Let’s Talk About Evolution
*Albert Einstein’s chauffeur - “Science without religion is lame,
religion without science is blind.”
Genesis 1:1-10 NAS *Pray – the glory of God is to conceal a matter
but the glory of kings is to search them out. We are not concerned
about agendas but only the truth. We should never be afraid of
scholarship, all truth is God’s truth, nor should we be intimidated by it.
It’s very important that we make a distinction between facts about the
earth that scientists have uncovered and the worldviews those
scientists have.
I.
What facts have been proven by science?
a. Microevolution. Examples of microevolution or variation
within a species today. *Bacteria naturally develop
resistance to antibiotics, and insect pests become
resistant to insecticides, because of the survival of
mutant forms possessing the advantage of resistance.
The DNA in the bacteria and insects include a wide
enough range so that a favorable change in a hostile
climate will be reproduced, and produce a whole
population with that attribute. This is microevolution
because a new species is not created but only a
change within a current species.
b. The age of the earth. The idea that the earth is old is
undisputed in the scientific community except by people
of faith who interpret the Bible to say that the earth is
only 6,000 years old.
i. Cuvier – Father of paleontology
observed catastrophes in the fossil record
leading to extinctions of animals no longer on the
earth.
ii. The light from the farthest star in the Milky Way
gallery takes 60,000 years to get to earth. Some
star’s light in far away galleries take 100 million
years to shine on the earth.
iii. The United States Department of the Interior
Branch of Isotope Geology gives the five main
reasons that science believes the earth is old
based on the radiometric dating of minerals in
rocks. *Young earth creation scientists have
fought a courageous fight for the Bible – and if
they are right the rest of the scientific community
is just wrong. *This is the fight the evolutionists
want to have. Some Intelligent Design leaders
were saddened that Ken Ham spent his time
defending a young earth instead of exposing the
problems with evolution.
c. Is macroevolution simply microevolution over a long
period of time? Evolutionists claim that macroevolution
(one species evolving out of another) is microevolution
over a very long time and are very dogmatic about it.
II.
Three scientific challenges to macroevolution.
a. The lack of transitional fossils. *Difficulty is that you
can’t do an experiment so you end up, as you do in a
court of law, looking for eyewitnesses. The only
geological witnesses we have are fossils. *If evolution is
true then it has to show up in the fossils.
i. Cuvier and Lamarke.
ii. Darwin himself understood this. In 1859 Darwin
proposed a theory even though he knew that it
was contradictory to the fossil record. “Why then
is not every geological formation and every
stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology
assuredly does not reveal any such finely
graduated organic chain; and this perhaps, is the
most obvious and gravest objection which can
be argued against my theory.” (280) *All
geologists were against the theory. His solution
was two fold:1. Fossils are rare to start with.
2.We haven’t dug into the fossil record enough –
it will reveal links as we dig more. *Good science
– testable theory.
iii. Stephen Jay Gould – 2001 named by the Library
of Congress as one of 83 living legends,
professor of geology at Harvard and the leading
voice for evolution for 40 years until his death in
2002. In 1972 he and his partner made a new
theory – he passionately defended his theory
again in “The Structure of Evolutionary Theory”
in 2002 before he died. After 140 years of
searching the fossil record he maintained that
two things are mainly observed: 1. Sudden
appearance - species appear all at once, and are
fully formed. 2. Stasis - species exhibit no
directional change but stay the same once they
appear until they disappear from the fossil
record. He says that the lack of fossils showing a
progression of evolution is “the most puzzling
fact of the fossil record.” He wrote that “the
extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil
record is the trade secret of paleontology.” *Niles
Eldredge his associate agrees with Gould by
stating further: “We paleontologists have said
that the history of life supposes the story of
gradual adaptive change, all the while really
knowing that it does not.” *There are over 60
million fossils in the British Museum of Natural
History and not one of them is a portrayed as a
true transitional fossil. Colin Paterson, Senior
Paleontologist in response to why he didn’t post
any pictures of transitions – “I fully agree with
your comments on the lack of direct illustration of
evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of
any (transitions), fossil or living, I would certainly
have included them. You suggest that an artist
should be used to visualize such
transformations, but where would he get the
information from? I could not, honestly, provide
it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license,
would that not mislead the reader? Gradualism
is a concept I believe in, not just because of
Darwin’s authority, but because my
understanding of genetics seems to demand it.
Yet Gould and the American Museum people are
hard to contradict when they say there are no
transitional forms.”
www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i4/fossil
s.asp *Archeopteryx and the Duckbilled Platypus
– missing links aren’t needed but chains. For
every beaver fossil should be 10,000 almost
beavers.
b. The difficulty of reproduction. “The amazing complex,
radically different, yet complimentary reproductive
systems of the male and female must have completely
and independently evolved at each stage at about the
same time and place. Just a slight incompleteness in
only one of the two would make both reproductive
systems useless, and the organism would become
extinct.” *George at the Museum of Geology. Faith, not
science.
c. The difficulty of DNA. Video. Natural Selection explains
the survival of the fittest but doesn’t explain the arrival
of the fittest. *Panspermia *Antony Flew “What I think
the DNA material has done is show that intelligence
must have been involved in getting these extraordinarily
diverse elements together. The enormous complexity
by which the results were achieved look to me like the
work of intelligence.”
III.
How do we reconcile the Bible and science?
a. Young Earth theory.
i. All of creation including heaven, the angels, and
earth happened in 144 hours approximately
6,000 years ago. The majority of modern
scientists who believe in an old earth are wrong.
Each of the radiation based dating techniques
(Mainly C-14 for fossils of things recently alive;
and Potassium Argon and Uranium Lead for
minerals in rocks that can date much longer
times) assume a steady, unchanging rate of
radiation and radiation loss in the past. A worldwide flood changed the atmosphere of this earth
dramatically as water broke forth in volcanic
eruptions from below, and by the rain above,
creating a whole new biosphere and most of the
fossils we have today.
ii. They would argue that the Geological Chart of
the ages is a myth made up with evolution in
mind. The geologic column is not a neat orderly
thing, but varies depending on where you test it.
Even the order that is suggested, and found in
many places in the earth (Up to 1/3 of the earth
more or less reveals the column), could simply
reflect the way things settled during the flood.
Plants on the bottom, fish and birds second,
animals swimming and running to higher places
third, and humans floating on things and using
survival techniques on top. *Cites evidence for a
world-wide flood. Trees through layers of rock.
iii. One of the main scriptures young earth people
use to support their position is Exodus 20:11:
“For in six days the Lord made the heavens and
the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and
rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord
blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” First
heaven – our atmosphere; Second heaven –
outer space; third heaven – paradise.
iv. Difficulties:
1. Scientifically – old earth – Ken Ham in the
debate admitted there is no evidence that
could convince him the earth is old.
2. Scripturally - Their position maintains that
Satan and a third of the angels fell
somewhere between day seven and the
time Adam and Eve fell from grace, yet
Jesus said that Satan was “a murderer
from the beginning.” (John 8:44)
3. Asah – to do, make, or work – not create
– he made a heaven and an earth but
they weren’t the original ones that already
existed before the six days of Genesis 1.
4. They insist that yom is a 24 hour period
but don’t believe the sun was created until
day four. Why would that day be limited if
it’s not a solar day?
v. I appreciate greatly the work of Creation
Scientists and the bold stand they’ve taken on
the authority of scripture. However, I feel that
when they are dogmatic about a young earth
they are divisive to the body of Christ. Henry
Morris’ statement that “If the old earth is true,
then Christianity is not true..” (Henry Morris,
“Science, Scripture, and Salvation” radio
broadcast, November 14, 1999) I find ridiculous.
If the earth really is old then Henry Morris’
interpretation of the Bible is wrong, it takes
nothing away from the claims of Christ. *Ken
Ham on John Ankerberg debating Hugh Ross.
b. Day Age Theory.
i. This view states that what Moses saw were God
sized days and not 24 hour periods. The word
Yom is used both for 24 hour periods and
extended periods of time as in Genesis 2:4, or in
talking about “the day of the Lord” or “the day of
salvation.” The days are not solar days because
the sun was not even created until the fourth
day. Some things could not easily be done in
one day because they were done in time by
man. *Specifically, the naming of all the animals
by Adam.
ii. The “geologic column” seems to show that plants
came first; followed by fish and birds; followed by
animals; and then most recently, by mankind.
This is the exact order God gives them,
reconciling the Biblical record to science. Hugh
Ross, an astrophysicist, has a whole ministry
called “Reasons to Believe” based on a nonevolutionary, old earth view of things. God
created a little at a time and many things He
made went extinct just like the fossil record
shows. Adam and Eve are real people.
iii. Some believe in theistic evolution *Catholics,
Intervarsity published The Language of God,
Blackhawk recently had a conference that
embraced this position. God in His infinite
wisdom that transcends human understanding,
set up a natural process which He foreknew
would lead to life and eventually to mankind. He
created life (no need for Panspermia) and He set
in place the laws of natural selection that Darwin
observed. Genesis 1-2 are in the genre of story.
iv. Difficulties:
1. Although the word “yom” can mean a 24
hour period or a long period of time in
scripture, in the context of Genesis 1 it is
accompanied by the phrase, “And there
was evening, and there was morning...”,
which seems to limit it to a solar day.
