NO
INTELLIGENT PERSON CAN ACCEPT EVOLUTION
See:
http://www.celticorthodoxy.com/bkceltic-orthodox-church/evolution.html
There
are logical reasons apart from Scripture's direct testimony to reject the theory
of evolution and accept creation and a Creator.
Can
we prove that evolution is false without using the Bible? Certainly we can!
Evolution is a scientific theory that stands or falls on the physical evidence.
In fact, one can be an atheist, a person who doesn't believe in God, and still
not believe in evolution!
Charles
Darwin's theory of evolution, as taught at school, is a biological explanation
of how creatures have supposedly "evolved" or developed progressively through
natural selection and variation (now known as mutation) over eons of time from
the tiny cell to the largest creatures on earth today. What is taught in
classrooms is not mere micro evolution—small changes within a species—but macro
evolution, the change from one type of creature to another quite distinct life
form.
What
many evolutionists are trying to convince you of is that there is no need for a
Creator since, as they say, evolution can substitute as the mechanism for
creating and transforming life. They teach that life arose from non-life and
evolved from simpler creatures to more complex life forms. In other words, the
tiny cell eventually became an amoeba, then a lizard, then a monkey, and
finally— you !
In
order to remember key points that disprove Darwinian evolution—the "molecules to
man" theory—we'll use the acronym FALSE. (A few of these points also disprove
the compromise of theistic evolution—the notion that God employed macroevolution
over eons in forming the creatures we see on earth
today.)
F
for Fossils
A
fossil is the preserved remains of a living thing. The fossil record around the
earth extends an average of one mile deep. Below this level we come up with a
blank slate as far as living, complex creatures are
concerned.
Collect
fossils of what are deemed the earliest type of complex creatures with hard
bodies—trilobites. No previous ancestors of these arthropods have been found.
Similar to some marine “bugs” we see today on the seashore that disappear into
the sand when the waves retreat, trilobites had hard shells, all the basic
organs, and complex eyes like those of flies, with hundreds of sophisticated
lenses connected to the optic nerve going to the brain. Trilobite fossils are
found around the earth, and in all cases the level of rock beneath them does not
reveal other creatures with similar features.
As
one source states: “The dominant life form was the now-extinct sea creature
known as a trilobite, up to a foot long, with a distinctive head and tail, a
body made up of several parts, and a complex respiratory system. But although
there are many places on earth where 5,000 feet of sedimentary rock stretch
unbroken and uniformly beneath the Cambrian [layer], not a single indisputable
multi-celled fossil has been found there. It is ‘the enigma of paleontological
[fossil studies] enigmas,’ according to Stephen Gould. Darwin himself said he
could give ‘no satisfactory answer’ to why no fossils had been discovered.
Today’s scientists are none the wiser” (Francis Hitching, The Neck of the Giraffe , 1982, pp. 26-27).
Question:
If, after almost two centuries of digging beneath all the world’s continents, no
previous ancestor of this first hard-bodied creature has been found, how then
did the ubiquitous trilobite evolve? There should be some previous ancestor if
evolution were true.
It’s
like finding an exquisite watch on the seashore and yet never finding any
previous primitive models of the watch on earth. If you reasoned as an
evolutionist, you would deny there was a need for a watchmaker at all,
maintaining that time, water, sand, minerals and actions of the elements are
sufficient to producing a fully functional watch that runs. This is part of the
reason it takes more faith to believe in evolution than in a
Creator!
Further
important evidence from the fossil record is the absence of transitional forms
between species. Darwin was concerned that the thousands of intermediate stages
between creatures needed to prove his theory were not in evidence, but he
expected they would eventually be found. Yet those thousands of missing
transitional forms are still missing!
Another
reference explains: “If throughout past ages life was actually drifting over in
one continual stream from one form to another, it is to be expected that as many
samples of the intermediate stages between species should be discovered in
fossil condition as of the species themselves … All should be in a state of
flux. But these missing links are wanting. There are no fossils of creatures
whose scales were changing into feathers or whose feet were changing into wings,
no fossils of fish getting legs or of reptiles getting hair. The real task of
the geological evolutionist is not to find ‘the’ missing link, as if there were
only one. The task is to find those thousands upon thousands of missing links
that connect the many fossil species with one another” (Byron Nelson, After Its
Kind , 1970, pp. 60-62).
