Sunday Sermons
Evolution - Part 1
Evolution
Evolution is based on Miraculous Claims
Some reject Creationism because of the miraculous and supernatural elements in it (Genesis 1:1; Psalm 33:6-9), but the theory of evolution depends upon a miraculous foundation as well. A miracle is something that happens that is contrary to natural law, that is the physical laws that govern this world. Eventually evolution must concede that life arose from non-life, that is spontaneous generation occurred is contrary to the physical laws that govern this universe. In the classic work on evolution,"Implications of Evolution", by Dr. G.A. Kerkut (an evolutionist); the author mentioned seven assumptions that evolution rests upon, the first two are: 1. Non-living things gave rise to living material, spontaneous generation occurred. 2. This occurred only once (The Implications of Evolution. G.A. Kerkut. Pergamon, London. 1960, p. 7). To this day the theory of evolution rests upon two basic miraculous claims, first that something came from nothing, and second that life came from non-life. So which miracle are we willing to believe? That God created everything, or that everything simply popped into existence by chance? Actually, the answer is very simple, all the evidence that surrounds us proves that the universe was planned and designed and is not the product of an accident (Psalm 19:1; Romans 1:20; Psalm 139:14).
Evolution is a Faith
It is often declared that evolution is a fact or it is “scientific” and that creation is a “faith”. In reality only three modern religions believe in Creation: Orthodox Islam, Judaism, and Christianity. In contrast, the following religions hold evolutionary views: Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Taoism, Shintoism, Sikhism, Jainism, Animism, Spiritism, Occultism, Satanism, Mysticism, Unitarianism, Religious Science, Unity, Humanism, liberal Judaism, Isalm and liberal Christianity. Not only are the religions of atheism and humanism grounded in evolutionary philiosophy, but so also are a host of social, economic, and psychological systems including Marxism, Facism, Nazism, Freudianism, behaviorism, existentialism, racism, imperialism, socialism, and anarchism. Unfortunately, the term “science” has also been corrupted and has been equated with “naturalism” (the attempt to explain everything apart from God), instead of retaining its traditional meaning of “knowledge” or “truth”. In fact, the Bible would call any scientific method that leaves God out of the equation “foolish” (Romans 1:21-22). Some think that science, belief in God, and Creation are incompatible, yet the following great scientists were among other creationists: In Physics: Newton, Faraday, Maxwell, Kelvin. Chemistry: Boyle, Dalton, Pascal, Ramsay. Biology: Ray, Linnaeus, Mendel, Pasteur. Geology: Steno, Woodward, Brewster, Agassiz. Astronomy: Kepler, Galileo, Herschel, Maunder.
Evolution under discussion
Some think that evolution has been proved by the examples of the peppered moth, fruit flies subject to radiation, Shetland ponies compared to the huge Clydesdales, miniature Chihuahuas as opposed to the Great Dane, and so on. Yet such is not the “evolution” that is opposed to Creationism. All the previous examples prove that there is a great variety within the various plant and animal kinds (Genesis 1:12,21), and yet peppered moths are still moths, Chihuahuas are still dogs, and fruit flies that do not have wings or legs, are still fruit flies. The evolution under discussion is the “non-life to man” evolution. Since neither evolution nor creation can be proved scientifically, we must ask ourselves, of the science that we know, of the facts available, of the scientific laws that have been verified, do they fit evolution or do they fit creation?
The Fossil Record
The theory of evolution would predict that the fossil record (the fossils found in the earth) would be full of examples of transitional forms (one species evolving into another), and that the boundaries between kinds should blur as we look back at their fossil history. It should get more and more difficult, for example, to tell cats from dogs and mammals from reptiles, land animals from water animals, and finally life from nonlife. Creation would predict that the fossil record would contain the same gaps that exist between species today. The Fossil Evidence as stated by Evolutionists:
"Most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless" (Harvard's top Evolutionist. Stephen Jay Gloud). "All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms: transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt" (Dr. S.J. Gloud. Natural History. June-July, 1977. p. 24). Even Charles Darwin knew that the fossil record was a major argument against his theory, for he entitled the chapter in his book on the fossil record, “On The Imperfection of the Geologic Record”. He noted, “intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic change, and this is perhaps the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory (of evolution)” (What is Creation Science? Morris/Parker, p. 130). Sadly, our culture has been so indoctrinated and many assume that believing in fossils is the equivalent to believing in evolution. In fact, Parker notes that extinction, not evolution, is the rule when we compare fossil sea life with the sort of marine invertebrates we find living today. In fact, all major groups, except perhaps the groups including clams and snails, are represented by greater variety and more complex forms as fossils than today. In fact, many evolutionists are now using the term “stasis” (to stay the same) in reference to the fossil record. That is, most kinds of fossilized life forms appear in the fossil sequence abruptly and distinctly as discrete types, then show relatively minor variation in their type, and finally abruptly disappear.
Fossils Evidence of Creation
For years the basis of evolution was uniformitarianism, that is slow and gradual change, including the slow and gradual accumulation of sediment, yet, such a process would not produce any fossils, for fossils do not form when plants and animals simply die and rot away on the surface of the ground or on the bottom of the sea. To fossilize, a plant or animal must be buried rapidly under a relatively heavy load of sediment. In addition, the earth contains huge fossil beds, such as the Karroo Beds in Africa, which contain perhaps 800 billion vertebrates. The Morrison Formation, famous for its dinosaur remains, covers much of the mountainous West, and St. Peter’s Sandstone, stretches from Canada to Texas and from the Rockies to the Appalachians. The evidence in the fossil record is that a huge catastrophe buried millions and billions of all types of life on this planet, regardless of their environmental fitness. For such fossil beds include giant dragonflies, dinosaurs, large plants and trees, and even giant beavers six feet in length. The Bible has always had the answer for the huge fossil beds, that is the flood of Noah’s time (Genesis 7:17-24). The evidence is so clear from such a huge catastrophe that such evolutionists are abandoning uniformitarianism and are calling themselves neo-catastrophists. In fact, evolutionists seem to be stepping all over themselves to come up with the right worldwide catastrophe to explain the sudden, worldwide extinction of the dinosaurs. A very popular theory has been that a global cataclysm was caused by the collision of an asteroid with the earth (Scientific American, January 1982). Some say it hit on the land and produced a dust cloud that reduced photosynthesis and starved the dinosaurs to extinction within 10 years; or alternately, that the dust blocked off the sun’s heat and froze the dinosaurs out in two or three years, yet, the fossil record shows evidence of massive flooding (2 Peter 3:3-7). Once again, we are faced to two choices. Either God brought a flood upon the world, from which we have both scientific and written evidence, or an asteroid hit the earth, wiped out most life forms, and then everything once again started to evolve by chance.
The Fossil Record Abandoned
Oxford zoologist Mark Ridley noted in 1981, “No real evolutionist, whether gradualist or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution over special creation” (“Who Doubts Evolution?” New Scientist, vol. 90, June 25, 1981, p. 831).
Instant Evolution?
A new concept of evolution was outlined by Stephen Gould in Natural History for June-July 1977. He noted that the fossil-record with its abrupt transitions offers no support for gradual change. In 1980 he noted, “Thus, our model of ‘punctuated equilibria” holds that evolution is concentrated in events of speciation and that successful speciation is an infrequent event punctuating the stasis of large populations that do not alter in fundamental ways during the millions of years that they endure”(“Is a New General Theory of Evolution Emerging?”, Paleobiology, Vol. 6, No. 1, 1980, p. 127). The idea appears to be that for millions of years nothing happens and then wham an animal suddenly evolves as the supposed result of radical chromosome rearrangements or cataclysmic mutations in super-genes or regulatory genes that are crucial to early development. Again, we have two choices, either an all-powerful and wise God created all the different kinds, or for millions of years nothing happens and then almost instantly a new form of life emerges by accident.
The Laws of Thermodynamics
The Laws of Thermodynamics are the two most universal laws of science. The First Law, also known as the law of Conservation and Decay, states that there can be no creation or annihilation of Mass/Energy, that is, the Universe is operating with the energy given it at it's beginning point. The Second Law states that the while mass/energy cannot be destroyed, energy available for useful work in a functioning system tends to decrease. Simply stated, everything is running down, growing old, and wearing out. Evolution claims an upward cycle, the simple evolving toward the complex, disorder evolving into order. Unfortunately the most fundamental laws of science have everything going in the opposite direction of evolution. "One problem biologists have faced is the apparent contradiction by evolution of the second law of thermodynamics. Systems should decay through time, giving less, not more order" (“A Downward Slope to Greater Diversity”, Science. Vol. 217 (Sept. 24, 1982) p. 1239, Roger Lewin). "But the answer can readily be given to the question, 'Has the second law of thermodynamics been circumvented?' Not yet" (American Laboratory, Oct. 1982, p. 88). On the other hand, Creation would agree with both laws. First that creation has ceased; no new material is being introduced into the universe: (Genesis 2:1-3). And that the creation itself is gradually wearing out (Hebrews 1:10-12). Again, two choices. We can accept Creation that harmonizes with the laws that govern this universe, or we can accept evolution, which goes against the most fundamental laws that govern this universe. It should not surprise us that the Bible mentions both of these Laws, for the God who is the author of Scripture (2 Timothy 3:16)is also the God who created this universe with the laws that govern it (Colossians 1:16).
Mark Dunagan/Beaverton Church of Christ/503-644-9017
www.beavertonchurchofchrist.net/mdunagan@easystreet.com
