Creation Evolution

I have included this topic not only because of its cultural importance but also because it is used as one of the primary arguments against the existence of God. I have also gone into greater detail with this topic because of the significance of the controversy and the many confusions that people seem to have about the facts of the subject.

Many believe science has proven that Evolution has happened, and because of this many uninformed Christians either believe that God must have used Evolution, or they eventually abandon their belief in God because of the seemingly convincing arguments presented. As I have emphasized considering evidences throughout this guide, what is the best conclusion based on the evidences which exist?

Why Does the Debate about Evolution Matter?

www.str.org/quickthoughts/why-does-the-debate-about-evolution-matter

As with the terms Truth and Morality, it is also important to understand the definitions of the terms dealing with the Creation-Evolution Controversy. The terms Science, Evolution, and Creation, have more than one definition, depending on how the term is used and the understanding of the person using or hearing the term. When in conversation about Creationism and/or Evolution, it can be very helpful to use the first Tactics question? “What do you mean by that?”

People will say that Evolution has been proven, but which “Evolution” are they referring to? The term Evolution has different meanings, and unless you understand the way the term is being used to you won’t know which definition the person is indicating. Two of the specific categories of Evolution are Microevolution, and Macroevolution. These terms are used to describe two ideas as to how the theory of Evolution works . There are two additional terms; Naturalistic Evolution, and Theistic Evolution. These describe how the process of Evolution got started in the first place.

Microevolution, better understood as Transition, is defined as variances within a species over time. Examples of this would be changes in the size and shape of the beak of a bird, the thickness or length of fur, etc. Descendants of the species are the same species as their predecessors. As an example, a Chihuahua is as much a dog as a Great Dane is. I know, some of you may disagree ;-) Even though there is amazing variance between different breeds, they are all still dogs. The same is true of all other species. These changes are visible and fully consistent with the concept of Creation because one species never change into a different species.

One example of a limitation of change within a species is the range of sizes of organisms within a species. Like the Chihuahua and Great Dane, there are limitations to the variances within each species.

Macroevolution is defined as changes which extend from one species to another, where a less complex (lower level) organism will increase in complexity to become a higher level organism, as in changing from ape to human through multiple Transitional steps. These are much larger changes, usually claimed by Evolutionists to be caused by mutation. Evolutionary scientists refer to Transitional Species as Missing Links. With the exception of a few controversial examples given as supposed evidence in support of evolution, almost all Missing Links are artist’s renditions, with no fossil evidence found. As Ken Ham states in regards to Missing Links,

“What do scientists find? Nothing. What do they label it as? Missing. Is it that it is missing or that it just isn't there to begin with?”

Microevolution, or variance within a species, is fully observable whereas Macroevolution has never been observed. Many proponents of evolution point to genetic mutations as the force behind the changes, but mutations have almost always proven to be harmful and very few have been found to be helpful or useful, and their benefit is arguable.

Examples of Beneficial Mutations in Humans

https://ratiochristi.org/uah/blog/post/examples-of-beneficial-mutations-in-humans/2011#.Wc71OU77bDc

Are There Beneficial Mutations?

https://answersingenesis.org/genetics/mutations/are-there-beneficial-mutations/

The Myth of Beneficial Mutations

http://www.creationstudies.org/operationsalt/myth-beneficial-mutations.html

Evolutionists look at micro evolutionary changes and they extrapolate that if small variances show very small changes then multiple small variances would result in large changes over long time frames. They claim this is evidence of evolutionary changes happening. Brett Kunkle refutes this theory fairly effectively in this video:

Evolution: The Big Question – Brett Kunkle

www.str.org/quickthoughts/evolution-the-big-question

What is the difference between Microevolution and Macroevolution?

www.gotquestions.org/microevolution-macroevolution.html

What is the missing link, and has it been found?

www.compellingtruth.org/missing-link.html

“Documented” Transitional Forms?

www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=2437

Survival Of The Fakest

A great article showing disproven evidences still being used in textbooks to support the theory of Evolution.

www.discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/survivalOfTheFakest.pdf

The concise definition of naturalistic evolution is

“Change over time from one species to another”.

For this definition to be true as described by evolutionary scientists, thousands of transitional species would need to be found to confirm this evolutionary process. Other than a few fossils classified by Evolutionists as transitional, the thousands of transitional fossils necessary have not been found. As a result, a theory was proposed by Stephen J. Gould called Punctuated Equilibrium. This is where huge jumps in evolution take place. An example would be where a lizard lays an egg and instead of a lizard hatching from the egg, a bird hatches instead. As such, there are no transitional species and so no fossil evidence. Some will say that this lack of fossil evidence is actually evidence for evolution, because there are “no transitional fossils”. Does this sound logical? This explanation would be circular reasoning

A Response to Dr. Dawkins' "The Information Challenge"

www.discovery.org/a/4278

General Rebuttal to the Theory of Evolution - Rich Deem

www.godandscience.org/evolution/evolution.html

There are some Christians who believe science has proven evolution true, and they believe that God used evolution to bring about the changes we see. This is called Theistic Evolution.