2. It says in Genesis 1:30 that God gave
“every green plant for food” to “everything
that has the breath of life in it.” *Animals
were not eating each other before the
curse came on the earth, yet this position
believes God used death and even
extinctions in the creation process.
3. Romans 5:12 says: “Therefore, just as sin
entered the world through one man, and
death through sin, and in this way death
came to all men, because all sinned.”
*Hugh Ross would argue that this is only
mankind, but my response would be that
the curse followed mankind.
c. Gap Theory.
i. There is a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2
during which Lucifer was judged on earth before
the six days. Satan was already here and he
was already evil. The Bible seems pretty straight
forward until Genesis 3:1. In the beginning God
created everything and He had called everything
very good, and then something entirely
unexpected happens: In this world that God had
made “very good” we find an unaccounted for
evil presence. We have no explanation for his
existence, he is just there speaking through a
serpent. When we go to the New Testament we
see Jesus dealing regularly with Satan and his
demons, but we are still given no explanation of
his origin except that he was “a murderer from
the beginning.” (John 8:44) To believe that he
was a murderer from his beginning is to believe
that God created him evil, which would make
God the author of evil which is impossible. So
Jesus can only mean that he was a murderer
from our beginning. He was already evil when
God made Adam and Eve, and thus, was
already on the earth in Genesis 3 when he
dialogued with Eve. Yet we have scriptural
evidence that he was on earth as Lucifer, perfect
in all his ways, an anointed cherub, with a throne
before he fell. (Isaiah 14:12-14; Ezekiel 28:1217) *The Bible indicates there have been two
major falls in history but it only tells the story of
one of them – man’s.
ii. “Was” in verse 2 can be translated “became.”
The only clue we have before Genesis 3 about a
fall is in Genesis 1:2 where it states that after
God created the earth, it “was” void and without
form. The word “was” is the Hebrew word
“hayah” and is translated “became” in 67 other
places. Did God originally create the world “void
and without form” or did it become that way after
Lucifer’s fall? The Hebrew scholars who
translated the New International Version put an
asterisk next to “was” in Genesis 1:2. If you go to
the bottom of the page you will see this note: “or
possibly became.” The greatest Hebrew
Christian scholars from every denomination felt
like “hayah” could be translated either way. I
believe that the correct translation, given the
context, should be “became”. “In the beginning
God created the heavens and the earth and the
earth became formless and void.”
iii. The words used to describe the state of the earth
are used elsewhere to tell of the result of a
judgment on rebellion. The Hebrew words for
“formless and void” are “tohu va bohu.” These
two words are used together in only two other
places. Once in Isaiah 34:11, where God is
describing a devastating judgment that is coming
on Edom; and once in Jeremiah 4:22-23 where
He is describing desolating judgment that will
come on Israelites who have been in rebellion.
Two of the uses describe certain and complete
judgment, is it possible that its third use in
Genesis 1:2 is describing the same?
iv. Why is the earth covered with water when God’s
definition of earth is dry land? In verses 9-10
when God gathers the waters together and dry
land appears, He calls the dry land “earth”.
God’s own definition of earth is “dry land,” not
land that’s covered with water. Doesn’t it make
sense that the “earth” He created in verse one
was dry land? And that it must have been
flooded with water at a later time?
v. Even as God moved water to reveal land; He
moved clouds on day four to reveal stars, sun,
and moon in verse 16. Job 38:4;9 “Where were
you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Tell
Me if you have understanding… when I made a
cloud its garment and thick darkness its
swaddling band…”
1. Darkness is only on the face of the earth
in verse two.
2. The sun was there from verse one or how
could have there been morning and
evening on the first day?
3. Asah – can also be translated “bring
forth.” God brought forth the sun and the
moon and the stars on day four by
completely removing the cloud cover.
Gorman Gray “Then God brought forth
two great lights, the greater light to
illumine the day and lesser light to illumine
the night…” *Asah is most frequently
translated “do” but is translated 74
different ways in the KJV.
vi. Difficulties – We don’t know much about the
original creation or the fall of Lucifer and have to
learn from geology that there even was an
ancient earth. We lose some control to explain.
IV.
How does the geologic record reconcile with the Gap
Theory?
a. Catastrophism vs uniformitarianism. Cuvier vs Lyell.
i. Catastrophes would ruin evolutions gains. Gould
about Lyell: “To circumvent the literal
appearance of geologic catastrophes, Lyell
imposed his imagination upon the evidence.
