evidences evolution - appleton church of christ · evidences & evolution -- page 3. there is...

Evidences &

Evolution

Evidences & Evolution --

Part 1 - The Need For Faith

Introduction: The Bible assumes the existence of God from the first verse on. That says something. But there are evidences of God, though no one can scientifically prove or disprove he exists, for He is a Spirit (John 4:24). But neither can alternatives be proven either. Evolution is just a theory. The question is which possesses the heavier weight of evi-dence and which is more reasonable, plausible and logical.

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you,

with meekness and fear. (I Peter 3:15)

I) Defining Some Terms * Evidence - From a Latin word meaning “to see out” and denotes that which is clearly seen or evident. * Genesis - Means “beginnings” and the first book of the Bible tells of many beginnings, including the origin of the universe, earth, seas and all that is in them. * Theism - Believes a God exists and accounts for the existence of all else. * Atheism - Believes there is no God. * Agnosticism - Believes he does not know or cannot know if there is a God.

II) The Necessity Of Faith By All


Monkey's Viewpoint

Three monkeys sat in a coconut tree, Discussing things as they're said to be.

Said one to the others, 'Now listen, you two. There's a certain rumor that can't be true; That man descended from our noble race;

Why the very idea is a Shame and disgrace!

"No monkey ever deserted his wife, Starved her babies and ruined her life.

And you've never known a mother monk To leave her babies with others to bunk,Or pass them on from one to an other,

Till they scarcely know who is their mother

"And another thing you'll never see --A monk build a fence 'round a coconut tree

And let the coconuts go to waste, Forbidding all other monks a taste,

Why if I'd put a fence around the tree Starvation would force you to steal from me!

*'Here's another thing a monkey won't doGo out at night and get on a stew.

Or use a gun or club or knife To take some other monkey's life

Yes, man descended, the ornery cuss,But, brother he didn't descend from us!”

(Author unknown)

Evidences & Evolution -- Page 50

* Hebrews 11:1 - Faith is the EVIDENCE of some things that are not seen or visible. * Heb. 11:6 - Faith is a requirement when dealing with God. * Faith is required in most areas of life - e.g. real parents, historical accu-racy, travel to the moon, passing an approaching car, guilt or innocence of a criminal etc.

III) Preliminary Arguments For Theism

* Our ability to THINK of God argues His existence. Most everyone in the world believes in a god of some sort. Is it logical to say that it is all an imagination? That practically the whole of mankind is irrational? * Something cannot come from nothing. Something exists. Therefore something or some one is eternal. It is either mind or matter and which is more reasonable? Which is greater?

For the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made,

even His everlasting power and divinity.(Romans 1:20)

* Cause and Effect - A watch requires a watch maker, a building requires a builder, a universe requires a Maker.

For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God.

(Hebrews 3:4) * Cosmos - From the Greek word for world and means order out of chaos, i.e. cosmetology. Design and order are evidence of a Designer.

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork.

Day unto day utters speech, and night unto night reveals knowledge.

(Psalm 19:1-2)Evidences & Evolution --

4. There is scientific evidence for the earth being relatively young.

5. The geological and fossil record do not prove evolution.

6. The special theory of evolution, wherein there is limited change within kinds is not denied. The general theory of evolution, wherein changes cross from one kind to another is unprovable.

7. The "evidence" for evolution can likewise be interpreted for creation.

Conclusion: As Christians we know that in the Bible we do not have a theory which is subject to all sorts of changes and modifications, a the-ory which has come about as a result of the restricted reasoning abilities of human beings, but we have the inspired account of the only Being who was present at Creation. True, there are still many things that we do not understand. There are some observations which at present are diffi-cult to reconcile with the Biblical account of creation. It is quite possible that some of these problems will never be solved for us.

But there are great difficulties also with the theory of evolution. No really satisfactory explanation for the origin of life has been suggested. It is difficult to account for the survival of simple forms and for the sur-vival of individual forms for supposedly long periods of time. There are a number of problems of evolutionary development in particular forms. It is difficult to explain the origin of obligate relationships. Some of the characteristics which organisms possess do not seem to meet their needs. The very complexity of living things makes it difficult to believe that these have originated by chance. In the inorganic world we have a ten-dency to greater randomness: it would be unusual to have the very oppo-site trend in the organic world. Certainly evolution is by no means proved, and it is not the only possible explanation for the organic diver-sity that we find. It is not unreasonable, then, to assume that the changes which have occurred have been finite and limited and that they have oc-curred within closed systems, the "kinds" of creation. -- John Klotz in Genes, Genesis and Evolution - pg. 547-548

Evidences & Evolution -- 9

* A Beginning? - As Lawrence 0. Richards puts it: "Before the discovery of the red shift, many non-believing scientists argued that the universe had always existed. If there were no beginning, there was no need to be-lieve in God who created everything. But then astronomers learned that our universe is expanding--exploding outward at tremendous speeds. They realized that an exploding universe must have had a beginning.” (It Couldn't Just Happen, page 11). This must be accounted for.

IV) Six Things The Atheist Must Believe 1. That God Does Not Exist - The atheist would have to be God to abso-lutely KNOW that there is no God. He would have to be everywhere and know everything, for where he is not may be where God is or what he does not know may be God! Illust. Is there a black marble in a closed bag of marbles?

2. That Matter Is Either Eternal Or Created Itself - Seeing God is not a possibility,that leaves only matter and it must be either eternal or self created. Since science has proven our universe had a beginning, even estimating the age of the earth, the notion that matter is eternal is not a viable one. The other option of self creation borders on the absurd..UNbelievable.

3. That Life Is Spontaneously Generated - This has never been replicated, but has to be believed by the atheist.

4. That Order And Design Are Results Of Non-Intelligent Accidents - Since faith is required, then which is more reasonable to believe...that a mind is behind all the wonders of this universe or it is all totally an acci-dent?

5. That Non-consciousness Evolved To Consciousness - Dead uncon-scious matter eventually became aware of itself! Is this still happening today?

6. That Non-morality Evolved To Morality - Why should a person do good? From whence came our sense of right and wrong?


life." Some are bound to think themselves superior to even other human beings.

4. The Bible Says: “For since the creation of the world His invisible at-tributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like cor-ruptible man--and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting; being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, mur-der, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters, hat-ers of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerci-ful; who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who prac-tice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also ap-prove of those who practice them.” (Romans 1:20-32)

IV) Review

1. Faith is required for both creation and evolution ... both are belief sys-tems.

2. Design demands a designer.

3. Man's unique nature cannot adequately be explained by evolution


V) The Agnostic * To claim one CANNOT know if there is a God, would just as with the atheist, necessitate knowing everything, for the very thing the agnostic does not know may be the evidence or knowledge of God. * Some agnostics may simply be ignorant but open to investigation. But many are probably agnostic by convenience. They are either too lazy to investigate or afraid of what might be found and conveniently say they are agnostic.

VI) For Consideration

Our Unique World

Suppose you take ten pennies and mark them from 1 to 10. Put them in your pocket and give them a good shake. Now try to draw them out in sequence from 1 to 10, putting each coin back in your pocket after each draw.

Your chance of drawing No. 1 is 1 to 10. Your chance of drawing 1 and 2 in succession would be 1 in 100. Your chance of drawing 1,2, and 3 in succession would be one in a thou-sand. Your chance of drawing 1,2,3, and 4 in succession would be one in 10,000 and so on, until your chance of drawing from No. I to No. 10 in succession, would reach the unbelievable figure of one chance in 10 bil-lion.

The object in dealing with so simple a problem is to show how enor-mously figures multiply against chance. So many essential conditions are necessary for life to exist on our earth that it is mathematically impossible that all of them could exist in proper relationship by chance on any one earth at one time. Therefore, there must be in nature some form of intelligent direction. If this be true, then there must be purpose.


are filled to overflowing with rapists, stalkers, and child molesters. What else, will have to go wrong before it becomes apparent that attempts to live without God are futile?

5. Evolution and the Value of Human Life Man may be more knowledge-able, more intellectual, and more scheming than his counterparts in the animal kingdom. But he is still an animal. And so the question is bound to arise: Why should man be treated any differently when his life no longer is deemed worth living? There is no logical reason that he should. From cradle to grave, life-from an evolutionary vantage point-is com-pletely expendable. In Darwin's day (and even in the early parts of this century), some applied this view to the human race via the concept of eugenics, the study of hereditary improvement of the human race by con-trolled selective breeding. By January 22, 1973, the United States Su-preme Court decided that the human embryo growing within the human womb no longer is "human" and subject to termination at the mother's whim. According to Darwin, "weaker" members of society are unfit and, by the laws of nature, normally would not survive. Once those who are helpless, weak, and young become expendable, who will be next? Will it be the helpless, weak, and old? Will it be those whose infirmities make them "unfit" to survive in a society that values the beautiful and the strong? Will it be those who are lame, blind, maimed? Will it be those whose 10 falls below a certain point, or whose skin is a different color? Some in our society already are calling for such cleansing" processes to be made legal, using euphemisms such as euthanasia" or "mercy killing." After all, they shoot horses, don't they?

III) The Fruits of Evolution

1. It tends to destroy faith in the Bible, Jesus and God. Religion is at best tolerated and likely persecuted. There is just no place in the evolutionary theory for sin, soul, salvation and a Savior.

2. It injures public morals. If the governor is taken off of people's lives, then what will restrain the injurious passions of some?

