Refuting Evolution

HOME

POEMS

QUOTES

PURPOSE

AUTHOR

MUSES

CONTACT

1. Refuting Evolution

(Secular/Christian)

Firstly, the theory of evolution is just that — a theory, and a very confused one, one that’s often wrongly taught as fact. The theory of evolution argues that “everything made itself.” Excuse my smile.

It’s certainly not logical, nor is it sound, to believe that we came out of nothing, some big bang, an amazing fusion of particles that miraculously threw themselves together all on their own, or that formed over time into this world as we know it, and human life.

On the other hand, it’s certainly logical, and perfectly sound, to believe that some Creator (mastermind) was responsible for the existence of the universe, our planet, and indeed ourselves.

Having put evolution to the test (via investigation) I have found it to be full of contradictions, distortions, (not to mention missing links, some supposedly found — total humbug), and that its history is riddled with lies, deceit, hoaxes, misinformation, plain nonsense, even arrogance, and the faulty assemblage of statements and fossils, some which are still openly and defiantly propagated despite having been proven (beyond a doubt) to be false. The theory of evolution can be likened to a boat full of holes. Holes that cannot be plugged.

I have discovered (via investigation) that geologically (and including the fossil records) that the evidence overwhelmingly supports a past catastrophic worldwide flood, a young earth, and intelligent design (that being, that a Creator had to be behind it all), all of which fits the biblical record to a T.
(As far as the Christian Bible goes, I have found it to be historically reliable, prophetically accurate, and that its predictions regarding earth’s final hours are right on track. I have also found this Bible to be inspired, life changing, encouraging, instructive, informative, reality based, and its wisdom unsurpassed. And it’s a book that has certainly stood the test of time).
It’s interesting how we’re told by evolutionists that strata took thousands to millions of years to develop, yet in 1980 at Mount St. Helens, over 30 feet of different strata was laid in three hours. It’s also very interesting how buried trees are seen crossing different rock strata that supposedly took those millions of years to develop. The Grand Canyon? Have you seen what a lot of water can do (and given the biblical record)? And so much more could be mentioned.

The theory of evolution automatically rules out personal accountability, deprives one of hope and purpose, and deprives one of a solid and directional foundation. If one doesn’t have a reason for being here, doesn’t have a moral compass, a code to live by, nor believes in a day of reckoning (or somewhat as foolish, believes once saved they’re always saved), there is literally nothing to hold them back from doing and unleashing the unthinkable and shameful. In other words, if we only lived for 70 years, and there was nothing beyond, who would worry about what they did in life? This alone makes the evolution theory untenable, and very dangerous. The evolution theory automatically leads to evil as it propagates (via its very nature) a dog eat dog, survival of the fittest mentality.

The evolution theory simply reduces us all to nothing more than sophisticated monkeys who’ve had a makeover. Why is it that a frog suddenly turning into a prince is called a fairytale, (the equivalent of a monkey suddenly becoming a human), yet a monkey turning into a human over untold years is called evolution? One would have thought that there would have been documented evidence of monkeys in various stages of metamorphosing. Imagine it. At what point would they be considered one of us? Seriously, who would honestly believe such? Funny how monkeys still abound. Didn’t it all happen millions of years ago? Ops! I’ve heard it said that evolution is a fairytale for grownups.

No big bang, nor some miraculous coming together of particles, nor evolutionary process, could account for the beauty, artistry, intricacy, and cleverness that we see in nature, the amazing migration of creatures, the miracle of birth, the complexity of the human body, the high information content of DNA (etc), nor account for the likes of love, compassion, mercy, forgiveness, tender human expressions, morals, standards, principles and so on. And nor are these latter things what beings who derived from nothing would come up with.

There are clearly two forces operating within the universe of which history and the biblical record attest to, (indeed our own experience). Once again, were the evolution theory correct, good would hardly play a part given the dog eat dog, survival of the fittest mentality associated with evolution. In other words, only one force would effectively exist, an evil (watch your back) one. Noble faculties could hardly derive from such a background.

