Skip to content

Evolution: the Tower of Babel of our Age

July 8, 2013

The Theory of Evolution has had a more profound impact on society over the last 150 years than any other single idea. Darwin’s theory itself, the extensions it received by the hand of others, its wider applications – all have had a hugely damaging effect on our society’s current worldview and values. It is our current age’s equivalent of the Tower of Babel – modern man’s effort to bypass God. It is clearly among the most important topics to teach our kids, both what Evolution claims and the real reasons why it has become the standard model in our society to explain how life began and flourished.

Evolution is a reasonable theory of genetic change via breeding choices, expanded unreasonably to a full explanation for the start and variety of all Life

Like many incorrect philosophies, the Theory of Evolution has a seed of fact in it, which in fact all people should believe, that genetic information changes in offspring organisms through generations as a result of breeding combinations and infrequent mutations (random changes in DNA). This is often referred to as “Micro-Evolution” and is an undeniable fact. Generally mating is done more frequently and more successfully by organisms with desirable characteristics. It is not too difficult to see this concept at work both in animal and human society, although we can certainly debate the judgments made about which characteristics should be considered “desirable”. This “Natural Selection” explains how in certain climates some animals of the same species develop more or less prominent features than other animals in the same species living in different climates. A lot of work has been done analyzing varieties of dogs, finches, turtles, bacteria, etc. proving this concept.

If “evolutionists” stopped with that then every Christian would have no problem joining that camp; but unfortunately they have not stopped there. Full or “Macro” Evolution applies this idea of genetic change through time via natural selection, but uses it to answer completely different questions: how Life began initially, and how all the variety of species came to exist on Earth. Sparked by the publication of “The Origin of Species” by Charles Darwin in 1859, they believe that more significant mutations added complexity to early simple-celled organisms to slowly create actual new species. They believe that given enough time and random variation in cell DNA, helped along also by natural selection, that more and more complex animals developed, with each new species building on the genetic design of its “ancestor” species. They have built elaborate charts showing how they believe every modern species descended from simpler ones, including some which have become extinct due to natural selection. In a follow-up book “The Descent of Man” in 1871, Darwin outlines his reasons for believing that man evolved “from” apes and monkeys, given some similarities in their bodies and behaviors which he saw as a primitive version of man, or possibly a close species descended from a common ancestor long ago.

In what may be one of the most completely redacted facts in history, Darwin makes it clear in both books that he believes the Creator must have actually started Life initially; he saw no way for his theory to explain that!

…it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes… There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one… — Charles Darwin, conclusion to Origin of Species

The general concept has gained incredible popularity among scientists since the late 1800s – and been expanded to override Darwin’s own belief in a Creator, to explain even the initial start of Life. That is clearly not because it is a good theory which makes sense and matches reality, but instead because it is the first explanation ever suggested for life on earth which does not require the existence of God. Many living today search for ways to explain our world without God, because when one acknowledges there is a God, they cannot live in the selfish way most people would like to live (John 8:34). And once proposed and wrapped in scientific language which makes it sound like proven fact rather than the free-floating over-extended theory it actually is, other slaves to sin are only too happy to accept it and swallow it whole. Not only do they believe it, but will vehemently defend it, even against 100% of the evidence to the contrary! They have convinced themselves this must be right; the theory is new so it must represent Progress, right? Just as the builders of the Tower of Babel would not be denied in their efforts to build higher and higher, Evolution’s followers press on blindly.

The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. — Romans 1:18

This suppression of the truth takes different forms at times; not all evolutionists are looking for an explanation bypassing God. There are Bible-believing Christians who believe that evolution is simply the mechanism that God used to perform all of His actions in creating the world’s species over billions of years on earth, a theory called “theistic evolution”. Let’s put aside the (completely separate) question of the age of the earth and whether Genesis 1 is a historical or literary account of creation, and whether its Hebrew “yom” means 24-hour “day” or “era”, because regardless of one’s position on those questions, Theistic Evolution is not a sound position to believe but rather a politically correct effort to give a nod to science while still claiming the Bible; it is a contradiction in terms.

