"All material is written by
Joe R. Price, unless otherwise
"And take...the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God" (Eph. 6:17)
In this issue:
There are only two choices for the origin of the universe. Either, 1) Somebody made the world, or 2) The world made itself. Humanists (not to be confused with humanitarians) believe, “…the universe as self-existing and not created.” The Bible teaches, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”2 Most evolutionists do not offer an explanation for “first cause.” They do not typically try to explain how the first matter came into being, you have to give them that. Evolutionary thinking is a belief system on origins for those who choose not to believe in God and His creation. Therefore, when considering origins we essentially have tow options: “In the beginning God” or “In the beginning Dirt” and you have to give them the dirt. Many among the media, politicians, educators, and religious leaders preach evolutionary doctrine and refer to creation as a fairy tale. They are the “spin doctors” who have joined forces to promote an evolutionary, humanistic, naturalistic World View. They do not tell you the concept of evolution is self-destructing. They do not tell you it has never been well supported by the evidence and there are many scientists coming forward to point out the weaknesses of this theory. Instead they prey upon the faith of our young people indicating that “all educated people believe in evolution.”
When engaging in debate it is best to start by defining the terms of the proposition. This is especially true when discussing evolution because it helps uncover the trickery used by evolutionists.
When we use the term “evolution” in this series of articles we are discussing the theories that say all living things have arisen by a materialistic, naturalistic evolutionary process from a single source, which itself arose by a similar process from a dead, inanimate world. This theory may also be called the “Molecule to Man theory of evolution.” Other terms for this theory include the “Atom to Adam” or “Goo to You” theory of evolution.
The concept of evolution actually involves several theories, which include:
1) Cosmic Evolution — the origin
of time, space, and matter. This is also known as the “Big Bang.”
Theories #1 through #5 listed above comprise the “General Theory of Organic Evolution.” When I use the word “evolution” in this series, unless stated otherwise, we will be referring to and refuting the “General Theory of Organic Evolution,” which is this “Atom to Adam,” theory of evolution. (Theories #4 and #5 together can also be referred to as the “Goo to You” theory of evolution.)
The first five theories are not scientific at all. Not every idea that any scientist has is necessarily a “scientific theory.” For a theory to be scientific, it must be subjected to the scientific method which involves observation, experimentation, and verification. These theories have not been observed and have not been supported by evidence or processes which have been observed. They have not been verified through experimentation. Therefore, they are not “scientific theories,” even though a large number of scientists believe in them.
Of the six theories listed above, only that of Micro-Evolution has been observed. Typically when evolutionists try to say evolution is amenable to the scientific method they have shifted into a discussion of theory #6. Do not be fooled. Evolutionists typically are quick to lump theory #6 in with the rest and use it as “proof” for the other five theories. Biology text books are full of this kind of methodology.
The first five theories should not be confused with nor commingled with the sixth concept which is often called Micro-Evolution. This concept is not really a theory, but is a fact. It identifies the fact that there is genetic capacity for horizontal variation and adaptability within genetically compatible kinds. This is why we have demographic differences within human populations. It also explains why there are so many variations within animal kinds, such as among dogs, cats, toads, cattle, etc. No one disagrees with this. Everyone knows you can cross a Cocker Spaniel with a Poodle and get a Cock-a-Poo or a Pekinese with a Poodle and get a Peek-a-Poo. When you are through with this process you have bred dogs and ended up with just dogs. The same principle is true in the plant kingdom where plants such as corn can be developed to be more disease and pest resistant. When you are through you still have corn and have not turned corn plants into oak trees. It has been said there are some 1300 variations of roses, but “a rose by any other name is still a rose.” “Micro-Evolution” or “Selective Breeding” does not prove you can begin with a single cell such as an amoeba, and end up with a human being. However, it is with this information many evolutionists play a con game upon unsuspecting students.
It is the old con game known as “Bait & Switch.” You may have had a telemarketer try to pull this con game on you. For example, a credit card company calls your home during the dinner hour assuring you that you have been “pre-qualified” for 2.9% percent interest on their card. When you get the card it actually carries 13.9% interest. That is “Bait & Switch!” They allure you with one thing and give you something else. It is an illegal business tactic, so why should it be allowed in the classrooms of public schools?
Evolutionists pull this con by discussing an example of adaptation within a genetically compatible kind (micro-evolution) and assert this is a case of evolution (macro-evolution) in progress. The classic example of this con game is the Peppered Moth story. If you have studied biology, you have probably heard the story, since it is in almost every text book The Peppered Moth (Biston betularia) has a light colored variation and a dark colored variation. To the human eye, it appears camouflaged when the light moth is with a light background and when the dark moth is with a dark background. It is said the light moth was the predominant variation in England before the industrial revolution where the trees were light colored. After the industrial revolution, the trees were predominantly darkened by pollution and it is said the predominant variation became the dark moth. After laws were enacted to clean up the environment and the trees began to show their natural lighter colors, it is said the demographics of light moths versus dark moths began to reverse again.
This story is told over and over again as proof of evolution in action. First, without even criticizing the elements of the evolutionists’ story, ask yourself if this proves or gives any credence to the “Amoeba to Man” theory of evolution. If the story started out with absolutely no dark moths at the beginning and ended up with some dark and light colored moths it would only demonstrate Micro-Evolution or the genetic capacity within a kind. It would be similar to a blonde-headed woman marrying a black-headed man and having four black-headed children and one red-headed child. Everyone knows this is possible and everyone should know this does not demonstrate that the moth is undergoing Macro-Evolution and will eventually evolve into a bird or some other genetically incompatible organism.
It is fascinating, however, to see that this story may not even be demonstrating Micro-Evolution. If both colors were present at the beginning, it only represents a demographic change in the population of moths. Think about it. The story is of a community of predominantly white moths becoming a community of predominantly dark moths, which later became a community of predominantly light moths again. We see this happen all the time with communities of people. Yet no one thinks it proves that man is evolving into another kind of being. This has to be the most successful “bait and switch con game” ever pulled off. The evolutionists describe a demographic change in the population, claim that it illustrates Micro-Evolution, and then jump over the huge crater of missing evidence to claim that it proves Macro-Evolution!
If there was any actual scientific evidence for the General Theory of Organic Evolution the evolutionists would present it. The fact that evolutionists are always using examples of Micro-Evolution or Horizontal Variation as “evidence” for the first five theories is pretty strong evidence, in and of itself, there has never been any observation of evidence for the General Theory of Organic Evolution.
There are only two choices for the origin of the universe. Evolutionists do not have scientific evidence for their theories. They would have you accept their belief system, simply based on their word that we came from the “Big Bang.” They would seem to rewrite the Bible to say, “In the beginning Dirt.”
On the other hand the Bible asserts, “By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. He gathereth the waters of the sea together as an heap: He layeth up the depth in storehouses. Let all the earth fear the LORD: let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. For He spake, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast.”3
The Bible claims the origin of the universe to be from the “Big Word,” if you will. Jesus Christ was the Word and provided the “Big Word” of creation. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made…And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.4
As this series progresses we will put various facets of the evolutionary theories under the microscope. As we do, we will continue to see the overwhelming evidence against evolution and the scientific and biblical evidence for creation. “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”
First Article of Human Manifesto I
“When I consider Your heavens, the work of Your fingers, The moon and the stars, which You have ordained, What is man that You are mindful of him, And the son of man that You visit him?” (Psalms 8:3-4)
Created by Chuck Sibbing -
The Spirit's Sword is a free,
weekly publication of the Mt. Baker church of Christ, Bellingham, WA