3. It encourages racial prejudice. There is a sub-title in one of Darwin's books that reads, "The preservation of favored races in the struggle for


(From A. Cressy Morrison’s book, Man Does Not Stand Alone, pg. 13).

The Solar System

There is a story which dates back to the time when the statesman Benja-min Franklin was Ambassador of the United States to France. While liv-ing in Paris, Franklin was a member of an elite literary social and scien-tific club. At certain meetings of this intellectual group, atheistic senti-ments were expressed, leaving the impression that only the superstitious and uninformed still believed in God as the creator of the universe.

At the next meeting of the group, Benjamin Franklin brought a beauti-fully designed and executed model of the sun and our entire solar system. The earth and the other planets were in their proper relationship to the sun and to each other and of appropriate sizes. It was a masterpiece. Upon seeing it, one of the sophisticated members of the club asked, "Who made it?" Dryly, without the trace of a smile, Franklin responded, "No one. It just happened."

(the above story has been attributed to both Sir Isaac Newton and Ben-jamin Franklin. It may be apocryphal, but illustrates well nonetheless.)

A Quote From: I Believe Because, by Batsell Barrett Baxter

The second law of thermodynamics or entropy is emphasized by Dr. Ed-ward Luther Kessel: Science clearly shows that the universe could not have existed from all eternity. The law of entropy states that there is a continuous flow of heat from warmer to colder bodies...Therefore the universe is headed for a time when the temperature will be universally uniform and there will be no more useful energy. Consequently there will be no more chemical and physical processes, and life itself will cease to exist.

But because life is still going on, and chemical and physical processes are still in progress, it is evident that our universe could not have existed from eternity, else it would have long since run out of useful energy and ground to a halt. Therefore, quite unintentionally, science proves that our universe had a beginning. And in so doing it proves the reality of God,


justify worldly behavior. They simply believe the evidence favors evolu-tion and thus have accepted it as the correct view of origins.

II) The Implications Of Evolution

1. No God, No Law! For there to be law, there must be a lawgiver.

2. Evolution and Ethics Ethics generally is viewed as the system or code by which attitudes and actions are determined to be either right or wrong. But the truth of the matter is that if evolution is correct and there is no God, man exists in an environment where "anything goes." With no way to reach a rational conclusion on what is ethical, man finds himself adrift in a chaotic sea of despair where "might makes right," where "the strong subjugates the weak," and where each man does what is right in his own eyes. This is not a system of ethics, but a society of anarchy.

3. Evolution and Morality Morality is the character of being in accord with the principles or standards of right conduct. But how should morals be determined? Since man is viewed as little more than the last animal among many to be produced by the long, meandering process of evolu-tion, this becomes problematic. Matter, in and of itself, is impotent to evolve any sense of moral consciousness. If there is no purpose in the universe, then unbelief must contend, and does contend, that there is no ultimate standard of moral/ethical truth, and that morality and ethics, at best, are relative and situational. That being the case, who could ever suggest, correctly, that someone else's conduct was "wrong," or that a man "ought" or "ought not" to do thus and so? Responsibility for one's actions are dismissed on the grounds that behavior was inherited. Per-sonal accountability goes lacking.

4. Evolution and Hedonism Hedonism is the philosophy which argues that the aim of "moral" conduct is the attainment of the greatest possible pleasure with the greatest possible avoidance of pain. What have been the consequences of this kind of thinking? Sexually-transmitted diseases are occurring in epidemic proportions. Teenage pregnancies are ram-pant. Babies are born already infected with deadly diseases such as AIDS, because their mothers contracted the diseases during their preg-nancies and passed them on to their unborn offspring. In many places divorces are so common that they equal or outnumber marriages. Jails


for whatever had a beginning did not begin of itself but demands a Prime Mover, a Creator, a God.

Part II - A Look At The Evidence

Introduction: In part I we noticed that whichever view one might take concerning God and the origin of all things, faith is required. Belief in God is logical and the evidence weighty. In part two we continue to examine some of that evidence.

I) The Bible’s Claim

When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, the moon and the stars, which You have ordained...

(Psalm 8:3)

I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvelous are Your works...

(Psalm 139:14)

God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is the Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands.

(Acts 17:24)

II) Design Demands A Designer

A. The Universe 1. Earth Rotation: "The earth rotates on its axis in twenty-four hours at the rate of about one thousand miles an hour. Suppose it turned at the rate of a hundred miles an hour. Why not? Our days and nights would then be ten times as long as now. The hot sun of summer would then


Reason #4 There are many who believe in evolution because they have rejected God. For those who refuse to believe in the Creator, evolution becomes their only escape.

Reason #5 Some beliefs in evolution has to do with the fact that there is so much evil, pain, and suffering in the world. To some, no explanation from religionists will ever provide an adequate answer to the conundrum of how an omnipotent, omniscient, omni-benevolent God can allow atrocities to fill His specially created world. Evolution, on the other hand, provides what appears to be a perfectly logical explanation for such a scenario. According to evolutionary dogma, throughout the his-tory of the world various species (including man) have been engaged in a struggle for survival and advancement.

Reason #6 Some people believe in evolution because they have heard about,, witnessed, or experienced first-hand the mistakes of religionists through the ages. Whether it is the offering of young virgins to an imagi-nary deity, the burning of alleged witches at the stake, or the adultery of a highly-visible televangelist, the truth of the matter is that on occasion believers in God have set a very poor example-one that sensitive, think-ing people naturally would have difficulty following. To some, the very history of religion makes it suspect from the outset. Add to that the hy-pocrisy of a person who wears the name "Christian," and the damage may be such that The result is that those who have been offended want nothing whatsoever to do with the God of the Bible.

Reason #7 Some reject God, and creation, to excuse or legitimize their own inappropriate personal conduct. In other words, they believe in evo-lution because it allows them to avoid any objective moral standard of behavior.

Reason #8 Some people accept evolution because they are convinced that it is the correct answer to the question of origins. They have examined the evidence and, on the basis of their examination, have concluded that evolution is the only plausible explanation for the Universe and all that it contains. These people generally are both sincere and open-minded. They are not attempting to rid themselves of the idea of God. They do not feel the need to be "intellectually correct." They are not reacting to unkind treatment at the hand of religionists. They are not searching for a way to


burn up our vegetation each long day and every sprout would freeze in such a night"

2. Sun/Life: "The sun, the source of life, has a surface temperature of 12,000 degrees Fahrenheit, and our earth is just far enough away so that this "eternal fire" warms us just enough and not too much. It is marvel-ously stable, and...has varied so little that life as we know it has survived. If the temperature on earth had changed so much as fifty degrees on the average for a single year, all vegetation would be dead and man with it, roasted or frozen." 3. Earth Tilt: "The earth is tilted at an angle of twenty-three degrees. This gives us our seasons. If it had not been tilted, the poles would be in eter-nal twilight. The water vapor from the ocean would move north and south, piling up continents of ice and leaving possibly a desert between the equator and the ice. "

4. Moon Distance: "The moon is 240,000 miles away, and the tides twice a day are usually a gentle reminder of its presence...If our moon was, say, fifty thousand miles away instead of its present respectable distance, our tides would be so enormous that twice a day all the lowland of all the continents would be submerged by a rush of water so enormous that even the mountains would soon be eroded away."

5. Earth Crust: "For, had the crust of the earth been ten feet thicker, there would be no oxygen, without which animal life is impossible; and had the ocean been a few feet deeper, carbon dioxide and oxygen would have been absorbed and vegetable life on the surface of the land could not ex-ist."

6. Atmosphere: "Oxygen, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and carbon, singly and in their various relations to each other, are the principal biological elements. They are the very basis on which life rests. There is, however, not one chance in millions that they should all be at one time on one planet in the proper proportions for life. Science has no explanations to offer for the facts, and to say it is accidental is to defy mathematics. "

7. Enormity: if we scale down the universe to something we can relate to, making the distance from the earth to the Sun being 1/4 inch, then the


A. The "evidence" of fossil record and the geological strata have been examined in a previous part of this study. The above approach can be applied to them as well. It is obvious there is nothing that puts this hy-pothesis in the realm of "scientific fact,"

B. There is, however, much about life that calls for a creationist interpre-tation of facts: fixity of kinds, law of biogenesis, 2nd law of thermody-namics, the overall presence of order and design in nature.

Part VI - The Consequences of Evolution

Introduction: The belief of the general evolutionary theory is not without consequence, as is the case with faith in creation. Much of this lesson is based on material by Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Monkey Busi-ness, a booklet by Ken Green.

1) Why Do People Believe In Evolution?

Reason #1 Many believe in evolution simply because it is what they have been taught. For the past quarter of a century or more, it has been taught as a scientific fact in many elementary, junior high, and senior high schools, as well as in most colleges and universities.

Reason #2 Many have been led to believe that if we wish to be consid-ered intelligent, then they should believe in evolution, because intelligent people all over the world believe in evolution.

Reason #3 Evolution has been given a "stamp of approval" by important spokespersons from practically every field of human endeavor. When evolution is presented as something that "all reputable scientists believe," there are many who accept such a statement at face value.


nearest star would be 1 mile away! The distance to the center of our Milky Way galaxy: 6,000 miles! And our galaxy is just one of millions!

8. Orderliness: The dictionary definition of “year” is: “the length of time it takes the earth to make one complete revolution around the sun; 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, and 45.51 seconds.” Every four years we have a leap year to take care of the amount over the 365 days. It never changes and plans are made for events well into the future because of its con-stancy.

