methods and postulated the same thing could occur in nature by natural selection, which is true. But it has never been proven that any higher life forms ever evolved from lower life forms. Many theories have evolved attempting to provide evidence for evolution, such as the fossil record, biogeography (different species separated by geography), homologous structures (ie. similarities in the design of limbs, wings and flippers), comparative embryology (similarities during development from an egg to birth), vestigial organs (ie. tonsils and appendix, now found to be important immune tissues), the universality of the genetic code and similarities in DNA, etc. These all give an illusion of evolution, but prove nothing other than similarities of design, which one would expect from a specific Designer (see Creation or Evolution - Does It Really Matter What You Believe?.
The system for scientific classification of living things and the evolutionary tree of life created by scientists also presents a very graphic illusion of evolution. Linnaeus (1707-78) established the modern scientific system for naming plants and animals and classifying them into progressively broader categories - from species, genera, families, orders, classes, subphyla, phyla, and kingdoms. According to Biology - Concepts & Connections, p. 305, "...decisions about classification often involve heated debate... Ever since Darwin, systematics has had a goal...to have classification reflect the evolutionary connections among species."
Species are often assumed to be the same as kinds in the Bible, but it should be noted that species in this artificial classification system do not specifically relate to biblical kinds. In most cases Genera and Families would probably relate closer to the Genesis kinds (Gen 1:21,24-27), whereas species are the many variations, like variations of the dog or cat kinds, and Darwin's finches, classified as different species.
Scientists, now doing genetic engineering in the lab, are able to transfer genes from one kind to another, but this does not create new genes, which are required for evolution to occur by natural selection. Natural and induced mutations, caused by radiation, chemicals, faulty transcription, etc., do cause changes, mostly damage or errors in genes, but there is also a backup system designed to correct errors. The change of just one letter of a gene code can have disastrous effects resulting in death or serious genetic diseases. Some mutations have little effect, but the great majority are detrimental resulting either in death, cancers or genetic disorders, but most aren't inherited. However, over 1000 human genetic disorders, including cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia, are from mutations that are inherited. The Bible gives laws against incestuous marriages to avoid concentrating hereditary defects in human family lines (Lev 18), as well as breeding principles for plants and animals (Lev 19:19). Some mutations have resulted in the loss of traits, such as hornless cattle, seedless oranges, etc., but none have ever been proven to evolve upward adding new beneficial features, as proposed by evolutionists.
DNA analysis is now being used to determine how closely two species might be related. Humans are placed in the Hominidae Family, and chimps, apes and orangutan in the Pongidae Family by classical classification. Both families are placed in the Primates Order, but suppositions of evolutionary connections between humans and apes, said to go back to extinct fossils supposedly 4-5 million years ago, are still being debated (Biology... pp. 309,744,747). Fossils and a classification system do not prove progressive evolution from lower to more complex organisms as presumed by evolutionists. "Analysis of DNA found in mitochondria (mtDNA) of human cells indicate that mtDNA is extremely uniform in today's human population. Supporters of the monogenesis hypothesis maintain that such uniformity could only stem from a recent origin of modern humans..." (ibid. p. 749).
The fact that many genetic traits of the various kinds of living organisms are shared, does not prove any evolutionary connections. The discovery of the highly complex DNA code for genetic traits reveals a highly intelligent design for all living organisms, which can only be accounted for by the unfathomable intelligence of the Creator who designed it (Psa 139:13-18; Isa 55:6-11). Though billions and trillions of each kind have lived and reproduced through sexual recombinations of DNA, none are identical genetically, - except for identical twins), nor have they upgraded into different more advanced kinds. Evolution is simply an illusion created by evolution scientists.
Scientists have also discovered that organisms adapt to major differences in environmental conditions because they carry adaptive genes that can be turned on or off depending on need and environmental conditions. Mountain climbers use this to adapt to high altitudes before climbing high peaks. Though natural selection may occur in selecting the fittest or best adapted, adaptation of animals does not require mutations and natural selection, as proposed by Darwinian evolution, to explain the great diversity of life on earth. The very complex genes created in each kind and the laws of genetics created by God, and natural variation through sexual reproduction eliminate the need for such changes to occur by the complete improbability of evolutionary means (see Gen 1:11-12,21,24-27).
