The ultimate goal of evolution is to remove Yahweh, the creative source and power behind this universe. If Darwin’s theory of creative advancement can convince this world that evolution was the mechanism for man’s existence, then man has no need for Yahweh or the morality of His Word.
A Harvard geneticist and leading evolutionist, Richard Lewontin, confirms this view, “We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs…no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door” (In Six Days, John Ashton, Ph.D., p. 76).
It is the goal of this article to prove by Yahweh’s Word and scientific evidence that the theory of evolution is nothing more than a deception and a lie of the Evil One. Some of the scientific proofs that this article will consider are the “evidence” for evolution, the second law of thermodynamics, the facts of mutation, and complexity of life. After considering this evidence we hope that those who may give credence to this unholy theory might agree from both Yahweh’s Word and science that evolution is indeed a deceptive travesty of HaSatan.
In one of the plainest passages showing Yahweh’s creation, the Apostle Paul offers prophetic insight that few could disagree with. “…because what may be known of Yahweh is manifest in them, for Yahweh has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and [Majesty], so that they are without excuse” (Rom 1:19-20, NKJV).
The Apostle Paul verified that the heavens and the earth serve are a visible sign and testimony to not only Yahweh’s existence, but also to His very attributes. Since Yahweh’s creation testifies of his creative power and existence, those who reject Him have no justification for their rebellion.
Paul was not alone in writing of man’s rejection. Peter, one of Yahshua’s most devoted apostles, also told of man’s rebellion. “For this they willfully forget: that by the word of Yahweh the heavens were of old…” (2Peter 3:5, NKJV).
Peter affirms in this passage that it was through Yahweh’s Word that the heavens and earth came into being and verifies that man deliberately forgets and ignores this truth. Why? As Satan rebelled with the intent of becoming equal to the Most High (Isa. 14:14), mankind is doing the same through the theory of evolution. If man can remove Yahweh’s creative presence from this universe then man is free to believe that no power, no Being, and no authority higher than man exists. This gives man the claim that he is the supreme mighty one.
From a Biblical perspective it is clear that the heavens and earth are testimony to Yahweh’s inspired creation. Now when it comes to this universe, does science contradict scripture? While many scientists might say that scripture and science are in opposition and incompatible to one another, there are many who see the harmony between the two.
Evolution Versus Science
Is Darwinian or macroevolution science? One person of many who share the belief that Darwinian evolution is not science is Dr. John Kramer. According to Dr. Kramer: “No one has ever demonstrated macro evolutionary changes on a molecular level, yet many people readily speculate evolutionary links between bacteria, plants, animals, and man” (In Six Days, p. 47).
Dr. Kramer, who holds a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Minnesota and currently serves as associate editor of the Scientific Journal, raises an important question. What does this mean for those who advocate that Darwinian evolution is a legitimate science? The answer depends on how one defines science. According to most definitions science contains three elements: observation, hypothesis, and reproduction. In a recent essay, Dr. Jeremy Walter corroborates this definition: “Science is the human enterprise of seeking accurately and quantitatively the nature and processes of our universe through observation, hypothesis, and experimental validation” (In Six Days, p. 47).
The problem is that no observable evidence has ever been found to verify and substantiate the claim of macroevolution. With this being the case it is the opinion of many leading scientists that Darwinian evolution is not a valid science. “Scientists who utterly reject evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities…Many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science” (The Case for a Creator, Lee Strobel, p. 31).
Second Law of Thermodynamics
A basic law of nature that contradicts macro evolutionary changes is the second law of thermodynamics. Dr. John Cimbala, Ph.D. from CalTech, offers the following definition for this scientific law: “A formal definition of the second law of thermodynamics is: ‘in any closed system, a process proceeds in a direction such that the unavailable energy increases.’ In other words, in any closed system, the amount of disorder always increases with time. Things progress naturally from order to disorder, or from an available energy state to one where energy is more unavailable” (In Six Days, p. 201).
According to this natural law all aspects of the universe break down over time and become unusable. We see that every day, as buildings left unattended will decay and collapse; the same is true with anything that man constructs. Dr. Don DeYoung states that death itself is a consequence of this law. “The second basic law of nature…Stated in another way, everything deteriorates, breaks down, and becomes less ordered with time. Ultimately, death itself is a consequence of the second law of thermodynamics” (Ibid., p. 343).
If death itself is a result of the second law of thermodynamics, how could life have evolved as explained by Darwinian evolution? In other words, how could life go from disorder to order – wonderful in its complexity and design? The cornerstone theory of evolution defies a basic law of nature.
Mutations and Loss of Information
Darwinian evolution also contradicts the laws of mutation. It is believed by most evolutionists that life arose from numerous mutations over million of years. Before delving into how mutations occur, it is first important to establish that the mutation supported by Darwinian evolution is macroevolution. A theoretical example of macroevolution is a bird evolving from a reptile. Now it is absolutely essential to point out that macroevolution has never been confirmed through human observation or even by the fossil record. The missing link that so many evolutionists speak about is just that – a missing link.
The only observable form of mutation is what occurs on the molecular level, such as DNA and different forms of bacteria. It is important to understand that this mutation, however, is not supportive of macroevolution. The reason why mutation on the molecular level does not support macroevolution is that these mutations always occur from a loss of genetic information, thus not allowing macro evolutionary advancements. Dr. Ariel Roth, a leading biologist with a Ph.D. in biology from the University of Michigan and an editor for the Origins journal for 23 years, verifies that for the above reasons macro evolutionary advancements through mutation are highly improbable: “…mutations are not a great breakthrough for evolution. They are almost always detrimental, and as such are more representative of a mechanism for degeneration than for advancement” (Ibid., p. 91).
In addition, Dr. Stephen Taylor verifies that all the examples of mutation used to support macroevolution are contradictory to the evidence: “For large-scale evolution, mutations must on average add information. In a recent book, bio-physicist Dr. Lee Spetner shows with detailed probabilistic analysis that this is completely precluded. He examines the classic textbook cases of mutations cited in favor of neo-Darwinism evolution and shows conclusively that, without exception, they are all losses of information. There is so such thing as a mutation that adds information” (Ibid., p. 307).
For macroevolution to occur it is fact that additional genetic information is required which according to the above sources cited, this simply does not happen. Without additional genetic information it would be impossible for a bird to evolve from a retile or a bear to evolve from a whale, as speculated in Darwin’s book Origin of the Species.
Complexity of Creation
The last point of evidence to examine is the complexity of creation. Few areas of study are more fascinating than the intricacies of this universe. Most people live their mundane lives without ever asking, “How did all this come to be?” Yahweh’s creation is truly an awesome work once we understand the complexity of this universe.
Physicist Paul Davis offers this remarkable observation, “It is hard to resist the impression that the present structure of the universe, apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in numbers, has been rather carefully thought out…The seemingly miraculous concurrence of these numerical values must remain the most compelling evidence for cosmic design” (The Case for a Creator, p. 125).
What Dr. Davis is stating is this – this universe is far too complex for chance and time to be the basis for its existence. For example, consider for a just the moment the distance of the earth from the sun. If the earth were any closer to the sun it would be too hot to support life and if the earth were any farther from the sun it would be too cold to support life. The earth is exactly the right distance away and has the right elements to support life. In this way, the earth is unique from its other planetary neighbors in the galaxy. Science knows of no other planet in this galaxy or in fact in this universe that shares these necessary phenomena.
Because of the complexity of this universe many believe that such theories as natural selection cannot account for its existence. For example, Dr. Roth offers this astonishing revelation, “The problem is that the very system of natural selection which Darwin proposed will tend to eliminate the interdependent parts of complex systems as these systems develop. The parts do not function until all the interdependent parts are present and the system works and provides some survival value to the organism” (In Six Days, p. 90).
What Dr. Roth is proposing is that the theory of natural selection, which puts forward the notion of mutation for the purpose of survival, does not explain or offer a probable explanation for the complexity and interdependencies of life; in fact, this theory is counter intuitive to the universe. Evolutionists advocate the idea that all life arose from mutation through the process of natural selection; however, the process of natural selection would advance an organism only if that advancement served some sort of survival value. Since mutation can serve no survival value until all the parts were complete and working, such theories as natural selection do not offer an adequate explanation for Darwinian evolution via mutation.
Evolution has a big problem. For instance, the first man would have no need of blood clotting mechanisms until he cut himself. But by then it would be too late and he would bleed to death. This survival mechanism has to be working by the time he first cuts himself. But evolution says it would not exist until something like a cut in the flesh makes it necessary to exist. So our first man bleeds to death and the human species ceases to survive, according to the logic of evolution! Many other similar and complex self-preservation mechanisms are built into human and animal bodies that must work right the very first time or else the animal or human dies. Evolution’s basic premise of millions of years of development cannot explain or answer this quandary.
One of the foremost men in the field of creation and author of Darwin’s Black Box and 20-year professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University, Dr. Michael Behe offers this significant observation about the complexity of the human body: “Evolution can’t produce an irreducibly complex biological machine suddenly, all at once, because it’s much too complicated. The odds against that would be prohibitive. And you can’t produce it directly by numerous, successive, slight modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor system would be missing a part and consequently couldn’t function. There would be no reason for it to exist. And natural selection chooses systems that are already working” (The Case for a Creator, p. 198).
Those who have taken time to study the human body know its awesome design. The complexity of a single DNA strand is far too complicated to evolve unguided through mere chance. According to Dr. Jonathon Sarfati, a physical chemist, the amount of information that could be stored in a pinhead’s volume of DNA could fill a pile of “paperback books 500 times as tall as the distance from earth to the sun” (In Six Days, p. 80). In another analogy, Dr. John Marcus, who received his Ph.D. in biological chemistry from the University of Michigan, states that the information in one human DNA cell could “fill almost 1,000 books, each containing 1,000 pages of text” (Ibid., p. 174).
No matter what aspect of this breathtakingly complex universe we consider, the fingerprint of Almighty Yahweh is stamped on everything we see. As it written in Psalm 19:1: “The heavens declare the glory of Elohim and the firmament shows his handiwork.” There is no other explanation for the creation of this universe other than Yahweh’s direct hand (Ps. 150:6).
The evolutionary theory has been the catapult for today’s secular movement. In what began as a denial of intelligent design will end in a removal of Yahweh and His Word from the culture. It is absolutely essential that Yahweh’s people reject an irrational and impossible humanistic theory rooted in the denial of Yahweh and His authority.