(Some of the above is taken from A. Cressy Morrison’s book: Man Does Not Stand Alone, pg. 16-19)

B. The Cell

"In all forms of animal life the unit of structure is the cell. Not only is it the fundamental unit of all tissues in the body of an animal but it is also the unit underlying all physiological activity." 1. "Each of the cells shows a magnificent structure...Each cell seems to be a unit in itself, each apparently capable of carrying on its life activities independently of others like itself...Each cell performs these activities with precision that by comparison makes the running of the finest watch a clumsy affair..." (Evidence of God in an Expanding Universe, Russell Charles Artist, pg. 119-124)

2. Summary: Imagine a unit of life smaller than the period at the end of this sentence that consists of inorganic and organic matter in a jelly-like substance that encloses a spherical body known as a nucleus and is itself enclosed by a plasma membrane. a. Factory: Think of each cell as a factory that produces its own ma-chines, that functions according to a specific blueprint, and that develops along with other cells various kinds of tissues, organs, and systems. b. Blueprint: In the nucleus of this factory is the head office that contains nucleic acid (DNA) which itself contains a coded blueprint that outlines the shape and design of each protein machine in the cell.


continuing to impress plastic minds by means of discredited generaliza-tions." (Evolution and Christian Faith p. 242).

3. Examples: Furrows in the embryo are often viewed as "gill slits" as it goes through the fish stage, but here there is no functional similarity to a fish and the furrows are not really open slits. Here there is a mere resem-blance that a highly charged imagination seeks to turn into evidence of evolution. Many other inconsistency are noted in the supposed "jelly-fish," "worm," and "choradate" stages (see Genes, Genesis, and Evolu-tion, John D. Klots, pp. 148-156). F. Mutation and Natural Selection: Small and large beneficial mutations or changes occur for a variety of reasons in animals and then by natural selection the fittest changes are preserved and passed on to the offspring. In time, as a result, the animal is upgraded and a new species is formed.

1. Evolutionists: Genetic changes in animals commonly occur and nature selects and preserves the beneficial changes by the survival of the animal best fit for natural surroundings. Genetic change is the means of evolu-tion and natural selection the mechanism for preservation of those changes.

2. Creationists: Nothing in scripture opposes and much in nature affirms genetic change in animals. These changes are, the evidence indicates, passed on to the offspring. We know there is variety in kinds--such as Chihuahuas, terriers , and great danes in the species of dogs. But is there unlimited change? This evolutionist must but cannot prove.

3. Mutations/Lethal: "A large number of these mutations, however, are lethal, killing the organism during its embryonic period..." (Genes, Gene-sis and Evolution p. 279) "The chief difficulty In the way of evolution by mutation is the fact that most mutations are either lethal or semi-lethal. Either they kill the organism outright-in which case they are said to be lethal -- or they are harmful in some way, so that In the ordinary course of events they would be eliminated ... Winchester says that over 99 per cent of the mutations which have been studied in various forms of life are harmful in some degree" (Genes, Genesis and Evolution p. 282)

Conclusion:


c. Transcription: In the nucleus is another nuclei acid (RNA) that photo-copies the code from the DNA and moves from the nucleus to the cytoplasm, where a complex of proteins known as ribosome receives the code and assembles the various kinds of amino acid chains which form the protein machines. d. Machine: Each protein machine is a linear sequence of 100 to 500 amino acids of up to 20 different kinds, which, as letters of the alphabet in proper arrangement produce words and sentences, produce different types of proteins. e. Product: The combination of proteins, according to the blueprint,in each cell and in combination with like cells produce tissues, organs, sys-tems, and species of animals. f. Conclusion: "The synthesis of proteins by the cell is thus achieved as a result of a remarkable and intimate relationship between one class of molecules--the proteins--and another quite different class of molecules--the nucleic acids. The nucleic acids contain the information for the con-struction of proteins, but it is the proteins which extract and utilize the information at all stages as it flows through this intricate series of trans-formations" (EVOLUTION: A Theory in Trouble, Michael Denton, p. 245)

3. Did you realize, for example, that the human body is composed of multiplied trillions of cells? In the nucleus of each cell, hundreds of thousands of genes are present. Each gene consists of a complex chemi-cal called deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). DNA has a complicated code for the mapping out of the entire development of the individual. If the coded instructions of a single human cell were put into English, 'they would fill a 1,000 volume encyclopedia' (Reader's Digest, October, 1962, p. 148 via A Study Course in CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES, Bert Thomp-son and Wayne Jackson, p. 25) 4. Each human being begins as a single cell, formed by the joining of a father's sperm and a mother's egg. From the one tiny cell comes a body that will have at least 26,000,000,000 cells. One original cell contained the code to make the thousands of different kinds of cells found in our bodies. Some of our billions of cells will be fat cells. There will be bone cells,heart muscle cells, brain cells and lung cells. There will be cells that


1 . Evolutionists: Since on the evolutionist's scale of ascent man is closer to Primates than other animals, these tests confirm evolution of man from Primates. If evolution has occurred here, it 'is reasonable to conclude it has occurred generally.

2. Creationists: They note that these tests prove too much and are contra-dictory to the theory of evolution. Furthermore, they note that these tests are made from the blood serum rather than from germ cells from which heredity is determined.

3. Example: According to these tests a kingfisher is more closely related to a dog than to a chicken and pigs are more closely related to dogs than cats are to dogs. What proves too much for a theory proves nothing.

E. Embryonic Recapitulation: "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny," which says that the embryonic development (ontogeny) of man passes through the various stages of evolution (phylogeny). 1. Evolutionists: The evolutionists argue that since a child's development in its mother's womb passes through all the stages of animal life from the simple to the complex-- that this but reflects his ancestral and evolution-ary history.

2. Creationists: Creationists admit that there is a development in the mother's womb from a simple one-celled egg to the complex form of man. But does this development pass through the stages of various lower animals in reaching man's maturity? Professor James W. Leach of Ohio State University says, " The undeniable tendency of a complex animal to pass through some developmental states reminiscent of the adult condi-tions of a selected and graduated series of lower forms has long been de-scribed as 'The Biogenetic Law.' But as a 'law' inscribed by nature it is perhaps more full of 'loopholes' and 'bypasses' than any law thus far in-scribed by man" ( Evolution and the Christian Faith, p. 242). Dr. Waldo Shumway said of the theory that it "seems to demand that the hypothesis be abandoned. Those of us who were reared in the phylogenetic tradition may see it go with a sigh of regret. Those of us charged with the respon-sibility of explaining the law of evolution to our classes will miss a fa-miliar maxim, easily learned, and a convenient skeleton on which to hang the discrete data of embryology. But there can be no excuse for


make up veins and capillaries, red blood cells and many different kinds of white blood cells. There will be different kinds of skin cells and tiny cilia cells growing on the cells that make up your breathing tubes. In your eyes there will be cells so transparent that you can see through them as if they were glass. All this will come from one tiny original cell, which contained the code needed to make you a complete human being ( from a book: It Couldn’t Just Happen, by Lawrence Richards pp. 139,140)

C. The Eye * The eye is a complex example of the coded message received by millions of cells that directed them to form the eyeball, the optic nerve, and its relationship to the brain.

1. Lens: The lens is surrounded by a group of cells that form the ciliary muscle which relaxes and contracts so man can focus on an object at a distance and instantly focus on another object up close.

2. Pupil: Cells constructed iris muscles that work slowly to open the pu-pil when entering darkness, requiring a space of time to adjust the vision; they work rapidly to shut down the pupil and protect the eye when enter-ing a lighted area.

3. Retina: The retina is shaped by millions of tiny cells--some like cones and others like rods. The cones detect sharp lines and the rods detect shapes in dim light.

4. Cones: The cones perceive three distinct colors, combine the three to see secondary colors, and then pass the image along the optic nerve to the brain. 5. Optic Nerve: Cells have created a million fibers, called the optic nerve, which transfer all images to the brain. Cells in the brain receive the im-age upside down and know to invert them so the image can be viewed right side up.

6. Design or Chance: Even Charles Darwin, the father of modern evolu-tion and author of Origin of Species, said: "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different dis-


2. Creationists: Why is it not possible that all these animals had the same designer and creator? Nothing says that a creator must have a totally dif-ferent design or structure for every different animal. It stands to reason that a pattern of digestion or the nature of muscles would work on sev-eral different kinds of animals.

3. Example: The "evolution" of the automobile shows much similar-ity through the decades and certain patterns still prevail nearly a century later--and yet we know each results from the creative design of intelli-gent engineers. So it is with airplanes, homes, bridges, etc. C. Vestigial Organs: Certain organs in animals' bodies, such as the ap-pendix in man, are said to be "vestigial"--to have degenerated from an-cestral usefulness to uselessness because the animal has evolved beyond its need.

1. Evolutionists: Vestigial organs show that the animal has evolved to a higher plane of life and in the process has lost it use for such organs. The fact that the organ is still there and is now useless shows that the animal has progressed upward.

2. Creationists: The fact that the function or purpose of an organ is un-known is no evidence that it is vestigial. It may have a purpose in em-bryonic development that is not needed as an adult or it may have a pur-pose that is yet unknown. Only a person with omniscience could make this argument.