By the way: Evidence clearly shows that mankind and dinosaurs existed at the same time.

The universe (and our own world) is far too ordered, finely tuned, perfectly balanced, and awesome, to have happened by chance.

As far as Christians go, they can’t have it both ways, foolishly coming up with another kind of evolutionary process that one might say bridges the gap (such as theistic evolution — effectively Christian Darwinism; a variation on a theme, or same song but different notes). A God who can instantly heal the sick, the blind, the diseased, grant the breath of life, and raise from the dead, hardly needs to work via any evolutionary process. Given that God can speak things into existence (if we believe Scripture), and that He can speak and things happen, the question could be asked: Why did God take as long as six days to create the earth? It’s intriguing (and surely telling) that there’s no astronomical or natural reason for the seven day weekly cycle — simply the biblical creation account. If each day supposedly represented a long period of time (as some say), why did God (pointing to His Commandments and the creation week) say to keep the seventh day as a Sabbath after His example (bearing in mind that His Commandments were known before Mount Sinai). Could it be that by keeping that particular day (as a memorial) from the creation of earth, that mankind would never forget who the Creator of earth was, nor fall for some humanistic evolutionary theory?
The evolutionary process not only contradicts God’s Word, but it slaps Him in the face and detracts from His power. Either God is who He is or He’s not, either God can do what He says or He can’t. And either His Word can be trusted or it can’t. If we can only believe some of the Bible, why believe the Bible at all? See the danger? And let’s not forget that the New Testament is built on the old. Plus, Christians know (don’t they?) that death and bloodshed came after man’s fall (as a result of sin), not before, (as evolution propagates).

It’s my personal belief that any evolution theory is a devilish substitute for God’s creation act; Satan’s attempt to take the spotlight off God (and subsequent glory); Satan’s attempt to confuse humanity and have them worshiping the creature rather than the Creator; Satan’s attempt to deprive humanity of hope (hence why atheism and evolution are bedfellows); Satan’s attempt to insult God and distort His image by claiming (via evolution) that we came from monkeys; Satan’s attempt to create chaos; and that the distortions we see in nature are the work of this same devil, who has been working ever since his fallout with God to wreck havoc via interfering with the natural process of things, via the manipulation of the likes of DNA, (hence weeds, thorns, fangs, poisonous plants and so on). After all, Satan’s ability is way beyond that of any earthly scientist, chemist, and he’s had thousands of years to tinker.

Above all that I’ve mentioned here, the most compelling argument for me in favour of a living loving Creator God is, that I have personally experienced this God (of the Christian Bible) via answered prayer and providential occurrences that can only have a supernatural explanation and origin — that being, that Someone out there (God, I believe) is responding and operating in such a way that cannot be put down to simply one’s imagination, one’s own making, nor to coincidence or plain delusion.

By the way: It’s my belief that we are witnessing a great (universal) controversy between good and evil that God is allowing to play out (instead of instantly snuffing it out in the first place) in order to help humanity (those saved, and other worlds watching) forever clearly see the result of rejecting what was right and best in the first place, thereby preventing another disaster, and showing how merciful and longsuffering a God He is — that He is not a dictator. Such the saved ones need to see, because a God who creates beings with freedom of choice instead of making them robots (voluntary love is the only love worth having) would hardly in a renewed environment (the coming renewed earth, Rev 21:1-4) change them into robots the second time round. That would be the ultimate contradiction! Yes, He will deal with Satan (an evil angel) and his followers very soon.

Finally, it’s argued that Charles Darwin was an evolutionary racist (drawing from his own words) and that the rise of eugenics was directly related to Darwin’s evolutionary racism. It can certainly be said that Hitler was an evolutionary racist. He was not only an enthusiastic supporter of Darwin’s theory but used evolution as justification for many of his wicked acts. It’s clear that Darwin’s evolutionary theory has provided encouragement for the likes of Marxism, Nazism and Fascism, and that his theory has fuelled the weakened influence of Christianity; widespread violence; the overturning of concepts of human decency and responsibility; and consequently the breakdown of society that we’re witnessing today.
When thoroughly researched, and viewed through the eyes of objectivity, one thing is certainly clear: Darwinism has not been to our advancement, but rather, has not only negatively shaped the course of history, but brought about serious damage to society as a whole. And given Darwin’s background, experiences, surrounding influences, and subsequent path, is it any wonder?

