Questions and Answers

From http://web.archive.org/web/20041212102735/www.evidenceofgod.com/answers/creation3.htm


Couldn’t God have simply started the Evolutionary process?

Certainly he COULD have? A God creating the Universe could use virtually any means. BUT, Evolution triggered by God is NOT consistent with his nature - since God would not have "lied" to Moses by telling us that he created all creatures [Genesis 1]. Perhaps you feel Moses wasn’t inspired by God, and just "got lucky." How "lucky" would that be? If Moses somehow knew the steps of creation listed in the Bible, just guessing the correct order would be as difficult as winning a state lottery... incredibly lucky. Perhaps you feel there is some latitude in the wording of Genesis. If you study the ORIGINAL Hebrew text, you will find the word "bara" used in creation of the heavens, creatures and man. Bara literally means to "create out of nothingness." There is NO ambiguity. Essentially you need to make a choice to believe God or misinformed scientists. Maybe people could rationalize their thoughts 50 years ago because we didn’t have the tools or knowledge to dispute "scientific" mistakes then. Now we do. But once you really investigate and gain absolute certainty that the Bible inspired with precision by God, you will learn to trust the Bible FAR more than humans.

Return to Questions



_______________________________


From http://web.archive.org/web/20060814012425/http://www.evidenceofgod.com/answers/creation10.htm



Doesn’t survival of the fittest and natural selection prove Evolution?

NO. Survival of the fittest AND natural selection are both real, but they have nothing to do with MACROevolution. Keep in mind that in Darwin’s day, there were no electron microscopes, medicine was in infancy and essentially he (and others) had to look for "evidence" easily visible. A common "textbook" example is the "Peppered Moth" which showed survival of the fittest. As time and generations of moths passed, color of nearly all moth’s wings switched from white to black to white again - as changes in the environment (soot pollution) made them more or less visible to predators (depending on the color of trees - see Creation vs. Evolution). This example (and many others) relate to MICROevolution - change WITHIN a species. There were always both black and white moths. The proportion greatly shifted as the surviving ones had more of the "right color" genes.

ALL creatures have such a survival system pre programmed into DNA from the outset. Two brown eyed parents can produce a blue-eyed child. Skin color, hair color and many other traits are programmed (often remaining hidden) for generations. Does this mean a fish can become a frog? Of course not. The change from one reproducing species to another is MACROevolution and NO evidence supports it. The Peppered Moth example is a simple adaptation from what God preplanned. Incidentally, humans CAN "force" ends of the spectrum with selective breeding. Man developed both the species of Chihuahuas and Great Danes through selective breeding. (Yet neither would survive long if placed in the wild.)

Return to Questions



_____________________


From http://web.archive.org/web/20041212101220/www.evidenceofgod.com/answers/creation1.htm

Answers to Questions - Creation vs. Evolution

Does Scientific evidence support Creation?

ABSOLUTELY. And NEVER more than now! Biochemistry just discovered that Evolution is impossible even at the molecular level - so how could it exist at the species level? The electron microscope (not available in the early 1900’s) has allowed us to see the vast complexity of the human cell - FAR more complex than the most modern factory. Space scientists (Astrophysicists) have "proven" that General Relativity is FACT. This means time and space had a beginning - just like the Bible says. Since 1992, the Hubble telescope and several deep-space probes provided evidence about the beginning of the Universe, never seen before - again supporting the Bible. Combining just Biochemistry and Astrophysics, we can compute that there couldn’t possibly be enough time and matter to have randomly produced ONE reproducible living cell - let alone, a parade of complex changes of species. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Microbiology is filled with other Creation evidence. Old theories of missing links and "random, synthetic" production of DNA molecules now are ridiculous.

Evolution is not only "in crisis," but can now be shown to be absurd. NO area of science can produce any "hard" evidence, nor even a reasonable argument for Evolution today. The ONLY idea fueling evolution now, is a presupposition that God can’t exist. If we used the same presupposition about air (we can’t see air either), airplanes wouldn’t exist... Or denying electrons, telephones and computers wouldn’t exist. To "save" evolution, some scientists have turned to speculation about things like "common body parts" (e.g. if a bat and a human both have bone joints, they must have come from the same ancestor). More likely - they had the same intelligent designer - using a good design for two systems. Would we ever think that automobiles came from roller skates because they both have wheels? Many smart people try very hard to reject God. The Bible says God has been obvious since the beginning of time, "through his Creation" - and that we are "without excuse" [Rom 1:20]. Newton, Galileo and many top scientists today, would agree.

Return to Questions