3. Example: At one time a list of 180 vestigial organs was compiled and all of those but a half dozen or so have by modern studies proved to be fictional. The appendix and tonsils, once thought vestigial, are now known to be rich in lymphoid tissue that may help protect the body from infection, especially in early years.

D. Blood Precipitation Tests: It is affirmed that blood serum tests show man to be more closely related to Primates (chimpanzees, gorillas, orangutans, baboons, etc.) than other animals.


tances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree" (Origin of Species, A Mentor Book, p. 168). The eye is no larger than a ping pong ball, but it has so many millions tiny electrical connections that it can handle 1 1/2 million messages at the same moment! (Richard’s book, p. 140) 7. Camera: A TV camera is crudely patterned after the eye and no one questions the intelligent design that created it. The eye is likewise, and abundantly more so, evidence of creative intelligence.

D. Animal Instincts

* Numerous authors point to the instincts of animals to demonstrate that more than unintelligent matter is necessary to explain the unerring habits that guide or direct various species.

1. Homing Birds: "The robin that nested at your door goes south in the fall, but comes back to his old nest the next spring. In September, flocks of most of our birds fly south, often over a thousand miles of open ocean, but they do not lose their way" (Ibid., Morrison, p. 49). Most know of the swallows that travel from many parts and arrive at Capistrano, CA every year on the exact same day. Chance or Design?

2. Migrating Fish: "The young salmon spends years at sea, then comes back to his own river, and, what is more, he travels up the side of the river into which flows the tributary in which he was born...If a salmon going up a river is transferred to another tributary he will at once realize he is not in the right tributary and will fight his way down to the main stream and then turn up against the current to finish his destiny" (Ibid., Morrison, p. 54,55).

3. American/European Eels: "These amazing creatures migrate at matur-ity from all the ponds and rivers everywhere--those from Europe across thousands of miles of ocean--all go to the abysmal deeps south of Ber-muda. There they breed and die. The little ones, with no apparent means of knowing anything except that they are in the wilderness of water, start back and find their way to the shore from which their parents came


II) Analyzing The Evidence

We now examine some of the "evidences" used to "prove" the hypothesis of evolution. Our goal is to show that none of the 11 evidences" is a sci-entific or adequate explanation of the "facts." The issue, thus, is not "sci-entific fact" (evolution) versus "metaphysical bias" (creation). The real issue is "believability"-- both views are systems of belief.

A. Comparative Anatomy (taxonomy): The classification of animals by which all life can be arranged on a descending scale from the most gen-eral (kingdom) to the most specific (species) and on an ascending scale from the simple (unicellular,) to the complex (man). This is a fact nei-ther side disputes.

1 . Evolutionists: The very fact that life can be so classified proves to the evolutionists that there has been a gradual development of life from sim-ple to complex forms. This, of course, is only assumed; there are no scientific tests that demonstrate it. It is there interpretation of the fact.

2. Creationists: The very fact that this ascending scale is full of unbridge-able gaps and that there are no transition forms from "kind" to "kind" convinces the creationists that these kinds must have been created as separate groups. This is their interpretation. 3. Example: There are one-celled organisms and many-celled organism, but where are the two-celled, four-celled, eight-celled, sixteen-celled, etc.? How did unicellular organism produce multi-cellular organisms? Evolution has no factual evidence or explanation-hence it is merely an hypothesis. A belief! Not a fact! It is possible that they were created as separate kinds.

B. Comparative Anatomy (Homology): The observation that a frog, a horse, and man have similar and comparable bones, muscles, organs, sys-tems, etc. Bats wings have a similar structure to man's arms. This, dissec-tion in a laboratory has demonstrated.

1. Evolutionists: The evolutionist argues that similarity proves descent. Since these various structures are much a like in these and other species they must have evolved in a direct line from one to the other. Similarity is a fact, but descent is an interpretation.


and thence to every river, lake and little pond, so that each body of water is always populated with eels. They have braved the mighty currents, storms, and tides, and have conquered the beating waves on every shore. They can now grow and when they are mature, they will, by some myste-rious law, go back through it all to complete the cycle. Where does the directing impulse originate? No American eel has ever been caught in European waters and no European eel has ever been caught in American waters...Do atoms and molecules when combined in an eel have a sense of direction and will power to exercise it?" (Ibid., Morrison,p. 55)

III) Man’s Unique Nature

A. Man has the capacity for rational thought.

1. This is to be distinguished from the teaching by "instinct" that is used in training a bear to skate, a horse to count, etc. An animal does not have the intellect to train other animals, to accumulate knowledge from generation to generation, to build machines and tools to lessen his work, etc. What is the origin of this? 2. Power of choice (freewill). Man has the ability to decide, go against his better judgment, and choose to foolishly follow the path of no sense. In a sense, go against what is “instinctive”. How did we develop this? B. Man has a sense of morals.

1. "Man alone of all earthly creatures does wrong. Willfully or igno-rantly he disobeys the laws of his nature or fails at complete fulfillment even when desiring it. Theft is no crime in a monkey or a bear. Blood-thirstiness is no vice in a tiger, nor vanity in a peacock. A dishonest or cruel or vain man breaks the laws of his own nature" (Hamilton, Basis of Faith, p. 221). Have you ever seen anything that shocked your sense of moral decency? If so, at that moment you exercised a faculty possessed by man that is unknown to animals. Where and how did this originate? 2. Man has a conscience. While not an organic part of his body, nor any-thing that he could have inherited from supposed animal ancestors, it is a real part of our being. How do you explain the conscience without God?


3. Life mindlessly evolved into its present form. Without God and crea-tion evolutionists must affirm that all present life forms gradually devel-oped by some mindless mechanism from a simple life form-say, a single-celled organism.

a. Fixity of kinds: The first problem with this view is that presently na-ture displays a fixity of kinds with no signs of transitions from one to the other. b. Evolution ceased: If evolution occurred somewhere and sometime in the past, why did it cease to work. It is not scientific to say it happened in the past when no experiments show it to be occurring in the present. c. No Transitions: Note that there are no transitional forms between Pro-tozoa (one celled) and Metazoa (multi-celled); none between Inverte-brates (no backbone) and Vertebrates (back bone); and none between Primates (apes, gorillas, etc.) and Homo-sapiens (man); etc.

4. Evolution is not a fact but merely a working hypothesis. Remember Kerkut's words: "This theory ... can be called the General Theory of Evo-lution and the evidence that supports it is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis" (The Im-plications of Evolution, p. 157).

C. Summary: The fundamental difference between creation and evolution is their views on the necessity of infinite intelligence and power to ex-plain the presence of the universe and of life as we know it today. The creationists affirm it and the evolutionists deny it.

Once God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over a// the earth, and over everv creep-ing thing that creepeth upon the earth” (Genesis 1:26)

“The God that made the world and all things therein, He, being Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands, neither is He served by men’s hands, as though He needed anything, seeing He Him-self gives to all life, and breath, and all things.” (Acts 17:24,25)


3. Man has a sense of “ought”. When we say such things as, “why did you do that to me?” or “I gave you some of mine, you ought to give me some of yours” we express an ethical quality that originated somewhere. Where? C. Man has an esthetic nature.

* Inherent in man is the capacity to appreciate and enjoy the beautiful and harmonious. A monkey or dog or cow are unmoved by a beautiful painting, an exquisite orchid, a beautiful sunset, etc. He alone is also able to arrange sounds (music) or colors (art) in a way to stimulate this. Where did this come from?

D. Man is inherently religious.

* Even the most primitive civilizations have had a sense of a higher be-ing, a basic fear of death, a conception of a life after death, and a form of worship. If we have come from animals, why is this missing in them?

E. All of these marks of personality in man prove two things:

1. He was created in the image of a "Personal" God with those same qualities of intellect, free will, moral sense, etc., and was not the product of so called "resident forces" in the material Universe.

2. There is something in man that is not material. Scientists tell us that our bodies are constantly changing . . . that our bodies today (including our brains) do not contain a single atom or molecule which they con-tained ten years ago. Yet our personality, our memory of who and what we are, our moral consciousness, and intellect are still present. We must have and be something else besides atoms and molecules.

(Much of sect. III is from a book, Indestructible Foundations, by Peter Wilson)


1. Matter is eternal. If evolutionists do not admit the existence of God and creation, they must affirm that matter is eternal. To most scientists, both evolutionists and creationists, the second law of thermodynamics argues that the universe cannot be eternal.

a. This law states that the amount of energy available for work is dimin-ishing. The universe is often portrayed as a mainspring clock that is run-ning down. This means that if the universe had been here forever it would have already run down. It is not wound down so at some point is must have had a beginning. b. It was this law that convinced Sir James Jeans and Sir Arthur Edding-ton, two prominent British scientists, an astronomer and physicists, that the universe is temporal. Matter, they believed, had a beginning. c. Gordon J. Wylen, Chairman of the Department of Mechanical Engi-neering at the University of Michigan, in his textbook on thermodynam-ics wrote "that the second law (of thermodynamics) tends to increase his conviction that there is a Creator who has the answer for the future destiny of man and the universe."

2. Life was spontaneously generated. Again, this is a logical deduction from the evolutionary premise that there is no God and creation has not occurred.

a. Biogenesis: Since the days of Louis Pasteur's experiments, scientists have formulated the "law of biogenesis" that rejects spontaneous genera-tion of life and affirms that all life comes from previous life. "Life begets life" is the premise.

b. Pasteur: Before Pasteur's experiments it was argued that maggots are an example of spontaneous generation of life. Pasteur, however, proved that they arise from eggs laid by flies. From those experiments we get the "law of biogenesis."

c. Problem: How, then, from the evolutionist's point of view did life be-gin? Did matter in some way produce it? If there is no God,. then life at some time was spontaneously generated from matter. This is a matter of belief--not a matter of fact.