Evolution calls for random changes driven by chance mutations over time. It completely removes not only the necessity, but actually the possibility of God’s purposeful agency in creating Life.

The most important failure of the theory is the complete absence of the “intermediate forms” as would be expected if it were true. We see fossils of current and extinct species, but none of anything “between” species. This is why the search for the “Missing Link” has gained popularity and been a crusade for evolutionist paleontologists for over a century now. In many textbooks a progression is shown visually from ape to intermediate knuckle-dragging hominid creatures to homo sapiens sapiens as we appear today. The truth is that ZERO fossil evidence has supported this concept. Scientists have stretched the bounds of credibility, labeling “new” species and constructing entire skeletons and lifestyle summaries after having found a single jaw-bone!

Another key failure of the theory is its inability to explain how certain organs could have developed in gradual change. The human eye, for example, needed to appear fully formed, with retina, rods/cones or both, cornea, pupil, iris, and the optic nerve to the brain, ALL in order for the organ to have been functional. Evolutionists have no real answer for how systems like this could have appeared together, NOR for why intermediate components of an organ like the eye would have evolved and been retained with no function in intervening species until their companion components could evolve. There are myriad examples of this difficulty in nature, such as echo-location in bats, the blood pressure regulation of giraffe necks, and poison glands in lizards which mix two different chemicals to produce a toxic defensive poison. Hybrids create another serious problem for the theory. The sterility or complete unviability of ALL hybrids with different numbers of chromosomes make it impossible that any combination of simpler organisms could have accreted together to form a more complex organism.

DNA is often pointed to as strong evidence for evolution. We are to believe that because all living things have DNA controlling how their cells grow and divide, that somehow this proves that all life came from primordial single-celled organisms. They refuse to consider that DNA may be the preferred method of encoding and passing along genetic material used by God when He designed life. The same can be said of individual genes, which are shared between many species for the same physical structures. Which idea is more reasonable when you see different structures which are unique to themselves but are made of the same basic underlying materials with a similar design (e.g. a row of houses)? – That the most complex of these structures somehow randomly improved upon the simpler ones and pulled their design into its own, or that the structures share the same designer and builder?

Evolution fails even the most basic of reasonableness tests and has ZERO evidence in its favor. It does not even meet the definition of Science!

Wikipedia states that “To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.” (emphasis added). Clearly nothing about Darwin’s Theory of Evolution meets this criteria. In fact the empirical scientific measurements and calculations about the sheer number of unlikely chemical and biological events, the required sequence/combination in which they have to occur, and the astronomical odds of even a single one of them occurring – ALL basically lead to a mathematical impossibility that Evolution even started single-celled Life, not to mention human beings. Doing even that on random chance has been described as more complex problem and less likely possibility than that a tornado might rip through a junkyard and assemble a working Boeing 747 airplane.

Why then is it so popular a view, particularly at our universities and among intellectuals? Most evolutionists are more “religious” about their theory than most Christians are about our beliefs. The fact they will never admit is that they have chosen a worldview with Godless assumptions which leaves evolution as the only choice to choose, then use the fact that it is their only viable choice as “proof” that it must be true. They hold out hope that all of the theory’s problems mentioned above will be resolved with more research. Despite claiming they are driven by the search for truth and that they let the facts drive their conclusions, in fact most scientific work in the world today is very much shaped by Paradigms of accepted theories, which presume the answer ahead of time.

In freeing us from slavery to sin, God freed our minds to discern and comprehend Truth. In a moment in history such as this, with the whole secular world conspiring to believe and evangelize the Falsehood of Evolution, this freedom comes with a responsibility to shine God’s light in the world.

“So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind… And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind… God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.” — Genesis 1:21-27


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: