Every so often, the media goes into a frenzy with headlines like “Miller creates life”[i]; this line is in reference to the fascinating experiment Stanley Miller and Harold Urey did in in 1953, which resulted in the creation of amino acids - the building blocks of life. At the time this was herald as evidence for life coming from non-life. And of course let’s not forget Robert Lenski’s discovery that, with even human intelligence patiently and methodically playing with it, e-coli can turn into different kinds of e-coli![ii] (For a separate and earlier documentation of Lenski’s findings over a much more exhaustive array biological samples refer to Genesis 1:11-12, 21, 24-25.)
It is at these times when both Creationists and Darwinists fall over each other trying to prove themselves right and the other wrong. There is one thing however that both creationists and Darwinists can agree on: Micro-Evolution, the observable fact that within a gene pool one could get a wide variety of the same species, such as in dogs. e.g. the Chihuahua to the Wolf. However when one thinks of the term ‘evolutionism’ it isn’t Micro-Evolution that often comes to mind; rather what comes to mind is Charles Darwin’s theory of Macro-Evolution. In 1859 Charles Darwin proposed that all known biological life forms can find their origin in an initial species of biological life. Darwinists give this original pool of organisms the nickname primordial soup.
Modern Darwinian Evolutionists assert that the process of tiny changes (mutations) in the DNA of the species of these single-celled organisms gave rise to species’ of multi-celled organisms. Then more mutations occurred giving rise to more complicated species of organism, namely fish. Many millions of years goes by, causing many more millions of mutations to take place. Eventually some of these mutations started to develop legs in some of these species of fish. Eventually there were animals who had the ability to walk onto land, and walk onto land they did. The mutations continued in these land dwelling creatures. Eventually wings started to develop in many of these species of land-walkers; and many millions of years down the road the skies began to be filled up with birds. And so on and so forth. Macro-Evolutionism asserts that via mutations in the DNA of organisms, including plants, and who also had the ability to survive long enough to pass their mutated DNA on to their young, “life” mastered its multiplication tables.
The Macro-Evolutionism controversy is a hot topic and I’d say as a result a lot of plainly false conclusions have developed on both sides of the debate. For an example, many ardent atheists believe that Macro-Evolutionism is fact and thus proves that we no longer need the divine explanation for our existence. Moreover, there are many creationists who would assert that the doctrine of Darwinian Evolutionism is inconsistent with the doctrine of God. In response however to both the atheistic Darwinists and anti-darwinian creationists, the theistic evolutionist might argue that under the premise of ex’nihilo fit (from nothing, nothing comes); in order to have biological changes there needs to be objects in reality to change, first. So having a physical answer doesn’t get rid of a theological answer. In sum you need God to explain the origin of at least the inorganic matter if it is going to give rise to organic matter, so to give rise to the first life. Conversely however it is also logical to assert that if God is *God*, he can do anything logically possible. So if God wants to guide inorganic matter so it gives rise to organic matter, and if he wants to oversee biological changes in ‘simple’ organic life so that more complex organisms come to be then so be-it.
So, Darwinian Evolutionism is not logically inconsistent with the basic doctrine of a divine creator; in fact it is dependant on it. However the doctrine of the Biblical God is inconsistent with the doctrine of Darwinian (Macro) Evolution. It is not logically inconsistent as He could have used a Darwinian process if he chose to; instead it is inconsistent with God’s documented chosen vehicle of creation.[iii] The question then should not be: “Can God use a Darwinian Evolution as a vehicle for creation” but rather “Did God create a Darwinian Evolutionary vehicle and then use it to created everything?” In answer to the second question: No, God did not create nor use the vehicle of Darwinian Evolution to create the universe and all life within. However even though there is no vehicle to allow the Macro-Evolutionary process to take place in biology,[iv] Macro-Evolution is a part of reality. This phenomena is done via micro-evolutionary steps; the Macro-Evolution aspect is invisible, but the micro-evolution is just as documentable as it is in biology.
Lets look again at the basic premise of Macro-Evolution: small changes in a species of creature that eventually gives rise to a distinctly new species of creature. In Matthew 13:24-30 Jesus compares the visible church to a wheat field. In His analogy those who are genuine followers of Christ, are represented by the wheat; however in the same batch of wheat lies weeds called Tares (or Darnel) which represents people who only look and act like Christians but who are genuine fakes. The reason for the comparison is Tares are indistinguishable from wheat while they are young; but when they are mature they are identifiably different. Christ illustrates that just as a wheat farmer has to wait until the crop matures to harvest, so to differentiate between the wheat and Tares God is going to wait until the end of days to harvest his followers and condemn the unbelievers (cf. 2 Peter 3:9) in Hell (cf. Matthew 25:41).
This fact sets the stage as it shows two very different types of people: regenerated[v] and unregenerated[vi]. However the big question is: How do these two people types come to pass in the end of days? Are there naturally born regenerate persons? No, as Paul states:
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned— - Romans 5:12
So all people are born enemies of God (cf. Romans 1:21). However through many tiny and daily changes in the lives of each regenerated person, by the power of God, they are a new creation (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:17). Through daily work of God, He changes each person that he has chosen (cf. Romans 8:28-30) so they are getting that much closer to the end result, namely being the image of Christ (cf. Romans 8:29). Eventually in the day Christ returns to judge the living and the dead (cf. 2 Timothy 4:1) there will be two distinct person groups or species if you'd like: enemies of God - peoples who will suffer God’s wrath and new creatures in Christ - peoples who have inherited the stamp of righteousness (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:17, Matthew 25:31-46). This evolution started off with one person type: the ungodly (cf. Romans 3:10-11); but from this group, a new species of person has been emerging and is getting larger day by day.
Unlike biological Macro-Evolutionism, where there is no vehicle to accomplish the task, there is a vehicle for spiritual Macro-Evolutionism: The sovereignty and power of God; and it is only through Him that this can be done (cf. John 6:44). So there is only one question for you to answer: Which species of person are you? Are you evolving into the man or woman, boy or girl that God wants you to be; or are you like so many of the fossils that scientists find: dead (cf. Ephesians 2:1) and unchanged from your ancestors?
____________________
[i] http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/molecular_biology_09.html - accessed February 10, 2014
[ii] http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html - accessed February, 2014
[iii] (NOTE: This assertion is to complicated to offer respond to here; so for the purposes of this article, this assertion will be merely assumed to be true.)
[iv] Many Darwinists will argue that 'Natural Selection' is the vehicle that drives the Darwinian Evolution. This is simply not true; as Natural Selection is only able to select from what information that is available in the gene pool; it cannot create more information. To use an analogy, a card player is able to shuffle the finite amount of combinations that a deck of 52 cards offers. The card player cannot shuffle the 52 cards and end up with 53. In the same way Natural Selection can only work with what information the gene pool offers.
[v] Regenerate: The regenerate is the one who has been legally justified in God’s sight and as such is being transformed into the image of Christ.
[vi] Unregenerate: The unregenerate is the one who is still legally an enemy of God and is deserving of his wrath.
No comments:
Post a Comment