‘The geologic record,’ he (meaning Lyell) argued,
‘is extremely imperfect and we must interpolate
into it what we can reasonably infer but cannot
see.’” (Ever Since Darwin, 150) *Interpolate –
We can’t see it but it makes sense. There is no
cut and dried geologic column. It’s all based on
assumptions.
ii. Gould – “I know of no greater irony in the history
of science than the inverted posthumous
reputations awarded to Lyell and (Cuvier) for
their supposed positions on objectivism in
science.” (486)
iii. Gould - “Yet Darwin’s defense was so
successful that it led to over a century of no
research on mass extinctions. Merely to suggest
catastrophe was apostasy.” (1303) *Alvarez
changed that.
b. Meeting with a professor on campus - Basic agreed
upon facts:
i. The Pleistocene age or ice age ended recently –
In the last 10,000 years.
ii. There were mass extinctions at the end of the
Pleistocene age and the mystery of
disharmonious associations. “Ice Age fossils
often display a strange mix of animals that would
not be expected to co-exist. Remains of animals
adapted to the cold are found much farther south
than expected. Warmth-loving animals are found
as fossils much farther north than they would
venture today. Yet, they apparently thrived in the
Ice Age environment. This peculiar mixture of
animals has been given a special name —
disharmonious associations. Disharmonious
associations have garnered much controversy.
Although difficult to explain, most scientists have
now accepted that the disharmonious
associations during the Ice Age are real. The
reason for the dilemma is that an Ice Age climate
is assumed to have been much colder than
present-day climates. However, the evidence
from the Ice Age fossils instead implies an
equable climate with mild winters and cool
summers. It is difficult enough to accept that
animals, as well as plants and insects, were
disharmonious during the Ice Age. But scientists
also are faced with explaining why this mix of
animals came to an abrupt end with mass
extinctions at the close of the Ice Age — at a
time the climate was supposed to be warming
and the living area expanding. In North America
alone, 135 species in 33 genera of large
mammals disappeared. Twenty-two genera of
birds went extinct from North America at the end
of the Ice Age. Other continents were hit hard
with extinctions during and soon after the Ice
Age, including South America and Australia. In
all, 167 genera of large mammals greater than
100 pounds (45 kg) disappeared from entire
continents. Why?” What the professor said
about the disharmonious associations. One
account: Alaska – Hibben 1946 “The evidence of
the violence of nature combined with the stench
of rotting carcasses was staggering. The ice
fields containing these remains stretched for
hundreds of miles in every direction. Trees and
animals, layers of peat and mosses, twisted and
mangled together like some giant mixer had
jumbled them some 10,000 years ago, and then
froze them into a solid mass. (Sanderson 1960)
The evidence immediately suggests an
enormous tidal wave which raged over the land,
tumbling animals and vegetation within its mass,
which was then quick-frozen.”
www.atlantisquest.com/Paleontology.html)
iii. There was a time (up to three thousand years) of
a more equable climate on earth (warmer in the
poles and with increased moisture in the deserts)
than we have today called the “Holocene Climate
Optimum.” No one knows why or how it ended.
iv. We are now living in the Holocene age.
c. Current theory - The extinctions occurred when things
warmed up partly due to the climate change and partly
due to the increased human population that was
hunting large animals.
d. Problems with the current theory.
i. It doesn’t explain why vegetation did not
decompose in the mouths of mammoths.
ii. It doesn’t explain why warm weather creatures
were all around the mammoths in Siberia and
Alaska.
iii. It doesn’t explain how mammoths survived
without the glands of today’s arctic animals.
iv. It doesn’t explain how they survived alongside a
number of other large animals with so little food
supply when elephants today need three
hundred pounds of food every day.
e. A more plausible theory.
i. The Pleistocene age ended when God recreated
the world less than 10,000 years ago. He
created a whole new set of animals and placed
them in a moist, greenhouse like climate we call
the Holocene Climate Optimum.
ii. After a few thousand years God judged the earth
with a world-wide flood which removed some of
the moisture in the air leading to a world of
extreme temperatures – cold on the poles and
hot in the deserts. We moved from the Optimum
to the Holocene age.
iii. Mammoths and other animals were killed in the
flood waters, buried in mud and then quickly
froze in the change of climate.
iv. Carbon 14 dating can only be independently
verified up to 5,000 years. If the atmosphere
before that time has a different C14/C12 ratio, all
efforts of dating man and animals would be off.
There would have been more C14 in the air and
less on the earth in a greater greenhouse, so all
animals and humans that died in the flood
appear much older than they are because the
ratio was different.
v. His response: “What you have is a theory and
it’s as good as any other I’ve heard.”