Part III - The Age Of The Earth

Introduction: Some believe that the world and all that is in it was creating by fiat in six literal 24 hour days and that it took place a few thousand years ago. Theistic evolutionists believe God formed the world millions of years ago but then things have evolved since. Evolutionists believe the world is billions of years old and nowhere is there a creator in their faith. Recently some are compromising and saying God created the world millions of years ago, that the six days were either each eons of time or eons between each day, but that man is only thousands of years old. Which is true?

I) Scientific Evidences For A Young Earth

1. The receding moon - The laws of physics indicate that the moon is slowly moving away from the earth. These laws also show that the moon could never survive a nearness to the earth of less than 11,500 miles—a distance known as the Roche limit. Inside that limit, the Earth's tidal forces would break the moon apart. Based upon standard uniformitarian principles which undergird Evolutionary theory, if you multiply the pre-sent recession speed of the moon by the presumed Evolutionary age, the moon should be much farther away from the earth than it now is. Thus scientific evidence shows that the moon is not as old as Evolutionary theory requires it to be. The receding moon supports Creationism—not Evolution.

2. The shape of the earth - Lord Kelvin argued that the earth's slowing spin rate proves that the earth could not be a billion years old. A billion years ago the earth would have been spinning twice as fast. If the earth were initially molten, the centrifugal force of such a high spin rate would have caused an extremely large bulge around the equator. Slow spin re-duction and fast surface cooling would then have solidified the bulge into a high continent that encircled the equator. But there is absolutely no trace of such a bulge.

3. The depth of lunar dust - Before our astronauts landed on the moon, evolutionary scientists caused great concern. They insisted that since the


The differences in beliefs before any evidence is examined, analyzed and interpreted, greatly affects the resulting conclusions. The saying, "Where you start determines where you end up" would definitely apply to the study of origins.

A. Bible/Creation: What creationists believe. 1 . God created: The belief that an all powerful, infinite intelligence created all the "kinds" of life. Genesis 1: 1 and Hebrews 1 1 :3 teach that God said "let there be" and all things came into existence. 2. Creation/Divinity: That the visible things of creation are a manifesta-tion of the invisible power and deity of God so that all men are without excuse for their disbelief in God (Rom. 1:20). 3. Limitations: God in creation set limits on "kinds," a term that is not necessarily equivalent to our taxonomic term "species." Genesis says the herbs and trees would produce "after their kind " and that animals of the sea, air, and land would produce "after their kind (Genesis 1: 12, 2 1,24,25). 4. Six days: That God created the cosmos and all life in six 24-hour days. This the evidence indicates for several reasons: a. This is obvious from "evening and morn ing"--"and there was evening and there was morning one day ... a second day ... a third day... a fourth day...a f-h day...the sixth day." (Gen. 1:5,8,13,19,23,31). b. Life could not have continued with thousands of years of day and thousands of years of night, as the language would demand. c. Exodus 20:8-11 -- Moses interprets these days as being ordinary days.

d. The word "day" should be interpreted in its ordinary sense unless the context demands otherwise. It does not in Genesis 1.

B. Evolutionists: What they say. (We speak here of materialistic evolu-tionists who deny the existence of God and creation in even a limited degree.)


moon was four to five billion years old, the rate of influx of dust and the lunar physical processes of rock break-up might result in the astronauts sinking into a great depth of dust on the moon. But, of course, the astro-nauts did not sink into deep dust. Instead, the Creationists' predictions of only a thin layer of dust, based on a young age for the moon, were cor-rect.

4. The rapid rate of decay of the earth's main magnetic field in accor-dance with the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Scientific calculations of the decay of this field have been going on since 1835 and measure about five percent per hundred years. Using the evolutionist's same methodology, if we extrapolate backwards, we come to a time when the earth's magnetic field could have been no stronger. We reach a time where if the magnetic field had been any stronger, it would have ruptured the earth and split it apart. That figures the age limit of the earth's mag-netic field—is 10,000 years! Here we have scientific evidence that the earth is neither millions nor billions of years old.

5. The Sun is shrinking - at the rate of five feet per hour. Once again, if we know the sun is shrinking at that rate and we apply evolutionary prin-ciples and work backward, adding five feet per hour to the sun's mass, we quickly come to a point where the sun would be too large for life to exist on earth—a few thousand years ago. The sun, on this basis, could not be several billion years old. Thus Creation is more scientifically feasible than evolution.

6. Hydrogen is gradually being converted into helium, in what appears to be an irreversible process. Sir Fred Hoyle, one of the most famous as-tronomers in the world pointed out that most of the universe is composed of hydrogen. But Dr. Hoyle discovered that the universe remains almost entirely composed of hydrogen. Yet if the universe were infinitely old, as the Evolutionists maintain, the universe ought to contain far more he-lium. On the basis of his findings, Dr. Hoyle concluded that the Creation issue simply cannot be dodged.

7. Population statistics - Evolutionists believe that man has been here only about one million years. Population statisticians are people who es-timate the world's population taking into account death, famine, disease, war, etc. Using Evolution's assumptions, how many people ought there to be on earth if human beings have been here for one million years? That


* From a book, The Remarkable Birth Of Planet Earth by Henry Morris

Part V - Interpreting The Evidence

Introduction: A. Remember: 1. Creation and macro-evolution are incompatible--one of the views must be false.2. Micro-evolution is change within kinds and macro-evolution is change from the simplest animals to the most complex.3. "Kinds," the Biblical term, is not necessarily synonymous with our taxonomic term "species".4. All biologists and scientists do no accept the theory of evolution.5. Evolutionists cannot speak with certainty when they detail the specific elements of the theory.6. Both evolution and creation are unobservable and are matters of "be-lief."

B. Interpretations: Both creation and evolution are interpretations of the facts of nature and will be examined in the course of this lesson. It is our view that creation is a better explanation than evolution and is therefore more believable. There is seldom any differences or controversy between creationists and evolutionists concerning the "facts" in nature. They both study, analyze, and interpret the same body of information that has been accumulated by research biologists and scientists. Differences and con-troversy arise when the two of them look at the facts and interpret those facts to draw conclusions about-- "origins." How did this or that animal or characteristic arise? Here science provides no observable or testable material.

I) Differences In Beliefs


figure stands at 1 x 10 to the 5000th power! That's a one with 5000 zeros added on behind. Let me attempt to give you an idea of the magnitude of that number. At the known estimated size of the entire universe—twenty billion light years in diameter— if you were to take people of our size and cram them into our universe like sardines, filling the entire universe, you might barely squeeze in 1 x 10 to the 100th power. That leaves you with a one with 4900 zeros left over. You can't even get them into the observable universe! If, on the other hand, you accept Creationist figures with the earth having been here some six to eight thousand years, there ought to be around five billion people on earth.

(Condensed from Piloting The Strait by Dave Miller)

II) Evidence Of Creation In 6 Successive 24 Hour Days

* There is nothing in the context that indicates a figurative use of the word day * God defines it - “God called the light Day and the darkness He called night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.” (Genesis 1:5) * Throughout the Bible whenever a day is designated as first or second, etc., it always refers to a twenty four hour day. * In Genesis 1:14 days are contrasted to years - “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years.” * Later when God commanded sabbath (seventh) day observance, He ties it in with the number of days God worked and rested. - Read Exodus 20:8-11. Man rested one 24 hour period, just as God did. * Life could not have existed naturally for thousands of years between the days.

III) Geological Evidences Evidences & Evolution --

2. Mutations - By some application of radiation or other external forces, changes take place in the genes, but they are almost always negative and rarely happen. Improvements never result.

VII) Quotes of Darwin

"Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not find everywhere innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined? ... why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology surely does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain. And this is perhaps the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory." (Origin of Spe-cies, Vol. 6, Page 1 )

"There are two or three millions of species on the earth ... but it must be said today, in spite of all the efforts of all the trained observers, not one change of one species into another is on record" (Life and Letters, Vol. 3, Page 25).

One thing people should remember when they read the works of men like Darwin They did not accept evolution because of the evidence for it, but because they were deter mined NOT to accept the evidence for creation .

* From a tract, God or Evolution by Luther Blackmon

VIII) Some Questions Evolutionists Have Difficulty Answering

l. What is the cause of our existence? 2. How did matter come into existence? 3. How did life begin? 4. How did the different kinds come into existence? 5. How did bodies exist while organs were evolving? 6. Why has evolution stopped? 7. How and what will end this world as we know it?