Theistic Evolution: Designed by Chance?

www.str.org/articles/theistic-evolution-designed-by-chance

Theistic Evolution

https://carm.org/secular-movements/evolution/theistic-evolution

The Scientific non-Bible believing community typically believe that Evolution is a naturalistic process and call it Naturalistic Evolution. This form of Evolution is completely absent of any supernatural intervention, and this is why it is called Naturalistic. If there is no God, then God obviously couldn’t be involved, and only natural process were responsible.

What is Evolution?

www.str.org/articles/what-is-evolution

15 Answers to John Rennie and Scientific American's Nonsense

www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=1046

While evolution is promoted by Atheists and Evolutionists as the explanation of the development of life, it still doesn’t answer the question of how life came to exist in the first place. Evolution is only an explanation as to what happened after life was present. The concept of life arising by chance from non-life is called Abiogenesis. The Law of Biogenesis indicates life only comes from life with life never coming from non-life. This is fully consistent with what is found in nature and in the Bible, and is completely contradictory to the concept of Abiogenesis. The Theory of Abiogenesis (life from non-life), is disproven by The Law of Biogenesis.

“Abiogenesis is Irrelevant to Evolution”

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1631

The Law of Biogenesis

Pt.1www.apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=1018

Pt.2www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=4178

Creationism and Intelligent Design are terms used for the concept of life being brought into existence by an intelligent creative force. As there are other religions which teach this (Judaism, Islam, etc.), the terms are not exclusive to Christianity. However, they are typically associated with Christianity in articles, books, and news reports.

Creationism doesn't specifically indicate the method God used to create, only that God did. In contrast, Intelligent Design holds that certain features of the Universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than by an undirected process, such as natural selection. Opponents of the idea that God was responsible for life coming into existence commonly confuse the terms of Creationism and Intelligent Design.

Creationism

https://carm.org/creationism

What is Intelligent Design

www.intelligentdesign.org/whatisid.php

Intelligent Design Network

www.intelligentdesignnetwork.org

Frequently raised but weak arguments against Intelligent Design

https://uncommondescent.com/faq/

The last term to consider in this section is Science. One of the definitions for Science at www.freedictionary.com is:

“Systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.”

Science is the process and method we use to discover information no matter where the evidence leads. However, today there is a new definition for Science. This new definition of science by evolutionary scientists requires that if the evidence leads to any conclusion which infers the existence of God, then you are not doing science.

This definition of science is used in many schools today and only allows for natural materialistic conclusions that will not allow the possibility of God regardless of where the evidence leads. The fancy name for this type of science is Methodological Naturalism. This phrase means that the only method that you can use is one which only arrives at a naturalistic conclusion. If you are using the above original definition of science, but the evidence you find points in any way to the existence of God, you aren't doing science according to Methodological Naturalism.

Thinking Clearly (3 of 4) - Greg Koukl

www.youtube.com/watch?v=MU0XJ1K9EIE

At the 37 minute mark, Greg goes into a more thorough explanation of the two definitions of Science. This should give you a better understanding of how the two definitions are used and the significant importance of understanding which definition a person is assuming when talking about science as it relates to the Creation Evolution controversy.

As you can also see with this topic, asking the tactics question “What do you mean by that?” is essential. Using the tactics methods will allow you to make sure as to which meaning a person is using for scientific terms used when you are in conversation with them.

Darwin On Trial - Phillip E. Johnson

http://server.firefighters.org/catalog/1999-2000/01037.mp3

12:18 Realization of the problems with Evolution as presented.

14:05 Observation of the word definitions and logic being used.

Why Does Science Leave God Out? (methodological naturalism)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dmom0jlgc_Q

Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (An Introduction)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpQ1-AGPysM

Many evolutionists have raised criticisms about Phillip E. Johnson commenting about evolution because he is not a scientist but a lawyer. This is an example where the person is attacked or criticized rather than dealing with the conclusion the person provides reasons for.

The following video shows why Professor Johnson is fully qualified to speak on the subject of Evolution.

Can a Lawyer Speak on Science and Evolution?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mJTZiEu3k0

If you are new to much of this information about evolution, it can seem a little overwhelming since challenges to the theory of Evolution are not taught in most schools or textbooks. Naturalistic Materialism is usually the only “science” taught. If you are somewhat familiar with the subject material, you could use the following tactic if in conversation with an evolutionist:

Simple Tactic with Topic of Evolution – Brett Kunkle

www.str.org/blog/what-is-a-simple-tactic-you-can-use-with-the-topic-of-evolution-video

Even after being shown the incredible odds against Evolution some Evolutionists will still make a statement similar to this,

“Evolution has to be true because we are here.”

How would they respond if we used almost the same statement? That statement being, “God has to exist because we are here.” These are not objective statements but subjective, and any person making either of them is presuming what they are trying to prove.

As with the other subjects in this guide, it is important that we rely on the available evidence to reach our conclusion and not assumptions.

Additional Links:

What does the Bible say?

www.gotquestions.org/creation-evolution.html

Frequently raised but weak arguments against Intelligent Design

www.uncommondescent.com/faq