The evolution theory was never fully Charles. There were others proposing such, including his grandfather (Erasmus Darwin, who proposed a theory on evolution in the 1790s which Charles often heard being discussed and at some point obviously swallowed). It appears that Charles may’ve desired the credit for the theory of evolution (credit that he in time did receive) and that he indulged in a considerable degree of plagiarism. Thus, it’s argued that he has been credited with far more than he is due. Not that anyone deserves credit for such a flawed theory — one that offers no hope, provides no purpose, and strips humanity of any nobility. And one that even Darwin expressed serious concerns about himself.

And lets not forget that many scientists do in fact reject the theory of evolution and actually believe in creation (among them, past believers in evolution) — and the number is growing. Yes, scientists who’re not afraid to say that the emperor has no clothes, and sensible enough not to continue following the sheep (who’re fed the evolutionary nonsense from the moment they begin school).

As I said, the theory of evolution is nothing but a theory — one that I strongly refute.

2. 15 Facts Disproving Evolution

This worthwhile Christian article comes from www.Choice-s.com. Any comments by me are in red and bracketed.

1.
It is a law of nature that nothing reproduces anything greater than itself. If this is true of all species today, of which we have millions of examples, then it was true originally. The vast creations of matter and life had to come into existence by a superior power, not an inferior force. One thing is certain: intelligence could not have come from any number of molecules of unintelligence. The most that has ever been done or can possibly be done is to demonstrate the law of improvement of a species through breeding and cultivation. No new species has been or can be produced by such law. If left alone the plants and animals would degenerate, not improve themselves in any degree, as seen in point 7 below. Therefore we must conclude that no amount of unintelligent matter could produce intelligent beings—anything higher than itself. The intelligent and innumerable self-producing creatures—each with its own eternal and consistent traits, distinct flavors, and infinite combinations of chemicals—could never be the product of unintelligent matter. Each one of the millions of creatures that reproduce their own kind by fixed and eternal laws must be the work of an all-powerful and all-wise Creator.
2.
The Bible declares (10 times in Gen. 1) that everything created by God was given power to reproduce its own kind. No one thing could break this law and produce any other kind (Gen. 1: 20-28). 1,660 years later it had not been broken (Gen. 7:14). Now, after more than 6,000 years the law of reproduction is still unbroken. The sponge is still a sponge and has not become an oyster, octopus, turtle, frog, fish, or crab. None of these have ever reproduced anything except their own kind. No lowly earthworm has ever turned into a spider, scorpion, lizard, tortoise, snake, or crocodile. No bug, bird, or animal has ever changed from its own kind or reproduced another kind which was fertile and could produce a new kind. The crossing of an ass and a mare, for instance, will produce a mule which cannot reproduce itself. No monkey has ever produced a man and the missing link is still missing and always will be.
All this is quite remarkable in view of the fact that there are over 2,000,000 different species of plant and animal life. Each species proves the law of reproduction established by God—after his own kind. There are more than 1,000,000 species of insects. Species of beetles number 250,000; butterflies and moths 10,000; shellfish 80,000; snails 80,000; arachnids 60,000; flies 40,000; barnacles, crabs, lobsters, and shrimp 25,000; fish 20,000; bees 10,000; wasps 10,000; worms 9,000; ants 5,000; birds 1,200; and cockroaches 1,000. There are also many species of larger animals, and over 180,000 species of plants. Species of fungi number 100,000; algae 20,000; mosses 20,000; corals 5,000; and sponges 3,000, besides many other species of living things.
All species exist in great variety, and the so-called proofs of evolutionists are merely variations, or minor changes within the same species. Out of billions of living organisms and fossils there is no evidence of the slightest tendency to evolve out of the original kind to which each belongs. There is only evidence of development and normal growth; but these are not evolution. Improvement of a species and new varieties within the species are not evolution. The theory of evolution teaches transmutation a change in nature, substance, form, and alteration of essence by a slow and gradual mutation from one species to another, and from the lower to the higher. This has never been done, nor can it be done. In nature we find endless variety within each species, but no change from one species to another. Without a change of species there can be no evolution. God has made life so that it interbreeds in closely related variations; and when interbreeding is attempted between different kinds of species it is found that there is a gulf which cannot be crossed.
Life multiplies abundantly. One bacterium in 24 hours can produce 281.5 trillion descendants. A fly can lay 500 eggs in a season, each of which can develop into a fly capable of laying 500 eggs of its own. If all eggs hatched and survived the original fly would have enough descendants in 6 months to cover the earth with flies, to a depth of about 50 feet. A common potato bug is capable of producing 60,000 offspring in a season; a single sunfish lays 30,000,000 eggs a season; an oyster 100,000,000; a codfish 10,000,000; a toad 20,000; spiders have 2,000 babies in one cocoon; a loggerhead turtle lays 1,000 eggs at a time; and a pair of meadow mice could produce 1,000,000 offspring in a year. An elm tree produces 1,584,000,000 seeds and a barley seed 18,000 grains. But out of the billions of yearly reproductions of nature, not one monkey's tail has been produced by anything except a monkey. There is no proof of man in various stages from a molecule to a monkey, or from a monkey to a man!
3.
There can be no evolution without the power of reproduction in living things. Since reproduction is a prior condition to evolution, it cannot be a product of it. Hence, we face the logical necessity for the creation of life and its power of continued reproduction. The power of reproduction is not in the embryo, but only in the mature parent. An egg cannot produce an egg. It is also true that the egg is not improvable by itself. Improvement can come only in and through the mature form. Therefore, the parent-form of life must have been created in the beginning to have produced an egg from which offspring alone can come.
4.
Science has proven that dead matter cannot generate life; life can only come from preexisting life. When test tubes were filled with hay and other organic matter, when all life germs were completely destroyed, when the tube was hermetically sealed to exclude outer air, and while it was absolutely free of living germs, not one vestige of life appeared. The attempt to get the living out of the dead completely failed. The theory of spontaneous generation of evolutionists has had to be given up. It is now recognized that life can only come from life. All life is dependent upon other life: the lower upon the higher; the simple upon the complex; the powerless upon the powerful; the impersonal upon the personal; the unintelligent upon the intelligent; the nonexisting upon the existing; the natural upon the spiritual; the temporary upon the eternal. Nothing can come from nothing or be produced by nothing.
5.
The argument of evolution from embryology that embryos of different forms of life are somewhat alike so they must have come from a common ancestor—has utterly failed, as have the theories of natural selection, and the survival of the fittest. The similarity of embryos and their fast development to full growth are contrary to the principles of the evolutionary hypothesis. The chief foundation of evolution is that of a slow and tedious process over millions and millions of years. The evolution teachers have to argue this due to the fact that no single example of evolution from one species to another can be cited. Human and other embryos pass through various stages of growth very rapidly. In some cases growth is miraculously rapid. Thus, evolutionists are forced to believe in miracles, which they deny in other fields but sustain in their own, in the effort to prove their claims. It is now known that there are radical differences between the embryos of vertebrates (backboned animals) and invertebrates (animals without backbones), which would not be if all things had a common ancestor. Some similarity among embryos of all forms of life should be expected, since all start individually from a single life-germ or a combination of two.
If a botanist were asked the difference between an oak, a palm tree, and a lichen, he would declare that they are separated by the broadest line of classification. But if the germs of these plants were placed before him to choose one from the other, he could not do it. Under the most powerful microscope they would yield no clue. If analyzed by the chemist they would still keep their secret. The same is true of the life germ of various animals and man. No one can tell which is which. What makes the little speck grow in the millions of different creatures? What is there which the eye cannot see that determines which of the many creatures it shall be? Only a personal and infinite intelligent Being could make such unfailing laws of reproduction—after his kind.
6.