* Evolutionists use charts of geological eras and periods to argue that the strata of the earth can be outlined in layers to show simple fossilized forms in the lower strata and progressively more complex forms in the upper strata. This is another of their "proofs" of evolution Problem One: The strata of earth do not line up so neatly as portrayed in the charts that appear in textbooks. The charts are drawn by men, not photographed from geological sites! 1. Strata Order: The strata periods, such as Cambrian or Devonian, are determined by the fossils that are in them--not by the order of the layers in the earth. 2. Example: The Cambrian layer may be found above the Devonian layer in what geologists call "overthrust." It is labeled Cambrian because it has certain simple organism. The Devonian is so labeled because it contains species of more complex organisms. 3. Assumption: Evolution, thus, is assumed to be true and a time frame for the rise of each species is set before the layer of earth is identified. 4. Circular Reasoning: "But since it is not often possible to find a rock which contains radioactive materials and also contains fossils, much of the dating of the rock depends upon the discovery of index fossils in the rocks. Certain forms are believed to have been very abundant in different periods and to have been characteristic of those different periods. Thus the fossils are used to date the rocks. But how are the fossils dated? All too often the only basis for dating them is the rock in which they are found. This sort of reasoning is evidently a gigantic argument in a circle" (Genes, Genesis, and Evolution, John D. Klotz, p. 21)

Problem Two: There is no place where they have dug and found all these strata lined up as they appear in charts. One strata is found at one place in a country and the next one in another part of the world. A stratum, again, is dated by its indices of organism and judged to be the same, earlier, or later than other strata.


7. Duck-billed Platypus - This little mammal (?) is not a very popular animal with evolutionists. They can't decide how he got here, and what he's "kin" to! He has a bill which resembles that of a duck (but is quite different), webbed fore feet like an otter’s(and yet different in some ways) a tail like a beaver's (but covered with fur rather than scales), a sharp spur on its hind foot like a poisonous snake's fang, it suckles its young (sort of) and lays eggs. Did it evolve from a duck, otter, beaver, snake or a common ancestor? We'll let the evolutionist answer' The fact is, in spite of its peculiarities, the Duck-billed Platypus is perfectly equipped for survival. Perhaps God put him here to give the evolutionist something to think about!

8. Others - CARNIVOROUS PLANTS such as the sundew, the Venus flytrap, etc., are such an an enigma in the evolutionary theory. Sea mam-mals, such as WHALES & DOLPHINS which bear their young beneath the water, TAIL FIRST (otherwise, they would drown before being able to Surface for air!), and perhaps, a few others, all witness against the ri-diculous theories of evolution.

* This section taken largely from the booklet Monkey Business by Ken-neth Green

V) Evolution Contradicts:

• the Bible claim of a finished creation - Hebrews 4:3• the Bible claim of fixed and distinct kinds - I Cor. 15:39• the Bible claim of an orderly and controlled universe - Acts 17'.

VI) The Mechanism of Evolution (The "How" of it)

1. Natural Selection or survival of the fittest - It's biggest flaw is in being able to bring a new organ into existence. It is based in the removal of weaker and leaving the stronger of already existing organs. General evo-lution needs many new changes to start, not simply be regulated.


Problem Three: The so-called Cambrian period, where life supposedly first appeared, shows a sudden appearance of many kinds of life--indicating the opposite of what evolution demands. The sudden presence of many species fits better with belief in creation.

Problem Four: No fossilized simple forms have been found in pre-Cambrian strata that could have evolved into the complex forms of the Cambrian period. There are clearly missing pieces of the evolutionary puzzle.

Problem Five: When fossils are found that are supposedly 100 million years old--they are no different from the living organisms of today. A starfish, for example, is still a starfish, etc. What complicates this prob-lem even more is the absence of transitional forms. "In mammals the earliest and most primitive known members of every order already have the basic ordinal characters. This is true of almost all orders of all classes of animals, both vertebrate and invertebrate. It is also true of the classes and of the phyla of the animal kingdom, and presumably it is also true of the plants. Simpson, an evolutionist points out that the absence of transi-tional fossils is a serious problem which cannot easily be dismissed. He says that in the larger groups--classes, orders, and phyla--transitional groups are not only rare, but practically absent".

Problem Six: A very small percentage of organisms fossilize. Suppose, for example, only brachiopods (mollusk marine animals) appear in a strata. How can one date the brachiopod fossils since these organisms are not extinct but still live today?

IV) Dating Methods A. Radioactive Methods: The most popular methods of dating are the study of radioactive decay. Radioactive elements decay and in the proc-ess form other elements. Time for half the atoms present to decay is pre-sumed to be constant. By measuring the amount of the original element and the amount of the new element the age of a rock or organic substance is determined. Lawrence 0. Richards illustrates the idea: 1. WHAT IS RADIO-METRIC DATING? At first, ages were assigned to different rock strata by use of the Theory of Evolution itself. Evolu-


of bird flight, but a bird's wing with its many flexible moving, parts which twist and bend under the pressure of the air, particularly in flap-ping flight, DEFIES the sort of critical analysis to which we can subject the rigid wing of an aircraft. Wind tunnels, smoke screen, streams, and mathematical formulas fail to give us more than an INKLING of the an-swers." Every part of the bird's anatomy is an engineering masterpiece. Each feather is light, yet remarkably strong and flexible. The skeletal system is especially adapted to flight, bones are hollow. Each bird is per-fectly equipped for life in its own environment. It is equipped with in-stinct which parallels its abilities. Some birds are insect feeders with short, thin bills; some are carnivorous and have strong beaks for tearing flesh, and feet which enable them to catch their prey.

Consider the woodpecker: "Here is some of the specialized equipment of the “common" woodpecker: 1. A powerful, heavy duty BEAK -- perfect as a woodboring tool. 2. Tough NECK MUSCLES, necessary to deliver- staccato. ",jackhammer" blows with its beak. 3. A THICK SKULL, made flexible by tiny cross braces. g. SHOCK ABSORBERS of heavy tissue between beak and skull-- not like other birds. 5. A long slender TONGUE, generally barbed and covered with sticky substance to "fish out" insects. 6, Short, Powerful LEGS, unlike , spindly legs of most birds. 7. Vice like TOES, two in front and two in back -- a perfect pincer for grasping bark. 8. Stiff TAIL FEATHERS that end in sharp spine. These are essential to prop up the woodpecker as he excavates nesting site. Could all EIGHT of these specialized parts evolve at once?! Impos-sible! All of these parts are essential to the survival of the woodpecker, but if they evolved, how did he survive before they evolved? Other birds are not equipped to beat their bills against a tree 100 times or more a minute. If they tried, they would either break- their beak or their neck! But the woodpecker's body is specially DESIGNED for the business at hand.

Compare the modern airplane with the goose. With the preflight plan-ning, IFR clearances, and flight plans, compasses, radios and all the other instruments, all planes STILL GET OFF COURSE! Geese don't! That's one difference between evolution and plain old common sense. We know airplanes didn't happen accidentally. Some people want us to believe that geese did.


tionists assumed that more complicated forms of life developed from simpler forms. They also assumed that this took millions and millions of years. So different rock strata were often identified by the fossils they contained, and ages were simply assigned. Today the method scientists use to help estimate the age of the Earth and of rock strata is radio metric dating. Some kinds of radioactive materials "decay" (break down) at a very slow rate. This means that a certain per-cent of different radioactive elements slowly turn into other elements. Carbon 14 turns into carbon 12. Uranium turns into thorium and then into lead. Rubidium turns into strontium. Scientists have tried to calculate the age of fossils and rocks by measur-ing the amount of these elements. They then figure out how long it would take for the source material, carbon 14, uranium or rubidium, to decay into carbon 12, thorium or lead, or strontium. This figure gives scientists what they believe is the approximate age of the fossil or rock being dated. We can understand how radio metric dating works if we imagine a large hotel in which there are 1,000 people. You stand outside and notice that every day at noon one adult woman comes out of the hotel, and a young girl goes into to take her place. After you have watched this for ten days and are sure that only one ex-change a day is made, you figure out a way to tell how long the people have been in the hotel! You will go inside and count both the women and young girls. Let's suppose you do go in and that you count 600 women and 400 young girls. How long will the people have been in the hotel? Why, ex-actly 400 days. This is how radio metric dating works. The original element is ex-changed for another element at a fixed rate. If you know how many ex-changes have taken place, then you can tell when the process started.

(It Couldn 't Just Happen, Lawrence O. Richards, p. 49)


Then in some inexplicable manner, enough momentum is obtained to carry the ball of squirming insects down the slope to the water's edge, where it falls in with a splash. Here the ball rolls about, so that an ant may be on top one second and entirely submerged the next ... The current keeps the ball rolling, so that each receives only a momentary ducking. The instant the ball touches the bank on the other side, the ants unscram-ble, toddle ashore, and continue their march!' (P. 22), NATURE PA-RADE,)

"Because of INSTINCT given by the Creator, the feat becomes believ-able, but were one forced to believe that they GRADUALLY AC-QUIRED this amazing ability, it is too much to give credence to -- for they would have died a thousand deaths while learning to cross streams, and never would have developed the proper technique, even in a billion years! They were originally MADE to do this; such a feat can NOT he acquired gradually.

5. Bees - Consider the amazing accomplishments and the intricate anat-omy of bees." The annual yield of insect-pollinated plants is 4 1/2 billion. Honey bees are responsible for more than of this." Many crops could not be grown without the pollination of bees. Which then evolved first?! The plant or the bee?! "A little thought will convince one that bees and the flowers they pollinate MUST have been created at about the same time, for the flowers need the bees for pollination and the bees need the flowers for food - for their very Survival. " Study the physical makeup of the bee and glorify God! The "'baskets" on the legs which enable him to carry pollen, the antennae which serve as "feelers" and "smellers", the wings so designed that he can go in any direction or remain motionless while hovering before a flower, the compound eyes which scientists be-lieve enable the bee to determine his position relative to his hive with the help of light waves from the Sun. Consider the stinger which when used, is left, along with part of the internal organs, in the victims skin. Soon after the bee dies! Now, harmonize that with the theory of "natural selec-tion" and "the survival of the fittest." Why did the bee EVOLVE a stinger which would, if used, effect his own destruction?

