Over the past eight weeks I have lead a group of young adults (18 and up) through several arguments against evolution. Today we summarized our eight weeks. I thought the summary might serve as a helpful introduction for others as well. Must of the information is drawn from Geisler’s Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics and The Answers Book from Answers in Genesis.
I would particularly point out the second paragraph which begins “Second, …”
In Jesus’ love,
Topic 1: Evolution
Week 8: Summary
In the eight weeks of reviewing evolution we have looked at several points. First, we defined the type of evolution we were going to discuss. Our definition was the evolution of one type of living creature into a more complex living creature. The difficulty here was the impossibility of randomly generating complexity. We used the example of a computer that could generate random computer characters. At no time would this process generate a usable program which could add numbers. Complexity or instructions cannot be generated from a random process.
Second, we looked at the difference between the evolutionary view and the view of salvation. We found these to be incompatible. Evolution requires survival of the fittest. In order for it to work, the death of the less fit is required. On the contrary, Romans 5:12 says, “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned”. Contrary to evolution, Christian salvation relies on death entering the world through sin, not as a normal process that aided the development of all creatures. Further, and more importantly, salvation relies on Jesus Christ conquering death and sin. Second Timothy 1:10b reads, “our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel”. If evolution holds then it demands death before Adam and Eve. Death before Adam and Eve would mean that death was not a consequence of the sin of Adam and Eve. If death is not a consequence of sin then Jesus did not have to die for our sins.
Third, we learned about the difficulty of dating the earth, rocks, fossils and the remains of the dead. There are many techniques for finding these dates. One is carbon dating. Carbon dating is only accurate for several thousands of years, not millions. It can be inaccurate unless the amount of carbon 14 in the cycle from air to plant to animal is known. Second is a technique used called radiometric dating. Radiometric dating uses isotopes that break down over predictable lengths of time to date stones and remains near those stones. Difficulties arise when the original amount of the parent and daughter isotope are not known; when the transition rate between the two is varied; and, when amounts of the parent or daughter could be added in the intervening time.
Forth, we review the common argument that the similarities of organisms and the evolutionist’s conclusion that these homologous structures necessitate common origin. We also review several real-world examples where similarities do not mean common origin and where they do. We discussed the necessity of many characteristics between organisms because of their common environment on earth. Also, a disconnect was found between structures that are similar between animals. The evolutionist does not concede that the structures are homologous, though they are similar, because there is no pre-conceived idea of a common origin between them.
Fifth, we reviewed a video, Unlocking the Mystery of Life, concerning the argument against evolution from the point of irreducible complexity. This again brought up the idea that the origin of the complex information is never explained in evolution. Also, the bacterial flagellum was used as an illustration of irreducible complexity. The idea of the video was that certain structures are complex and cannot be arrived at through more simple structures because the loss of any piece of the complex structure renders it completely useless. The order of assembly, self assessment, and construction mechanisms are also discussed as further difficulties to the evolution of these complex structures.