Many Christians aren't sure how to answer the questions raised by these types of claims. Some of it is a lack of understanding of basic words. For example, to evolve (little e) means to undergo change. By that definition, all living things evolve. Over time, there can be small changes within species, and this is part of little e evolution, also called microevolution. These changes can be scientifically observed. The Theory of Evolution (capital E) is a different story. This theory (and yes, it is a theory, not an undeniable, verified fact) makes much more extreme claims. Evolutionists believe: 1) Life began as a chance combination of nonliving chemicals. 2) All living things today developed from a common, one-celled ancestor. 3) Over millions of years, these living things gradually changed into the fish, reptiles, birds and mammals of today's world. Unlike microevolution, this type of Evolution claims species evolve into higher life forms over time. This is called macroevolution. While microevolution is scientific, macroevolution has never been observed or proven.
In this post, I am going to examine the evidence. It is my hope that you will be encouraged by where it takes us, and bolstered in your faith! I am a student of these things, but I am not a scientist myself, so I will be using layman's terms--for my benefit if not for yours! I will also try to provide names and details of everything I state, so you can look these things up and study them for yourself if you want. This is a big topic, and I could make this post very, very long if I followed every argument, so I am rather basic, but I hope I still have some good food for thought, and aid you in further study.
There have always been scientists who believed in God and the claims of scripture, and others who did not. Prior to the early 1960's, many of the atheistic scientists believed that the universe had no beginning, and that it just always existed. That changed in 1962, when the light from a particular star--quasar 3C 273--was studied. From examining their light waves, astronomers discovered a shifting in the black lines, and a "red shift" in the light. What did this mean? It was determined that the galaxies were traveling away from us at 100-million miles per hour! This led scientists to believe that the universe is expanding, and if it is expanding, the universe had to have had a beginning.
Understandably, this encouraged Christians who were in the field of science, because it was evidence for God having created the universe at a particular time. You'd think the unbelievers would be convinced, right? Wrong! As the Bible warns us to expect, these non-Christian scientists maintained their atheism, subscribing to the "Big Bang Theory" the belief that the universe started by an explosion billions of years ago, and that "Big Bang" set everything in motion to become what it is today. And yet, in spite of their unwavering commitment to a godless universe, they cannot say what caused the Big Bang, nor can they determine what happened before it. Within this belief, all they have are guesses.
The Bible does not tell us exactly when or how God created the universe, but the very first thing we are told is that In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. (Genesis 1:1). God spoke, and it was. The universe had a beginning, and I humbly assert that belief in God is the only real explanation.
Some people want to argue, "Well, who created God?" and if we don't have a simple answer to that, then they place God as the same category as the Big Bang, and yet it is not a fair question or comparison. Apologist Greg Koukl answers that question by saying, "You don't believe God was created, because you don't believe in Him. I don't believe God was created, because I believe He is eternal. Since neither of us believes God was created, that isn't a fair question." I think that is a good answer, and I recommend sticking with something like that if you ever get into that kind of discussion. It's true that this argument won't answer all their questions about belief in God, but it will get you out of an unfair hot seat.
Our universe is orderly, not a chaotic mess that would be caused by an explosion. It is ordered by a set of laws. If these laws were even slightly different, life could not exist. For example, only the exact amount of gravity allows our free movement, without us floating away. If the universe had started in chaos, it would have only been able to produce more chaos, and these orderly laws would never have developed. This means that they had to be put into our universe at the starting point for them to exist today. The Law of Entropy, also called the Second Law of Thermodynamics, tells us that anything that is organized tends, with time, to become disorganized. Right there, that shoots down the Big Bang, which states the opposite is true--an unexplained chaotic explosion formed our orderly universe. Albert Einstein viewed the Second Law of Thermodynamics as the premier law of all science. And it supports Intelligent Design, not random chance.
So why doesn't everyone believe in God? Romans 1:18 says that they by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. Verse 19 goes on to say, For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. This verse is clear that the evidence is there, but it will only strengthen the belief of those who already want to know the truth. As for those who are determined not to believe, verse 20 says, So they are without excuse. It is important to note that no reasonable conclusion about our universe has ever been offered apart from God's existence. They keep trying, but every theory they come up with violates the laws of the universe in some way or other.
Let's look at earth--our planet. It is unusual. It is the only planet in our solar system that could facilitate life. Earth is the exact right distance from the sun. If earth got just 1% less energy from the sun, it would begin to freeze. It if got 1% more, it would become unbearably hot. The earth continues to receive the exact needed amount of energy, and it has remained this way throughout history. The sun's photons (heat and light particles) travel to earth at a very slow, long journey. If they arrived faster, without having lost a great deal of their power on the trip, they would be too powerful, destroying life on earth.