6. Birds - Would You believe that a jet airliner evolved'! Would You be-lieve a bird'? I had sooner accept the former than the latter. But BOTH show evidence of causation and design and one would he foolish to ac-cept either! "Thousands of papers have been written on the aerodynamics


2. WHAT’s WRONG WITH RADIO-METRIC DATING? In some cases radio metric dating seems to work as those who believe in Evolu-tion predict. But in other cases the methods give very different results than are expected. Actually, there are many reasons why radio metric dating cannot be considered reliable. Think back to the hotel. We decided that the group entered the hotel 400 days ago. We reached this conclusion by counting the young girls, think-ing that the exchange was one young girl for one woman per day. If there were 400 children, we reasoned that the group entered the hotel 400 days ago.

The problem is, to reach this conclusion we had to make several assump-tions. That is, we had to suppose that certain things are true which we do not know are true. First, we assumed that the 1,000 people who went into the hotel were all adult women. But what if when they went in, there were 800 women and 200 young girls? In that case our figure of 400 days would be wrong. The group would have been in the hotel for only 200 days. Scientists assume that originally the material in a radio metric sample was carbon 14 or rubidium or whatever. What if originally only part was carbon 14 and part was already carbon 12. What if originally part of the material being measured was rubidium and part was already strontium? Since we do not know what was there originally, the dates may be very far from correct. Second remember that we watched the hotel for just ten days. We saw one exchange take place each day. So we assumed that the rate of ex-change had not changed since the group went into the hotel. But what if, before we started watching,four young girls exchanged places with four women each day? Then again we would be wrong about when the group entered the hotel. This too is a problem for radio metric dating. Experiments have shown that carbon 14, for instance, does change into carbon 12 at different rates, depending on factors like heat and radiation. Also, we now know that


it'? Of Course, you couldn't, unless you Possessed Sufficient scientific knowledge and engineering technique. A law of physics decrees that a drying object shrinks and contracts. The spider is seemingly aware of this law for "she locates her shell in relation to her bough and swings down, leaving behind her a threads as wet as she can make it. This thi-cad she ties to one edge of the shell and waits for it to dry after incessant labor for several days, she succeeds in lifting her home to the desired elevation by lifting first one end and then another.

Were an evolutionist asked How the spider knew to accomplish this amazing feat, he would answer. "by instinct But what is instinct f it is inherited memory why do domestic animals Such as dogs and horses not pass the ability to perform tricks on to their offspring'? And also, "if all this he inherited memory, one spider it from the preceding FIRST SPIDER THAT EVER DID THIS SAT DOWN AND FIGURED IT OUT!" Mr. Rimmer In this reference, goes on to give a more logical definition of "instinct" "Instinct is imparted wisdom. In the very dawn of creation the Creator imparted to every creature the knowledge essential to Survival in its own environment. With that conclusion logic Call find no fault, nor can science marshal one fact in refutation

4. Ants - King Solomon said: "Go to the ant thy sluggard consider her ways and be wise, who...gathers her food in the harvest." (Prov. 6:6-8) For years science dismissed this as a myth. It wasn't until 1871 that en-tomologists discovered the Harvester ants of Palestine which harvest seed-yielding plants in their vicinity. Along with the Harvester ants are about three thousand five hundred species of ants in the world. Some "herd cattle" ('aphids) and milk them. Some store honey, grow gardens, or slaves. Amazon ants are totally dependent for life on slave ants IF THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION BE TRUE, WHICH EVOLVED FIRST'! THE MASTER OR THE SLAVE')

"They have instincts that enable them to achieve. some remarkable things, such as crossing water. Carveth Wells tells about their spectacular method of crossing water. He witnessed this scene in the Malay jungle. "'Rivers do not stop a marching column of army ants; on reaching a river the main body waits while scouts look for the best place to cross. The scouts find a bend in the stream, where the current is shunted diagonally across the river-bed to the other side. Next, the ants form heaps and slowly wiggle themselves into a solid ball, about the size of a coconut.


high electric voltages definitely change the rate of decay of many ele-ments.

(It Couldn't Just Happen, Lawrence O. Richards, p. 49, 50)

B. Various Methods: 1. Uranium and thorium disintegrate and are transformed into specific kinds of lead. This is used to date rocks. 2. Another method of dating rocks is the rate of Potassium which decays and is transformed into Calcium and into Argon. 3. Rocks are also dated by the radioactive rate of decay in which rubid-ium is changed into strontium. 4. Organic materials are dated by the Carbon-14 method. Plants by pho-tosynthesis incorporate C-14 and through the plants it is taken into ani-mals who feed on those plants. The increase of C-14 ceases with the death of the plant or animal and it begins to decay at an apparently con-stant rate. The amount of C-14 depleted from organic remains can be used to calculate time. C. Criticism: All these dating methods are founded on a number of as-sumptions that could throw off these calculations. 1. It is assumed that the radioactive decay through the centuries has not been affected in some way and that the rates of decay are constant. 2. It is likewise assumed that nothing has occurred in the past to increase the amounts of these radioactive substances. 3. Evolution is assumed to be true and it is believed that all of these ra-dioactive elements have developed naturally in the process of time. 4. Arguments from dating methods are presented as if the dates yielded have always been consistent.


developing these organs and unorthodox abilities upon which they de-pend?

2. Earthworms - "Passing through the worm's digestive tract both alkalies and acids he come more neutralized. Earth minerals and chemicals are broken down, enriching the soil with particle nutrients that plants and seedlings can more easily assimilate. Experimenters comparing the top six-inch layer of soil with the castings of earthworms have discovered that the castings contained, in a form that plants call use, five times as men nitrates twice as much calcium, two and one half times as much magnesium. seven times as much phosphorus, eleven times as Much po-tassium Subsequently, scientists found that soil's content actino-nycetes-organisms that play a significant role in decomposing all organic matter into humus-multiples seven times as it passes through the earthworm Our amazing friend is as as he is talented. Each mature worm casts up about half pound of humus a year Since t Population of 50,000 earthworms in all acre of normal ground is common seven million have been found,), you can figure conservatively that earthworms arc producing 12 1/2 tons of topsoil a year in each acre of good garden soil.” (READERS' DIGEST Aug., 1968, Condensed from NATURAL WILDLIFE. Jack DeSLon Scott).

So then, plant life is pretty much dependent on the earthworm. If evolu-tion, then which evolved first, the plant or the worm'? How (and why) did the earthworm develop these amazing capabilities'!

3. Spiders - Most spiders cannot Survive without webs. How then, did they survive during the millions of years in which they were Supposed to he developing this ability There are many varieties of spiders and then abilities and instincts are likewise varied. Some spiders dive for their prey (and take their own oxygen supply), some walk on water some throw nets over their victims, and some use the block and tackle method of lifting objects many times their size.

A spider not bigger than a shirt button on the North Pacific Coast makes its nest in the empty shell of any bivalve. While the spider weighs a frac-tion of an Ounce, the shell may weigh as much as 1/2 pound. The shell is generally raised 12 to 2(-) inches above the ground. This would be com-parable to a man raising 36()() tons of concrete and steel 1800 feet in the air. If You were, faced with such a task, how would you accomplish


D. Creation: What, if for a moment, we assume that the earth was created by God. 1. Would there be any coal, oil, and rocks in the brand new earth? If yes,then the earth from the beginning would have shown signs of age. How, in other words, if creation is true, can there be a brand new earth with no appearance of age? 2. Adam, for instance, was created an adult and had the appearance of 20 or 30 year old man when he was really only 1 day old. 3. The assumption that everything evolved and that all matter gradually arose, if false, throws off the whole process and methods of dating.

V) The Fossil Record

A. Horse Series: Evolutionists, based on fossil finds, draw and line up a series of horses from small to large and point to the drawings as evidence of evolution. 1. Horses: A horse series is drawn from Eohippis, the size of a fox ter-rier, through several intermediate sizes up to Equus, the modern horse. 2. Classification: The first problem with this and other series is classify-ing animals from a small amount of bones. A tooth from the so-called Nebraska man turned out to be a pig's tooth. 3. Mutations: Striking changes can occur within a species that merely prove a wide variation within the same kind of animal. Note the radical differences in dogs--from the chihuahua to the great Dane. Yet they are all dogs and no different kind of animal has arisen. 4. Reconstructions: Accurate reconstructions of animals from just a few bones is not a very exact science. As E. A. Hooten said of the man series, its done with 5 % bones and 95 % imagination.


IV) Witnesses Against Evolution

1. The Portuguese "Man-of-War" (Physalia physalis) - "The ruthless PHYSALIA employs a lethal combination of ingenious tackle, murder-ous chemical warfare and a remarkable working partnership with a small fish, the NOMEUS. The deadly sequence starts as this innocent-looking little NOMEUS swims about apparently aimlessly, in the vicinity of the man-of-war A bigger fish seeing this tempting and seemingly defenseless morsel makes a grab for it. The NOMEUS darts away with an unex-pected burst of speed straight toward a tangle of seaweed-like tentacles that hang down from the man-of-war. The larger fish plunges recklessly after it, into these harmless less- I looking streamers. In a fraction of a second he is paralyzed and the fiendish tentacles are drawing him in to he consumed by the hungry man-of-war. "What happened to him as he plunged into the streamers is a process that astounds and mystifies scien-tists who consider one of nature's deadliest mechanisms. The tentacles are studded with tiny peal-shaped capsules. sheathed in each capsule is a compressed hair The instant any creature touches one of the capsules, this hall- shoots Out like a harpoon, its sharp point penetrating the body of the victim. Through the hall- flows a powerful acid which has the power to paralyze the creature into which it is thus injected .... So giant is the force of the driven threads that they call easily puncture human skill. When they do, the victim may he doubled LIP in violent spasms and en-ter a state of shock..