The
absence of transitional forms is an insurmountable hurdle for theistic
evolutionists as well. It also fits with our next
point.
A
for Assumption
When
there is no real evidence, evolutionary scientists simply make
assumptions.
If
evolution were true, then where is the evidence of different types of animals
now “evolving” into other types? Where is the evidence of cats, dogs and horses
gradually turning into something else? We do see changes within species, but we
do not see any changes into other species. And, as mentioned, we see no evidence
of gradual change in the fossil record either. Yet evolutionists continue to
assume that transitional forms must have existed.
In
Darwin’s landmark book On the Origin of Species there are some 800 subjective
clauses, with uncertainty repeatedly admitted instead of proof. Words such as
“could,” “perhaps” and “possibly” plague the entire
book.
Evolution
is still called a theory—a possible explanation or assumption—because it is not
testable according to the scientific method, as this would require thousands or
millions of years. Evolutionists will counter that a theory is not a mere
hypothesis but is a widely affirmed intellectual construct that generally
appears to fit all the facts. Yet evolution in no way fits all the facts
available. Evidence does not support it—and in many respects runs counter to
it.
L
for Life
The
law of biogenesis as taught in biology class states that only life can produce
life.
You’ve
probably heard the famous question: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
It’s a real dilemma for an evolutionist to answer. An egg comes from a chicken,
yet the chicken comes from an egg. How can there be one without the
other?
To
complicate matters even more, the chicken has to come from a fertilized egg that
has the mixture of two different genetic strains from both its parents. So the
problem of the origin of life and initial reproduction is still a mystery that
evolutionary science cannot adequately answer.
Yet
for someone who believes in special creation by a Creator, there is no dilemma
here. First God made the male and female chickens, which produced the first
fertilized egg—and the rest is history.
S
for Symbiosis
When
one living thing needs another different living thing to survive, it’s called a
symbiotic relationship.
A
good example of this is the relationship between bees and flowers. The bees need
the nectar from some types of flowers to feed while these flowers need bees to
pollinate them. Both depend on each other to exist and survive. The question for
evolutionists is: How did these plants exist without the bees, and how did the
bees exist without these plants?
Again,
atheistic scientists are stumped. Theistic evolutionists are perplexed as well.
Yet if you believe in a Creator who specially created the various forms of life
on earth, the answer is simple—both were created at about the same
time.
E
for Engineering
All
living things are exquisitely engineered or designed. Qualitatively, a bacterium
is as majestically built for its purpose as a human body is for its function.
Yet evolution says it’s only an illusion of design—that there is no real
designer behind it. Reality is not an illusion! Living things are
multi-functional, which means they do many complex things at the same time,
something evolution with its step-by-step process has never been able to
demonstrate.
One
example of a living thing with exquisite engineering is the tree. It provides
breathable oxygen for us while processing carbon dioxide, which would in high
amounts in the air be toxic to us. It supplies wood, housing for birds, roots to
limit erosion, fruit and seeds to eat, is biodegradable and gives shade.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, “A healthy tree provides a
cooling effect that is equivalent to 10 room-size air conditioners operating 20
hours a day.” How could something so complex arise from a random, undirected
evolutionary process?
Again,
you need more “faith” to believe in blind evolution than in an all-knowing
Creator who designed the marvelous tree in the first
place.
Now
you have five proofs that evolution is F-A-L-S-E and that special creation is
true—and we didn’t even use the Bible. Remember the acronym FALSE when you read
or hear about evolution—and do take time to read our Creator’s great book of
truth! It has much to say regarding origins.
See: http://www.celticorthodoxy.com/bkceltic-orthodox-church/creation.html
HOME
PAGE
http://www.celticorthodoxy.com/bkceltic-orthodox-church