Remember the Second Law of Thermodynamics? It states that things start out organized, but move toward chaos. That is true in almost anything. Yet the processes on earth don't seem to be breaking down and turning into chaos. I am referring to the way the atmosphere, ocean, plants and animals all take energy from the sun in an organized way. Rather than braking down, these processes even seem to adjust constantly to maintain that balance without which all life would end. This was what led Russian scientist Dr. Boris P. Dotsenko to belief in God. He stated, As I thought about all of that, it suddenly dawned on me that there must be a very powerful organizing force counteracting this disorganizing tendency within nature, keeping the universe controlled and in order. This force must not be material; otherwise, it too would become disordered. I concluded that this power must be both omnipotent and omniscient. There must be a God--one God--controlling everything! This quote is taken from Scientists Who Believe, put out by Moody Press. You can read more about Dr. Boris P. Dotsenko's journey to Christianity in this 1973 article from Christianity Today.
Evolution requires billions of years, and throwing out these astronomical numbers allows Evolutionists to explain what would otherwise seem unexplainable--such as the extinction of certain animals, or the Grand Canyon's formation, to give a few examples. However, scientists are learning that many things on our planet point to quick cataclysms, not the slow processes of great amounts of time required by Evolution. A cataclysm is a large-scale and violent event in the natural world. At one time, scientists didn't believe cataclysms had anything to do with world history. That has changed. Cataclysms have been verified, bringing the "millions of years" claims of Evolution into question.
A noteworthy cataclysm happened about 3,700 years ago. A volcano on the island of Santorini (in the Aegean Sea, between Greece and Turkey) erupted violently, with the force of hundreds of hydrogen bombs. Volcanic fires shot miles into the sky, causing a fiery rain that spread for miles, dropping ash 100 feet thick on nearby islands. The island dropped into a deep hole in the sea, causing tidal waves hundreds of feet high. Hundreds of thousands were killed, and a civilization was wiped out. There is still evidence of this terrible disaster 3,700 years later. This tragedy has given validation to the idea of cataclysms causing very fast change.
This idea of cataclysmic change was furthered by questioning: what happened to dinosaurs? No one knows exactly what happened, but because they disappear from the fossil record so suddenly, scientists now believe that they died in a catastrophe.
A theory that further gives a nod to cataclysms is the continental drift. The shapes of the continents have led some to believe that they used to all be connected, and have drifted apart, due to a cataclysm of movement of the earth's plates (see pictured below). This may or may not be true, but the possibility has given rise to the belief in cataclysmic events.
 |
| Continental Drift theory illustrates how the continents may have fit together in the past, prior to a worldwide cataclysm that might have divided them. |
Many Bible-believing scientists believe the Genesis flood (which would be considered a worldwide cataclysm) is responsible for many of the earth's unique features today, including the formation of the Grand Canyon. In all transparency, we don't know 100% which features on earth were formed as a result of the Genesis flood, but we do know this: scientists who once scoffed at the idea of cataclysms are now accepting them as part of our world history. These same scientists, suppressing the truth, scoff and deny the possibility of a worldwide flood, but it actually makes perfect sense and explains a lot.
The date of the earth is a question to many. Many who believe in Evolution claim that given billions of years, anything could have happened. As I already pointed out, it is easy for proponents of Evolution to throw around the phrase "billions of years" to give credence to their claims. But let's really look at that. The fact of Creation (which we can conclude from the Bible, as well as the evidence that supports it) is distinct and different from the date of creation. There are Bible-believing Creationists who differ on how old they believe the earth is. The genealogical evidence in scripture leads many biblical scholars to conclude that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, though we cannot put too fine a point on it.
In contrast, Evolutionary scientists speak factually about dates, just as they speak factually about Evolution. The record in the rocks is not as compelling as they would like people to think. Proponents of Evolution are not really at all certain the dates they give are correct. They conclude that rocks and fossils discovered beneath other rocks and fossils are older, which is a reasonable assumption. But there is no way to determine how much older, or even how old any of them are. All they have are guesses. The dating system they use, radiometric dating, is not considered completely reliable either. Simply put, this dating method tries to determine age by observing decay. However, it is understood and agreed upon that it is only reliable up to 100,000 years--far less than the millions and billions Evolutionist throw around. Secondly, though, even assuming its accuracy up until 100,000 years requires some assumptions that cannot be proven (for deeper explanation of how this works, you can look it up. I'm just giving the basics here on a very complex process).
One particular example in the fossil record that is problematic for Evolutionists was discovered in Agate Springs, Nebraska. This slab holds the bones of over 9,000 different animals, all jumbled together. These animals (including rhinoceroses, camels, giant boars, and many other strange as well as modern animals) were all tossed together by some violent flood and were buried quickly, before their bodies could decay or be eaten. The sudden burial together of kinds of animals who should not be found in the same part of the world cannot be explained by Evolutionists.
Another problem is posed for Evolutionists by the idea of soil. For the earth to support life, we need it to contain soil made of weathered rock, chemicals that water washes from the rocks, air and water. But soil must contain organic matter, and must have millions of tiny living organisms in it, if anything is to grow. This poses a problem for those who believe in slow Evolution over millions or billions of years. Where did the soil that living things need in order to exist come from before there were living things to fill the soil with organic matter?
Here's a thought. What was the earth like when God created it? Some Christians raise the possibility that, just as God created Adam as an adult, He likely created the earth "all grown up" as well, with mature trees already planted and growing. If this is the case, light and heat were traveling from the sun already, as if they had been doing so for millions of years. Considering this possibility, can we really tell from the evidence how old the earth is? Despite many unexplainable mysteries, a study of our world should convince us that the universe, our planet, and life itself really couldn't just happen. In the beginning there was God!
Evolutionists also point to similarities between species (for example, between apes and humans) and say this is irrefutable proof that they are related and have a common ancestor. In reality, similarity is not proof of relationship. For many years, Evolutionists had a now-debunked belief about how horses evolved. A fossil called Eohippus was believed to be the ancestor of the modern horse. In the 20th century, this was considered the absolute truth, and was presented in colleges as irrefutable proof of Evolution. Today, no one believes this fossil was a close relative of the modern horse. Instead, it is now seen to be related to the rock rabbit! Similarities do not necessarily mean interrelatedness. On the other hand, these similarities give evidence that the same Designer created them, with what they needed to survive.
When I was a teenager, learning to refute Evolution with the Bible (and the claims of science), one point that was often raised was the lack of evidence of "missing links." An argument made was that we still have apes, and we still have humans, but we don't have "in-between" creatures walking around. This was a very good point. It was also pointed out that many of what Evolutionists thought were the skeletal remains of missing links ended up being debunked (Neanderthal man, for example, was believed at one time to be a missing link, but was later concluded to be fully human. Piltdown man, another supposed missing link, turned out to be a hoax. You can look it up--no conclusive missing link is verified by the scientific community, and most have been at least challenged, if not altogether disproven). In fact, the term "missing link" has largely fallen out of favor now, but was used to refer to transitional beings (a sub-human still similar to apelike ancestors).
 |
| This was the common portrayal of Evolution for many years, showing the ape, the human, and everything they believed came between. Of course, none of these in-between characters were ever discovered conclusively. Now, many Evolutions have ditched this model. |
My teen years, when I learned these arguments, were back when it was more common for Evolutions to say we evolved from apes. Now, the claim is more along the lines of saying we evolved form a common ancestor to the ape. I honestly cannot tell you when the wording changed, or when Evolutionists changed their consensus about common ancestry, or what reasons were given, because all I know was what I was taught in the past, and what is being said now. In trying to research that particular aspect of it to write this part of the post, I came up with no answers as to how the narrative changed, so if you know more about that than I do, you can clue me in. It is my considered belief that the story had to change, because of the lack of evidence. Saying we evolved from an unknown common ancestor buys them a little more credibility. But they're still lacking in evidence. Even with this whitewashed way of stating it, there is no conclusive evidence of this supposed common ancestor we allegedly share with apes.
Yet even now, with less emphasis on "missing links" some Evolutions are still claiming to find archeological remains of human ancestors. It would be unwise to believe them at face value, because at one time, the claims about Neanderthal man and Piltdown man were also hailed as the truth, but were later disproven. Some Evolutionists are honestly deceived by these things, but some are underhanded about it, such as Eugene DuBois. He discovered what was termed Java man, but was later determined to be a mix of human and animal bones that were fossilized together. Eugene DuBois realized his error when he found a whole human skull in the same find--but he kept silent for almost 30 years, because he didn't want to debunk his find, or debunk Evolution. Because of his silence, some today still think Java man "proves" Evolution. Don't be misled!
There are also Creationists who don't do the field justice. One famous Creationist apologist was Kent Hovind, who used a lot of arguments that are not largely encouraged in the field of Creation science. His talks had good points, but also a lot of conspiracy theories. It should also be noted that he ended up doing time in jail for tax evasion. I mention Kent Hovind to point out that people on both sides can have bad arguments, and behave wrongly. It is not my intent to vilify Evolutionists or deify Creationists. I just want to get to the truth. Just because we believe something doesn't mean we agree with everyone else who believes in it. We need to have integrity.
