The New Lexicon Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language definition of the word evolution is... “the theory that all living things have changed in response to environmental conditions by the natural selection of randomly occurring mutations, developing from the simplest forms to complex forms which are more prolific and stronger, due to their better adaptation to their environment...”
It also defines the word theory as... “an organized body of ideas as to the truth of something, usually derived from the study of a number of facts relating to it, but sometimes entirely a result of exercising the speculative imagination...”
Now ladies and gentlemen, the facts are that evolution is nothing more than a theory. Yet, so many people treat the theory of evolution as a truth. They base their lives on this theory as if it were a science. I believe the reason for this is that they do not want to come under the authority of Jesus Christ.
When people reject the Scriptures and favor the theory of evolution, they can live the way they choose instead of the way God commands. Evolution then becomes the foundation on which humanism is built and flourishes. Once a person or society accepts evolution, they can now choose morality based on their own opinions. Consequently, abortion, fornication, adultery, homo- sexuality, co-habitation, other religions, etc., have justification to thrive in society. When one accepts the theory of evolution in place of creationism, then one has a license for evil values and behaviors to be taught, tolerated and flaunted without any guilt.
A person can live as an intelligent animal instead of a human being accountable to a higher authority. Humanists use the demonically inspired theory of evolution to attack the credibility and authority of creationism.
The following is taken from S. F. Fleming’s book, "Gate Breakers":
"VI. WHAT ARE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS WITH THE THEORY 0F EVOLUTION?
A. The Problem of Spontaneous Generation
This theory teaches that life somehow came from non-living matter. In Fast Facts on False Teachings, Carlson and Decker explain the evolutionists believe “that some 3.5 billion years ago there was a large inorganic soup of nitrogen, ammonia, salts, and carbon dioxide bubbling away. Out of this noxious caldron arose the first single-cell alga.
One problem is that Biogenesis (life comes only from life) is a basic axiom of biology and is taught as fact to biology students. This completely contradicts spontaneous generation and supports the concept of everything yielding seed and fruit after its own kind as presented in the first chapter of Genesis.
Another problem for spontaneous generation is that it has been disproved by eminent scientists, time and time again, starting with Louis Pasteur. Scientists have tried to create life in test tubes many times. Dr. Stanley Miller and Dr. Sidney Fox tried, but the most that they have accomplished was combining some atoms to form amino acids, which are the simplest compound units out of which proteins can he assembled.
However, this did not strengthen their case for spontaneous generation but weakened it because 'The mixture of amino acids and other simple chemicals [were] not right for producing life. 'There are some combinations of amino acids that will build life and some that will destroy it. These were the latter.
The odds of scientists actually constructing a full DNA molecule from non- living matter in a test tube are literally astronomical, but if they did— what would it prove?—only that life was created in a supervised, highly organized laboratory by an intelligent being.
B. The Problem of Reproduction
There is in every cell of plants, animals, and humans a complex metabolic motor. This enables the cell to draw or extract energy from its surrounding environment in order to give enough energy for the reproduction of the cell and other functions. This metabolic motor is required for life to exist and reproduce. Since there was no metabolic motor present, it would have been impossible for the non-living “inorganic soup” that the evolutionists propose to create life. Also, DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) could only be spawned by life containing DNA and every living thing must have DNA.
C. The Problem of Probability
The probability of life arising from non-life and then upgrading through evolution is so slight that evolutionists have turned creationists after studying it themselves. The following give some kind of idea of the chances:
1) One chemist calculated the chances of amino acids combining in the necessary arrangement by coincidence to be 1 against 10 with 67 zeros, and this, he said, would need to be in an ideal atmosphere, with an ideal mixture of chemicals, and with 100 billion years.
2) Sir Fred Hoyle, English astronomer and professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University, compared the probability the same as a tornado whipping through a junk yard and creating a Boeing 747 from the junk. Furthermore, he said, “The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 noughts after it ...It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of Evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other.”
D. The Problem of the Second Law of Thermodynamics
All energy and matter are governed by the physical laws of thermodynamics. The Second Law states that everything in the universe slowly runs out of energy and disorganizes. It tends towards chaos and breakdown.
The idea of things going from new to old or from complex to disorganized is clearly seen in life. Cars rust, wood rots, buildings fall down, hair falls out, rooms get messy, people die, and no genuine perpetual motion machine keeps going indefinitely. Everything loses energy at a gradual rate. This is called entropy. The problem the theory of evolution has with this, is that evolution is built upon the assumption that chaos turns into order, that basic life forms move in an upward progression into complex life forms.
E. The Problem of the Fossil Record
Darwin told us that evolution was a slow, gradual change which the fossil record would eventually prove with millions of transitional forms. However, after more than a hundred years of digging and countless numbers of fossils unearthed, the fossil record bears practically nothing. The best that evolutionists have come up with (actually the only thing) is Archaeopteryx which they claim is the transitional intermediate of a reptile changing into a bird. It did have teeth and claws like a reptile and wings and feathers like a bird, but no transition was taking place. All of these things were fully formed. Dr. Henry Morris makes the following statement regarding the fossil record:
"Now even if we take the geological ages at face value, all the way from the Cambrian period of the Paleozoic era to the Pleistocene epoch of the Cenozoic era, the remarkable fact is that there is still not the slightest evidence for evolution in the fossil record. That is out of all the billions of fossils known and documented in the rocks of the earth’s crust—fossils in tremendous variety, representing both extinct and living kinds—there is not a single true transitional evolutionary form that has yet been excavated anywhere in the world."
VII. WHAT ARE THE PROBLEMS WITH THE MISSING LINKS—APE MEN?
A few bones found in India created for some evolutionists the missing link in man’s climb from an ape. The specimen was named after Rama, one of the Indian gods. Someone’s wild imagination created an entire Ramapithecus walking upright from only jaws and teeth. Millions of textbooks crowned it the missing link. Convinced that it was of human ancestry, paleoanthropologist David Pilbeam of Harvard University promoted it for years on the flimsiest fossil evidence.
Finally, in the late 1970’s Pilbeam came to the shocking realization that the specimen was that of an extinct ape and not that of a man. It was not the missing link.
(southern ape) africanus, robustus, and afarensis. The best known of these is afarensis, affectionately known as “Lucy,” a three-foot tall australopithecine found by Don Johanson in Ethiopia in 1974. Lucy is assumed to be three million years old by evolutionists and considered by many of them the missing link. However, various evolutionist including the famous, Richard Leakey, have concluded that there is no good evidence that Lucy was the missing link. Many eminent evolutionists believe Australopithecus are just another group of extinct apes. Also, it has been discovered that the modern pygmy chimpanzee (Pan paniscus) is remarkably similar to the skeletal remains of Australopithecus casting serious doubt on the age factor or missing link theory. Indeed, one of England’s top scientists, Lord Zuckerman (an evolutionist) carried out a number of examinations, tests and measurements on these australopithecine bones. His research team concluded that they were not related to man, did not walk upright, and were more like the orangutan than any other living animal. Lord Zuckerman himself had the following to say about the evidence for human evolution...'[ If man] evolved from some ape-like creature...[it was] without leaving any fossil traces of the steps of the transformation.'
C. Homo Habilis
(Handy Man). Some evolutionists still stick to their theories that Australopithecus evolved into Homo Habilis, who evolved into Homo Erectus, who evolved into Homo sapiens and modern man. The absurdity in this is that even according to their own reckonings, Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, and Homo sapiens existed at the same time. This means no evolution because there was no transition from one to the other. Another difficulty for evolutionists to explain is that H. Habilis is only half as tall as H. Erectus.
Louis and Mary Leakey brought to light another confusing issue that they found “primitive” Oldowan-type tools with a group of H. Habilis thought to be 2 million years old but then found the same tools in Kanapoi Valley, northern Kenya of very recent origin. This throws great doubt upon the age. The crushing blow to H. Habilis, however, is that bones of modern man have been found alongside the H. Habilis showing that evolutionists have been mixing human with monkey bones. A current theory now is that H. Habilis is another extinct type of ape or chimp.
D. Homo Erectus
(erect man). Some evolutionists hold that this was the precursor to modern man, but even among evolutionists there is much controversy because much of what has been discovered simply shows it to be modern man. H. Erectus has been found with tools, the use of fire, and understanding of burial or cremation. One scientific Creationist, Marvin L. Lubenow in his book Bones of Contention: A Creationist Assessment of Human Fossils writes, “the differences between Homo Erectus and Homo sapiens are not the result of evolution but instead represent genetic variation within one species.”
Two of the most famous cases are as follows. “Peking Man” was supposedly a missing link. Skulls and teeth found in China were described and then mysteriously lost. What was not publicized, however, was that evidence of ten humans, fire, and tools were discovered at the same site. Circumstantial evidence indicates the men to be hunters who brought ape skulls to the site to eat. ‘Java Man’ discovered by Eugene Dubois and propounded as the missing link. Later, it was found to be a modern-type human leg bone along with a very apelike skull cap. A whole group of evolutionist scientists on the Selenka-Trinil Expedition in 1907 studied the area located by Dubois. They concluded that Java man was not related to modern man. Apparently, even Dubois eventually said the same.
E. Nebraska Man
Supposedly the genuine missing link and the evidence used against creationists at the famous Scopes “Monkey Trial.” A vivid reconstruction was commissioned of Nebraska man based on a single tooth and a few tools. Eventually, it was found that the tooth was not that of ancient man, but a wild pig.
F. Piltdown Man
Based on skull fragment found in a gravel pit at Piltdown, East Sussex, England. For forty years it was held up as classic proof of evolution. Then it was discovered that the whole thing was a fraud based upon altered orangutan bones mixed with human ones.
G. Neanderthal Man
The classic textbook example of Neanderthal sends pictures of primitive man through our minds. Evolutionist like to add grotesque features based upon very few bone fragments and speculation. In actuality, it appears that Neanderthal was simple l00 percent human, perhaps suffering from the disease of rickets. This information has been available from the beginning when in 1872 Rudolf Virchow, a professor of pathology at the University of Berlin, discoverer of embolism and leukemia, “published a carefully argued and factual diagnosis that the original Neanderthal had been a normal human who suffered from rickets in childhood and arthritis in adulthood.”
The evolutionists did not want to regard Virchow’s analysis because he questioned Darwin’s theory to begin with. Today further evidence by Francis Ivanhoe is showing Neanderthal people as a group to be those who suffered from rickets. However, evolutionists are still not regarding this information. Dr. Lyall Watson made an interesting observation regarding the actual number of bones that might be considered legitimate examples of the evolution process. He said: “The fossils that decorate our family tree are so scarce that there are still more scientists than specimens. The remarkable fact is that all the physical evidence we have for human evolution can still be placed, with room to spare, inside a single coffin.” Fleming, S. F. (1998), Gate Breakers: Answering cults and world religions with prayer, love and witnessing. Washington: Selah.
The abominations, curses, sins and plagues classified as pornography, fornication, adultery, homosexuality, lesbianism, abortion, euthanasia, racism, etc., are all built on the foundation of evolution. Reject evolution and one must come under the authority of Jesus Christ; thus, the Holy Scriptures, which condemn these life choices. I have just pointed out to a limited degree, the absurdity of believing in the theory of evolution. To do so, one must throw out all the solid and scientific evidence that shreds the theory of evolution into a baseless and hopeless myth. The following story illustrates the utter stupidity of evolution: A teacher admits to her class that she is an atheist. She asks the children if they are atheists, too. Not wanting to be different than their teacher, they all raise their hands into the air except a little girl named Melita. The teacher asks her why she has decided not to be an atheist. Melita answers that because her parents are Christians, they raised her as a Christian and she has decided now, on her own, to be a Christian. The teacher is now angry and red in the face. “That is no reason,” screams the teacher. “What if your Dad was a moron, and your Mom was a moron? What would you be then?” asks the teacher. Melita waits a moment, smiles and answers, “Well, then I would be an atheist.”
Rev. Dr. M.L. Johnson wrote in his book, “Overcoming Racism Through the Gospel”; "...if the man-inspired theory of the origin of the universe was truthfully judged according to the standards of the scientific world which has established its own laws of probability in mathematics and science, evolution would be impossible! The probability of atoms and molecules falling into place to form just one simple protein molecule is 1 in 10113, or 1 followed by 113 zeros. That number is larger than the estimated total number of atoms in the universe! Mathematicians dismiss as never taking place anything that has a probability of occurring of less than 1 in 1050. But far more than one simple protein molecule is needed for life. Some 2,000 different proteins are needed just for a cell to maintain its activity, and the chance that all of them will occur at random is 1 in 1040,000! Good math will always beat bad science, but in spite of these scientifically-established odds, evolutionists reject mathematics through faith and embrace the improbable...Evolution has no more right to public consumption than any other religion. It is a system unprovable. Dr. H.S. Lipson, professor of physics at the University of Manchester in England comments, ‘In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to ‘bend’ their observations to fit in with it.’...Famous British biologist L. Harrison Mathews adds, ‘The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory—is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to the belief in special creation... "
"When evolutionists look at fossilized plants and animals, they assume automatically in terms of millions of years. When a Creationist views that same fossil, much of what he sees is based upon the result of the Great Flood as recorded in the Bible, and referenced in over 200 civilizations throughout the world! The greatest difference is that because of censorship, you only see the atheistic evolutionary view. One issue is what might be called circular reasoning, where the dating process of both rocks and organic fossils is based upon on another’s interdependent age. American paleontologist Dr. Niles Eldredge, one who is often found in high school biology text books says, ‘And this poses something of a problem: if we paleontologists date the rocks by their fossils, how can we turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossil record? This was a confession by one of the world’s leading paleontologists!" (Pgs. 197-198)
Yes, that is about the gist of it! Evolution is so discredited and utterly unbelievable. It is so unscientific that one has to throw out all reason and common sense to believe in such utter philosophical nonsense. Romans 1:18-32 explains to us clearly why people believe such foolish fables, ideas and theories.
© 2009 World Ministries International