Ecology, the interdependence in living things in nature, is another clear overwhelming evidence of special creation by the Creator. With the complexity of life's requirements, no living forms could survive waiting thousands or millions of years for the essential functional components necessary for life to evolve and thereby survive. Nor could the many highly complex components of a postulated first living cell have evolved and survived and mysteriously come together to form a living cell without someone to simultaneously create all the components and then put them together into a living cell, anymore than a tornado could sweep through a junkyard and put together a Boeing 747 from the scraps. Nor could the fragile first cell have survived until an interdependent biological ecology and environment had evolved to support it. When a living organism dies, it returns to the dust from whence it was created (Gen 2:7; 3:19).
Darwin himself recognized weaknesses in his theory from its many unproven assumptions, but this does not seem to dissuade his worshippers. Darwin devoted two chapters to one of his most vexing concerns—gaps in the fossil record. He wrote, “The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed, [must] be truly enormous... Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? . . . This, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.” (On the Origin of Species, p. 280).
The lack of intermediate links in the fossil record has remained a centerpiece in the debate over origins for 150 years. "Darwin tried to explain the gaps in two ways: (1) the geologic record and fossil collections are imperfect, so it will be difficult to discover many transitional forms; and (2) despite so many known gaps at almost every stage of the evolutionary tree, new transitions are sure to be found (or, he argued, in rare cases, had already been found).
"Worse still, from Darwin's point of view, the lowest fossil-bearing rocks were filled with vast numbers of complex marine fossils that lacked any hint of their origin or transitional forms from one kind of creature to another. What is now called the “Cambrian Explosion” was wedged into Darwin’s thoughts on gaps. Such a sudden appearance of so many different groups of marine invertebrates, Darwin lamented, was “inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument” against his theory (www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n1/god-of-gaps).
It appears that Dawkins' Darwinian Delusion is the illusion that there is no God and that evolution can be supported and proven by the "philosophy" and "profane and vain babblings and contradictions of science falsely so-called" (Col 2:8; 1 Tim 6:20; also 2 Tim 3:1-9).
One more Question...
Theories of evolution are based on the precept that there is no purpose in the universe for anything, but that it all just happened and evolved by random chance, "luck," mutations and natural selection, so "eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die" (Mat 24:38-39).
As a veterinarian and a scientist, who practiced and taught veterinary medicine, research, science, biology, nutrition, health and agricultural sciences, and conducted research and consulting programs while serving in government, university and business, I am amazed at what science has been able to discover about the intricate design, details and ecological interdependency of everything from the cosmos to the tiniest living cells, and yet paradoxically not recognize or accept the incredible intelligence and powers required for its creation and harmonious existence.
Though I grew up as an agnostic and was trained as a scientist, I have since found that what science cannot discover, God has revealed in His written word, the Bible - the Creator's revelation to man (Deut 29:29; 2 Tim 3:15-17). Following biblical principles set me on the right track for finding solutions to problems created by ignorance, greed and misguided science (see Mankind's Greatest Experiment) in nutrition, health and agriculture (see Agricultural & Environmental Research) .
Also, while serving in the military, I came to realize that mankind's dilemma for survival was beyond science, politics and man's religions. Science has bestowed upon mankind the powers to destroy all life (see Gen 11:6), and for the most part man's religions have ignored the true wisdom and only real hope for mankind revealed in the Bible. It reveals that though man was created from the dust as flesh and blood, and may share many genes (ie. maybe 96% with monkeys) with other beasts (Gen 2:7; Eccl 3:18-21; 2 Pet 2:12), man is special, created "in the image of God," and given abilities above the animals, to become the children of God, and to rule over animals and earth, and in the future over angels and all things with God (Gen 1:26-28; Psa 8:1-9; 1 Cor 2:7-14; 6:2-3; Heb 2:1-15).
Is there a future destiny for you beyond death? Yes! God, who is eternal, offers eternal life to all mankind. "His mercy endures forever" (Psa 136). God "is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that all come to repentance" (2 Pet 3:3-12). Though "The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom 6:23). God has a masterplan for the salvation of all. (see Job 14:1-17; Eccl 3:11; Isa 46:8-13; John 5:21,24-29; 1 Cor 15:12-26,45-58; 1 John 3:1-3; Rev 21:2-7; also Passover...The Beginning of Salvation, What Is Your Destiny?) & The Road to Eternal Life.
Allen Stout D.V.M.
Copyright ©: Serf Publishing, Inc. March 2009
Updates: 4/8/09