Evolution claims that species evolved from other, lower species. Scientifically, this doesn't check out. Why? Because of genes and chromosomes. These are like long, thin strings largely composed of DNA and proteins. They make up the code for the animals' characteristics. The code is different for each kind of living creature. Cells in a fish, for example, do not contain the code for a bird, a cat, or a human. Each kind of living creature can only reproduce its own kind. However, while living creatures cannot give birth to a different species, offsprings are not identical to parents. Every cat, dog, horse and human is a unique individual, and have small differences from all others of their species...but they do not cease to be that species. The small differences within a species is a variation. This is what makes evolution (with a small e) realistic, but Evolution (with a capital E) a fantasy.
An examination of nature should also point us to faith in God as our Creator. When one examines the intricacies of the way Emperor penguins care for their chicks, the African gazelle's cooling system, the Australian malleefowl's ability to determine the change in temperature to a tenth of a degree, and communities of insects like termites and bees, how can we believe they just happened by random chance? Still more in-depth are the cases in which species depend on each other to live, and could not exist without each other--what are the odds that these species would have Evolved at the same time (IE: certain insects and plants)? Even more than that, the Bible says we are made in God's image, and examining the human body is a study in itself.
There is a difference between good and bad science. Good science constantly searches for new information and is open to correction. Good science doesn't jump to conclusions. When one doesn't have enough info, or has the wrong info, the theories they accept can be very wrong. A good scientist will be cautious, while a less capable one will jump to conclusions. Everyone has biases, and available evidence is seen through the lens of those biases. But a good scientist is open to the truth, wherever it leads him. That is why accepting Evolution as an unquestionable fact is not real science. Science must be questioned. Moreover, in order for it be considered science at all, it needs to be observable, measurable and repeatable. Evolution is none of these things, nor is Creationism. Both are matters of faith. If you know me, you know my faith is in the claims of scripture, and I believe the evidence supports the claims of the Bible. The authors of the book Streams of Civilization (Copyright 1992, Mary Stanton and Albert Hyma) refuse to even call Evolution or Creation a theory, because neither can be tested scientifically. They are beliefs.
For many years, some devout Christians and some secular atheists mistakenly believed that science and Christianity are incompatible. These particular Christians threw out all science, believing it supported unbiblical beliefs, while the atheists threw out the Bible, believing it to be contrary to science. This supposed disconnect between science and the Bible still happens, but both sides are wrong. The Bible and science are not incompatible. God created science. It speaks of His glory and power! Psalm 19 begins, The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. Ecclesiastes 3:11 says that God has put eternity into man’s heart... God gave us everything we need to place our faith in Him. We already read from Romans 1 why some don't. Disbelief isn't based on lack of evidence. It is based on a choice.
When my dad was eleven years old, he watched on TV as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin walked on the moon. He asked his dad, who was seated beside him in their living room, "Wouldn't it be great if God left a Bible on the moon, and when they found it, everyone watching would know God was real after all, since no one could have put it there but Him?" In my father's eleven-year-old mind, this would be irrefutable proof that God existed, and would make atheism obsolete. You'd think it would be that way, but my grandfather knew better. "No, son," he told my dad, "God could carve John 3:16 in the moon, and people would still find reasons not to believe. People who don't want to believe just won't, no matter how much evidence is out there." What choices have you made where God is concerned?
One of my pet peeves in this day and age is the number of people from my generation leaving historic biblical Christianity for the "progressive" brand of the faith (by the way, progressive Christianity is anything but Christian, but I have addressed that in other posts, and anything further right now is a conversation for another time). Some of these progressives make statements they won't substantiate, such as, "Well, I couldn't believe the book of Genesis anymore, when science supports Evolution." They make these claims, yet won't give examples of how they believe science supports Evolution, and they expect to be taken seriously. I don't do that. I take it as a given that you are an intelligent person who may not agree with everything I say here. That is okay. I try to back up everything I say with sources you can look up and make your own decisions about. Having said that...
I will close by encouraging you to look these things up for yourself. If you don't believe me, do your own research. Study it out for yourself. A tool that helped me with these truths as a teenager was a book entitled It Couldn't Just Happen, originally published in 1987 by Lawrence O. Richards. A newer edition is available now, and can be ordered from Amazon and many of the other normal book vendors. This is just one of many tools that can help aid in your study to find the truth, and some points in it have helped me in writing this post. A great resource is the organization Answers in Genesis, and I recommend you look up their website here. Another book, which I referred to, is Streams of Civilization, by Mary Stanton and Albert Hyma. Let me know your favorite apologetic references, and what you discover! Remember what is promised in Jeremiah 20:13, You will seek me and find me, when you seek me with all your heart.
No comments:
Post a Comment