It is further argued that man and monkey are so similar that they must have come from a common ancestor. This is neither sound logic nor sound science. Resemblance proves nothing but resemblance. Similarity proves nothing but similarity. Resemblance and similarity run throughout all nature in things that have no connection with each other. Resemblance or similarity on some points is to be expected even though we accept creation by God. Such only magnifies the fact of an intelligent operator. This is true whether it is the Creator or a manufacturer in a factory. The wheel is the same in the wagon, car, locomotive, and plane. But such similarity does not prove that the wagon evolved into an automobile, then into a locomotive, and finally into a plane.
All animals and men have the same kind of faculties to breathe, eat food, and perform other bodily functions, but no such similarity proves close relationship. God made them thus so that all could exist alike in the same air and on similar foods. The dissimilarities between man and lower animals not only in body, but also in brain, spirit and soul faculties-prove that they are NOT vitally related. The differences between man and monkey are so wide that any single bodily part is sufficient in itself to prove whether it is a part of man or monkey.
Evolutionists themselves confirm this fact by their promptness in deciding whether a bone is from a monkey or a man. There are hundreds of differences between the bodies of men and apes, and thousands of mental, moral, spiritual, and habitual differences between them which prove evolution of man from apes or lower life impossible.
7.
Degeneration. The similarities between man and lower animals could be used to prove a process of degeneration from man more than a process of evolution to man. The Bible teaches that God made man before He made land animals—on day 6. Therefore, man came first and then the monkey (Gen. 2:7, 19-25). Darwin's argument that plants and animals have within themselves tendencies to vary of their own accord in all directions to an unlimited degree, has been disproved many times. Mendel's experiments prove conclusively that plants and animals, even under man's selective skill in breeding, do not tend to vary in all directions and to an unlimited degree; but that the variations are within strict limits and work according to fixed laws producing unvarying results. The theory of natural selection and of inheritance of acquired characters has failed of proof. The forms of vegetables, plants, and animals that man succeeds in improving by human selection and cultivation revert rapidly to type as soon as man's directing skill is removed. In all man's selection and cultivation he can work only within the limits of the species. No change into new species has been produced either by natural or artificial selection. The iron law of sterility stands guard at the far frontiers of the species and everything continues to reproduce after his kind.
There is a certain potency of development implanted in all things, but such potential powers are led out into actual development or improvement not through resident forces, as evolution teaches, but only through outside intervention and intelligent help. Man can develop the wild rose into the American Beauty, or the wild pony into the Kentucky thoroughbred, by selection, better environment, breeding, etc., but it is most significant that these improvements do not continue to increase, or even persist, when things are left to themselves. The rose reverts to a wild rose if left alone, and the horse begins to go back to its degenerated type once man's skill is omitted.
If one takes a flock of highly developed pigeons, with all their shades of color and variety of markings, and turns them loose in the forest to see if they will improve or degenerate, he will find in a few years that they have all returned to one type. Compelled by an unfailing natural law, all will revert to common colors instead of being a variety with beautiful markings. Improvements brought about by care and selection in breeding will be gone, proving the law of evolution a failure.
The same thing will happen to man. If he neglects himself he will revert to a worse and lower type of man—like those who have been discovered on desert islands or in jungles. If the mind is neglected it will degenerate into imbecility and ignorance. Solitary confinement has the power to unmake men's minds and leave them idiots. If the conscience is neglected it will run off into lawlessness and sin. The soul that is neglected will go into ruin and depravity.
Only 3 possibilities are before us: balance, improvement only to a certain degree, or degeneration. The Bible question is: How shall we escape if we neglect (Heb. 2: 1-4)? These 3 possibilities face every man. He has a desire to better himself and yet he is constantly beset with a gravitation to sin and the law of death working in his very being. We say that nature is full of life, but in reality it is full of death. Plant life and animal life are kept alive by a temporary endowment which gives power over the elements that cause death. Withdraw the elements of life and the true nature will be revealed. Life is merely the suspension of these destructive powers the sum total of the functions that resist death. Spiritual life is the same—the sum total of the functions that resist sin. If we neglect the use of these powers death will result. A man falling 500 ft. is as good as dead the first foot of the fall. So it is with the man who does not properly use the powers to live. One who continues to neglect life is dead. If we neglect, degeneration sets in. If we use the powers of life to resist sin, we live.
To use the argument that savages are more like monkeys than civilized men is no proof of evolution; it is proof of degeneration. Man fell from original sinlessness and the highest degree of intelligence to the present status. Adam had more intelligence the day he was created than all men together have now. He could name all things, and all men today who learn all their lives cannot yet do this (Gen. 2:19).
Degeneration explains the present uncivilized parts of the world, and the so-called cave men-the Peking man, the Heidelberg, the Neanderthal, the Cro-Magnon man and others. All problems between true science and the Bible can be solved by the facts of degeneration.
8.
Fossil remains have been referred to as one of the strongest proofs of evolution. But evolutionists themselves acknowledge that this proof is extremely fragmentary, limited, and obscure due to the fact of only a few fossil remains. Hence, they are forced to guess without proof. The missing links between man and monkey have never been found. The manufactured bones of prehistoric men are fakes. The Piltdown man, for example, was no man at all. The story is that in a gravel pit in Sussex, Eng., near Piltdown Common, 2 or 3 bits of a skull bone, a piece of jawbone, and a tooth were found by different persons in different places in different years. From these few scrapes scientists constructed the Piltdown man and named it the Dawn-man of the dateless past. From the same bones another later type was made by another team of scientists. Finally it was acknowledged that the jawbone and tooth did not belong to the skull, but were those of a chimpanzee. The Java-man was built in Java from a skull bone, leg bone, 2 molars, and plaster-of-Paris; the Heidelberg-man was built in Germany from a jawbone which was unquestionably human; the Peking-man of China was made from human skull, fragments found in a cave, in 1929; the Swanscombe-man of England was made from the back and one side of a woman's skull; the Fontechevade-man of France was made from a part of a skull; the first Neanderthal-man was made from a skull cap in Germany, which one great German pathologist declared to be the cranium of an idiot; the Australopithecus Africanus-man of Africa was made from an ape skull found with a number of other ape skulls and bones in Africa; and the Hesperopithecus Haroldcookii, the Nebraska-man, was made from a single pig tooth said to be 1 million years old. Pictures of these man-made specimens have been the so-called proof shown in school textbooks. Some educators in the name of science are passing such hoaxes upon innocent children!
9.
The old geological scheme to prove evolution has also been repudiated. Instead of the older rocks being found at the bottom and the younger rocks at the top, as would be the case if evolution were true, it is often the opposite. This kills the evolution-theory of natural building up of the strata. Sound science is quickly disproving this old geological scheme proposing that the earth is a gazillion years old (more than say, 10,000 years old – see point 14 below).
10.
The fact of a universal flood (Noah's), can easily explain the fossil remains being where they are. This accounts for fossil remains being found deep in the earth underneath many layers of solid rock. Such things never would have been there without the flood, what it caused, and judgment of God.
It is evident that many fossils came from a great catastrophe, being entombed in the strata instead of being slowly buried by sedimentation over millions of years. We read of whole schools of fish covering large fields which have been found with every indication of a violent and sudden death. They are not in a relaxed position but often with their head twisted around to their tails and every fin extended—the position a fish dies in when overtaken by an enemy or some catastrophe. Historians tell us that the earth has undergone one great and indescribable catastrophe. This happened at Noah's flood or from what it caused.
That the earth was divided in the days of Peleg is clear from Gen. 10:25. Such a shaking up of the entire earth, as well as the flood catastrophe of Noah's time, could have caused fossils to become deeply submerged.
