Creation or Evolution?

 

Should Genesis be interpreted as symbolical or mythological? Most people in our society say yes.  But Jesus referred to Genesis as historical fact. See Matthew 19:4, 23:35 & Mark 10:6.   Paul referred to Genesis as recording truth. See Romans 5:14, 1st Corinthians 11:8-12, 2nd Corinthians 11:3 & 1stTimothy 2:13. The creation of the world by the very word of God is accepted as an actual event by Paul in 2nd Corinthians 4:6, and the Hebrew writer 11:3, and also by Peter himself, 2nd  Peter 3:5. We may conclude that if Adam is not historical, then neither is Jesus Christ, Romans 5:12-19 & 1st Corinthians 15:45-49.  But why should all of these references between the old and new testament really matter about our interpretation of God’s creation? Because without Genesis being literally factual, then we deny the reliability and authenticity of God’s nature, promises & morals. After all is said and done, if we remove the foundation of fact Genesis gives us, then where is the reason for our existence? If we really originated with a lucky blast of gasses, then why should we be destined for anything more? Is God a fake or real? The Bible doesn’t attempt to logically explain and prove His existence. The Bible merely asserts God, and draws us into learning about faith. So where can you go to attempt to ‘prove’ His existence? Science & logic? Mathematics is a solid approach to understanding our universe.

What Evolution Says: Scientists claim to calculate the probabilities of certain biological changes occurring over a given time. They assume there was at least 4 billion years to originate pre-biologic life and evolve complex life from the first cell. While evolutionary biology isn’t very quantitative, some laws of chemistry and genetics can be expressed in the form of equations which provide probability of change over time. This means scientists can estimate the amount of time it would take to originate a single living cell and the time needed to evolve a multiplicity of cells into a complex life form. If some event such as specific mutation in a DNA molecule has a mathematical probability greater than zero, the chance that it will occur increases with time. In 1952 Stanley Miller showed small organic molecules form when a mixture of simple gases is exposed to a spark-source of energy.  Decades of subsequent research  failed to produce life from many versions of his experiments to date.

What Scientists Say: Hubert Yockey an information theorist from Cambridge Unv, in 1977 argued that the information needed to begin life could not have developed by chance, he suggests that life be considered a given “quantity” like energy. Other scientists show that the mathematical probability of life evolving by Darwin’s evolutionary model is extremely small. A universe even 100 billion years old is still not old enough for a single cell to have developed on earth. Attempts to synthesize RNA, an information carrying molecule in labs, have been unsuccessful, proving life cannot be explained by chemical origins. In 1981 Nobel Laureate Francis Crick wrote, “an honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have been satisfied to get it going”.  Dr. Hoyle from London in 1983 says, “The current scenario of the origin of life is about as likely as the assemblage of an aeroplane by a tornado whirling through a junkyard.”  In 1994 J.P.Moreland and other scientists and mathematicians working on the theory of “Intelligent Design”, are trying to find new ways of exploring the origin and transformation of biological information, believing firmly that God is the ultimate source of information supposedly in DNA. Neo-Darwinian evolution is flawed and even Darwin in 1859 knew of his theories own inconsistencies. He wrote, “To suppose that the eye with all it inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection seems, I confess, absurd in the highest degree”. In a letter from Darwin to Asa Gray which surfaced publicly in 1991, Darwin wrote, “I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science...it is a mere rag of hypothesis with as many flaws and holes as sound parts.” Furthermore, Richard Leakey, world renown Paleoanthropologist in a PBS documentary in 1990 said, “If pressed about man’s ancestry, I would have to unequivocally say that all we have is a huge question mark. To date, there has been nothing found to truthfully purport as a transitional specie to man…If further pressed, I would have to state that there is more evidence to suggest an abrupt arrival of man rather than a gradual process of evolving”.  Therefore we can conclude that the theory of evolution and even the ‘big bang’ is simply still just a theory and the tangible evidence we have, points towards creation.

What The Bible Says: It is not a scientific textbook and it’s purpose lay in explaining why we are here, not how we got here. But God does give us insights to His creation, such as 1st Cor. 15:38-39, “God gives…to each seed it’s own body, all flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of animals, another of fish and another of birds”. This is a clear indication that the complex life forms we have will not mutate or evolve into other species other than variations within a specie. Microevolution is a reality, the changes in colors of moths, and sizes of beaks on birds. The differences between race and plough horses and dairy and beef cattle, are all evidence of microevolution. But macroevolution, where a change makes a life form switch from one specie to another is impossible. So with evidence we can see in true science, we confirm what the Bible says is true. There is a God, and only the fool says in his heart that there isn’t, Psalm 53:1. This is why Genesis should be accepted as historical fact.

          www.arn.org

          www.icr.org

          www.reasons.org

 

Useful Books: Essays in Apologetics, Vol.4,  by Thompson & Jackson

The Genesis Flood by Whitcomb & Morris

          In Six Days by J. Ashton

          Refuting Evolution by J. Sarfati

          Astronomy & The Bible by D. DeYoung

          The Answers Book by Ham & Wieland

         

 

Useful Prayers: Do we ever pray for those “in authority” as needing direction and wisdom in glorifying God and truth in scientific research? When we consider how much of our tax money funds false science in education, industry and government, is it not a worthy need in prayer? Would it enable us with courage to talk about our faith in God and His creation?