"But why do these deadly hairs which respond so instantly and savagely to the slightest touch by the other creature, let NOMEUS go unscathed? Actually, the NOMEUS can he harmed by the PHYSALIA'S sting...but the NOMEUS seems to he especially adapted for dodging the tentacles of the PHYSALIA. "When the man-of-war captures and eats a fish which the NOMEUS has lured into his trap the little decoy fish gets the scraps from the man-of-war's meal.

Here we have a remarkable case dependence, and to a degree, interde-pendence. The NOMEUS is dependent upon the "man-of-war" for its food. For either creature to have arrived by evolution, both would have had to evolve at the same time! And how did they Survive during the millions (or perhaps billions) of years in which they were supposedly


5. No intermediate forms: Even with all the fossils found the gaps are still there. No intermediate forms are found that show transition from one kind of animal to another. 6. Fossils/Strata: Note that these fossils of horses have not been found in succeeding strata of a particular area. The series is based on the com-bined fossils of horses found in many different areas. 7. Genetic Links: No genetic tests can be run on fossils to determine if these were viable species, sterile mutants, or, for that matter, if they are all horses.

B. Man Series: A number of fossils have been found and classified to show a series of men from ape-like appearance to modern man.

1. Piltdown Man: Now known to have been a hoax--the jaw bone and tooth of an anthropoid ape were altered and stained to match a human skull and give the appearance of primates in transition to man. 2. Nebraska Man: A single tooth was found in Nebraska that after analy-sis was judged to be ape-like and later human-like. Scholars argued back and forth, thinking it was from an animal somewhere between ape-like men and man, until it was finally resolved that it was a tooth from an pig-like animal. 3. Java Man: A skull cap, lower jaw, two molar teeth, a premolar, and a femur are supposed to be the remains of an erect walking primate. Con-cluding that all these bones go together he is now called "homo erectus" and is assumed to be a step between primates and man. By now one must remember that these classifications involve significant amounts of guesswork. 4. Neanderthal Man: 80 to 90 fossils have been found but only 13 are adults. The cranial capacity is that of most modern Europeans. It is dis-tinctly homo sapien and was found near Neanderthal, Germany. Draw-ings give him a decidedly ape-man like appearance, but as the evolution-ists E. A. Hooten said: "You can with equal facility model on a Nean-dertholoid skull the features of a chimpanzee or the lineaments of a phi-losopher."


E. Major Assumptions of Evolution: 1. That matter is eternal 2. That mat-ter, I spontaneously produced life 3. That unicellular animals evolved gradually into multi-cellulalanimals 4. That invertebrates gave rise to vertebrates 5. That fish gave rise to amphibians, amphibians to reptiles, reptiles to birds, etc. 6. That primates developed into homo sapiens. What experiments, observations, or data prove any of these assumptions. None; it is simply the "belief" of some biologists and scientists.

II) The Bible and Evolution are Incompatible

A. The Bible: It teaches creation by God--a super-natural, extra-material essence that is intelligent (Gen. 1: 1,3,6,9,14,20,24,26). Heb. 11:3 says, "By faith We understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God."

B. Evolution- It teaches creation by resident forces in matter: "Evolution may be defined as the hypothesis that millions of years ago lifeless mat-ter, acted upon by natural forces, gave origin to one or more minute liv-ing, organisms which have since evolved into all living and extinct plants and animals, including man" (Evolution, Science Falsely So-called, page 7)

C. Incompatible: If the Bible is true, the hypothesis of evolution is false, if the hypothesis of evolution is true, the Bible is false and unreliable.

III) Fallacy: All scientists are evolutionists

1. Scientific Organizations: Hundreds of biologists and scientists with Ph.D's are members of the American Scientific Affiliation and reject evo-lution and teach creation. Creation Research Society consists of hun-dreds of science majors with at least master's degrees that relect evolu-tion and teach creation.

* Sections I,II, & III taken in large part from Things Most Surely Be-lieved by L.A. Stauffer


5. Cro Magnon: The name comes from a rock shelter in Les Euzies, France and denotes a restoration drawing based on a skull and other bones of an old man plus remains of four other individuals. It is clearly thought and drawn to represent homosapien. 6. Note: These are but examples of a series of men who are drawn to por-tray a progressive development of animals from primates to man. They are based on pieces of skulls, jaws, and other bones. Since the artist must flesh out the bones in his drawings, it must be remembered, as Hooten also said, that these portraits are based on 5% bones and 95% imagina-tion. This is not fact but interpretation! ! 7. Conclusion: As in the horse series there is no way to study the genetic make up of any of these finds to determine if they are intermediate and transitional forms. The impression left by the drawings is pure assumption--based on no facts of science.

(Much of sections III-V taken from L.A. Stauffer’s Things Most Surely Believed )

VI) Genealogies of the Bible

* James Ussher (1581-1656) from a study of the genealogical tables of the Bible arrived at a date of 4004 B.C. for creation. * There is reason to believe that the listings are not without gaps and not intended to be a chronological table. * Dr. John W. Klotz comments on the abridgment of genealogies in Genes, Genesis and Evolution: However, there is some evidence that these may not be simple father-and-son relationships. We know that abridgment of genealogies is very common in Scripture and may almost be said to be the rule. Time after time we find the term son used where clearly the term means descendant, not son. For instance, in the very first verse of Matthew's Gospel, Christ is called "the Son of David, the Son of Abraham." In the same chapter in verse 8 three names are omitted be-tween Joram and Ozias (Uzziah).


lent to man's taxonomic term "species." The theory of general (macro) evolution is unobservable, therefore it is unscientific, and unprovable. This is a popular belief of many as an alternative to creation, but it is just a theory.

I) Remember: Both Evolution and Creation are Belief Systems

A. Evolution is often arrayed as a system of “fact” against creation as a system of “faith.”

B. Scientific Method For Determining a Fact: 1. The collection of data 2. From the data form a hypothesis, 3. If the hypothesis matches the data, it is upgraded to a theory, 4. If no conflicting data is arrayed by other ex-periments and scientists against the theory, it is accepted as a fact.

C. Creation/Science/Belief: Christians admit that "creation" is not an ob-servable fact and that no scientific data establish it as fact. 1. Based on the biological data and the evidence of intelligent design it is accepted and believed as a reasonable explanation of the origin and development of life. 2. Based on the evidence that the Bible is the word of God it is believed that the Bible account of God's creative work in Genesis 1 is true.

D. Evolution/Science/Belief: A prominent evolutionist says: "At the same time I think that the attempt to explain all living forms in terms of an evolution from a unique source, though a brave and valid attempt, is one that is premature and not satisfactorily supported by present-day evi-dence. It may in fact be shown ultimately to be the correct explanation, but the supporting evidence remains to be discovered. We can, if we like, BELIEVE that such an evolutionary system has taken place. but I for one do not think that it has been proven beyond all reasonable doubt". "On the other hand there is the theory that all the living, forms in the world have arisen from a single Source which itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the 'General Theory of Evolution' and the evidence that supports it is not Sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis.” (Implications of Evolu-tion, G.A. Kerkut)


It may be helpful to consider the purpose of the genealogical tables in Genesis. Certainly the purpose was not to give us an exact chronological account of those times, for if that were the case, there would be no omis-sions. The Holy Spirit would not have permitted Moses to omit any names if that had been His purpose. It seems rather that God wanted to give us the names of the most important men who lived between Adam and Abra ham and wanted to give us a brief account of what occurred in that period. It is also evident that the Lord wanted to show us how the earth was populated in keep ing with His command (Gen. 1:28 and Gen. 9:1). By the time of the Flood the human race had spread over much of the face of the earth, and it is the purpose of Genesis 5 to show how this spread was accomplished. In Genesis 11 the emphasis is on the spread of the descendants of Shem after the Flood. But why should God have in-cluded the ages of these patriarchs? Chiefly to show how the human race could have increased in numbers so rapidly. Because these men attained such great ages, they were able to beget large numbers of sons and daughters. In this way, the world was populated rather quickly.

(Excerpted from I Believe Because by Batsell Barrett Baxter)

Part IV - The Theory Of Evolution

Introduction: I believe in evolution. Special (micro) evolution or change can and does take place in nature. Genetic changes may take place naturally over time and then show up in offspring. Man can even alter the features of some plants and animals through breeding and or cross breeding. But this is always within the same kind. The AA breeding of cattle, for example, is a clear case of "micro" evolution changes within a certain "kind" of animal or plant. Man may make hybrid types of plant life (i.e. corn) by cross pollination or a "new" breed of dog through cross breeding, but it is still corn or a dog. Genesis 1:11 speaks of "bearing fruit after their kind"; Genesis 1:25 says God made the beasts of the earth "after their kind." In Bible terminology "kinds" is not necessarily equiva-


evidences evolution - appleton church of christ · evidences & evolution -- page 3. there is...

Documents