The Arctic regions give clear evidence of a sudden calamity. In their extensive fields of fossilized and frozen mammoths, where multitudes of giant creatures have been found, some were discovered with their stomachs full of undigested food, and some with their mouths full as well. This shows that they were feeding quietly when the crisis came and were destroyed with suddenness. That the Arctic regions had tropical climate when these beasts were destroyed seems true, for they had tropical food in their mouths. Evidently they were frozen immediately when God withheld the sun from shining during Noah's flood [not sure what the author is really getting at here as witholding the sun would hardly cause an immediate effect], and/or what then happened as a result of this event (Gen. 1: 2; Isa. 14: 12-14; Jer. 4: 23-26; Ez. 28: 11-17; Ps. 104: 6-9; 2 Pet. 3: 5-7).
11.
Regarding Noah's flood, God commanded male and female of every species to be kept alive in the ark to replenish the earth after his kind when the flood was over (Gen. 6: 18-22; 7: 2-16). Had the evolutionists been right, this would have been unnecessary. Noah could have merely saved a couple of molecules, turned them loose after the flood, an eventually we could have the innumerable living things again in all their varieties!
12.
If evolution is responsible for all the vast creations in space and the endless varieties of species of life on the innumerable planets, then why is the law not working today? And why do we not have actual and unquestionable examples of the various stages of evolution from the lowest to the highest forms of life? If evolution ever worked, it should be working today so that every form or stage of development could be seen as proof that the lower forms of life will eventually be the higher in the ages to come. Is it not strange that the process has been at a standstill for the period man has been on earth to observe evolution at work? Is it not strange that man has not produced one example of change from one species to another, not even to the losing of the monkey tail and hair? And again, if people evolved from apes, why are there still apes?
13.
There is evidence now that the whole world and all in it are degenerating and moving toward some climax or judgment and re-creation, instead of evolving upward into higher and better forms. In chemistry which is closest to the deeper facts and forces of inanimate matter and life, there is no evidence of a surge upward. Not only are the laws of chemical affinity static and unchangeable as to their operations, but there is a disintegrating tendency downward instead of upward that seems to characterize all matter. The tendency of atoms of high atomic weight to break up into other atoms of lower weight seems to be the universal tendency of all matter. Scientists declare that this is also true in the vegetable and animal kingdoms.
14.
The evolution theory is not only absurd—its so-called proofs are so contradictory that they cause increasing doubt. Tyndal says that the world began in a fire-mist that contracted as it became cold; but Spencer says it was a cold-cloud that became heated and contracted. The age of man is estimated anywhere from 550 million to 6 million years. The age of the earth is estimated anywhere from 10 billion to 10 million years. This proves nothing but the unreliability of data, which is used in the effort to prove diverse conclusions.
15.
The Bible in its entirety condemns the theories of both cosmic and organic evolution. It declares in no uncertain terms that God created all the material and moral creations, the animate and inanimate things, and that He is the first and last cause of all existing universes and the things therein. The Bible declares: God created the heavens and the earth (Gen. 1: 1; Ps. 8: 1-9; 19: 1-7; 102: 25-27; Isa. 45: 18); God created great whales and every living creature (Gen. 1: 20); God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them (Gen. 1: 26-28; 2: 7, 19-25; 5: 1-2; 9: 6); all things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made (Jn. 1: 3); God created all things by Yeshua the Messiah (Jesus Christ) (Eph. 3: 9; Col. 1: 15-18); the upholding of all things by the word of His power (Heb. 1: 3); Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are and were created (Rev. 4: 11).
Jesus the Christ? He didn’t believe in evolution. Jesus said unto them, But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female (Mark 10:6). To argue that the Christian can accept evolution on the grounds that the Bible is not to be taken literally, is a surrender to the foes of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the Bible, and all Christian teachings. The theory therefore is anti-God, anti-Christ, anti-Bible, anti-Christian, and anti-intelligence.