Evolution and Faith

Some people have wrongly interpreted Darwin’s Theory to mean that life and the universe have come about without God. In a strange way this sometimes becomes their proof that there is no God. Believing there is no God to answer to some people have seized this as a licence to live their lives devoid of a sense of accountability. It is natural not to like being held to account and this bent gives a head start to endorsing reasons not to accept the need to.
Many people have never really properly investigated what is claimed to be known about the origin of their lives. Some (not by any means all of them) slip into immorality and reckless living because they infer from the evolution belief that life is accidental and there is no meaning or purpose. Often some of the people who feel aimless abandon morality and instead seek out only the pleasures that can be squeezed out of this world to maximise what they feel is an accidental, temporal, meaningless existence. These people ultimately and invariably find they that they are not fulfilled. The meaning of life eludes them. It really is time to think again. Decline in the quality of society and personal life is linked to godless and meaningless attitudes. Some people have a false confidence because the present alleged majority vote in western society seems to endorse our origins as being without God. However History has repeatedly demonstrated that the majority vote is not an evidence of truth. Sometimes this is only evidence that people like to be accepted as not being different. It is time to think again and time to think harder and deeper. What is the evidence for Evolution? What is the evidence for God?  Assumptions can lead us down to disastrous conclusions. We must seek and find truth in order to live our one life outside of delusion. There are no re-runs if we get it wrong.


Many people seem to accept that Evolution is a fact of life. Evolution is not a fact. Evolution is a theory (i.e. it is a belief.)
A FACT is something which is definitely true. A fact is something which has definitely happened for which there is overwhelming evidence. Some people think that “the scientists” have this overwhelming evidence which we are not clever enough to understand. Put simply, they put their “faith” in the scientists.

There are two main problems here:                                                                                                             
1) Scientists do not have overwhelming, conclusive evidence.                         2)  A growing number of scientists openly state that they no longer believe in evolution. This dissent is because results of scientific knowledge and discovery into the 21st century are throwing up more and more barriers to accepting the evolution belief.
Large numbers of people from all walks of life, including Christianity, readily accept the plausibility of the theory of evolution. It is not a massive threat to Christians to believe this theory because they can interpret evolving changes as being God directed. Non-believers in God have bigger problems answering the question “Why do things evolve?” Evolution cannot and does not explain the origin of matter or the universe. How can something come from nothing? How can the universe expand to infinity? How can infinity exist? We must conclude that “impossible” is “possible” even in our natural thinking about our universe. Natural thinking tries to contain things within natural boundaries.
We accept that our thinking is unable to deal with the big questions of our universe.  As we ponder this the question that also rises is:      
           “Why shouldn’t there be a God beyond our understanding?”
Despite school textbooks, TV computer animations, artist drawings and
wild-life documentary programme statements presenting evolution basically
as a done deal a growing number of thinking people are actually questioning evolution as the explanation of life. There are many, many questions which truthfully cannot be answered by the evolution theory.
Those who have read Darwin’s theory may know that certain factual knowledge which now exists confirm statements which Darwin said would disprove his theory. E.g. Darwin, in his day, made statements about simple organisms. They were assumed to be simple. He inferred that if they were found to be complex this would disprove his theory. Use of modern scientific technology has found that even bacteria are not simple. The so-called "bacterial flagellum" is what propels a bacterium through its microscopic world. The bacterial flagellum consists of about 40 different protein parts, including a stator, rotor, drive shaft, U-joint, and propeller. Through 21st century magnification technology, we now understand that a simple bacterium has a microscopic outboard motor! The individual parts come into focus when magnified 50,000 times using electron micrographs. These microscopic motors can run at 100,000 rpm. Nevertheless, they can stop on a microscopic one-pence piece. In fact, it takes only a quarter turn for them to stop, shift gears and start spinning 100,000 rpm in the other direction! The flagellar motor is water-cooled and hardwired into a sensory mechanism that allows the bacterium to get feedback from its environment!  Hardly simple and if one part were missing it would not work. (See www.allaboutthejourney.org to read many more accounts of this science.)

The Theory of Evolution's has lots of basic problems:
Listed below are just a few of them

Evolution Theory violates almost every law of science!
Living systems look designed. Science's first law, the Law of Cause and Effect, states, "The effect can never be greater than the cause." First-graders, when shown an arrowhead and a flint rock and asked which someone made, invariably pick the arrowhead. They instinctively know what every educated person should know, that when something looks designed, it had a designer.             
Gas explosions never produce intelligence.
Evolution could never have started. Dr. George Wald, Nobel Prize winner in science, commented on The Law of Biogenesis, which is that life only comes from life. "When it comes to the origin of life, there are only two possibilities spontaneous generation and special creation," Wald said. "Spontaneous generation was disproved more than 100 years ago. That leaves us only with special creation. We refuse to accept that based on philosophical grounds. Therefore, we are left with the unenviable position of having to believe the impossible."
Evolution has no mechanism that can add all the new genetic information that would be needed to change one life form into another.  
Evolution theory claims mutations cause an organism to get better and then natural selection culls out those without the new traits, thus pushing life onward and upward. But in the real world, science shows mutations never add information; they only miscopy or destroy information in the organism's DNA. Mutations are birth defects, and in the real world, natural selection works to keep mutations from being passed on to future generations. E.g. Recently, an Indonesian girl was born with four legs. Did she run faster and jump higher? No. She couldn't walk at all.
A look at www.dissentfromdarwin.org   reveals many hundreds of scientists who have signed this statement:
"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.”
"Dr. T.N. Tahmisian, of the Atomic Energy Commission, wrote that those "who go about teaching that evolution is a fact are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact."
Cambridge astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle called evolution "nonsense of the highest order.” Supreme Court Justices William Renquist and Antonin Scalia wrote, "The censorship of creation science has at least two harmful effects: First, it deprives students of knowledge of one of the two scientific theories for the origin of life and leads them to believe that evolution is a proven fact and belief in evolution is a central tenant of the religion of secular humanism” (see Totaso vs. Hawkins). Thus, by censoring creation science, and by teaching students that evolution is fact, public school teachers are now advancing the religion of secular humanism in violation of the establishment clause."
   To read a full article about the above see : www.reporternews.com/news/2007/dec/15/weakness-of-evolution-life-design/   
Amongst those who accept Darwinian Evolution some changes of belief are gradually being declared. In 2004 Professor Antony Flew, long regarded as the champion of Atheism in Britain, said he now believed in God (more or less). He now doubts that Darwinian Evolution can explain the ultimate origins of life. Flew became an atheist when he was 15. He taught, wrote and debated against  belief in God whilst lecturing in Oxford, Aberdeen, Keele and Reading Universities. It took him 66 years to change his mind.    Why has he changed his mind now?  He has changed his mind now because recent research into DNA “has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved.” He recognises that his new philosophy is upsetting his traditional followers. His response to their upset, after preaching atheism to them for 66 years, is “That’s too bad. My whole life has been guided by the principle of Plato’s Socrates: Follow the evidence wherever it leads.” Professor Flew produced a video of his belief conversion entitled “Has Science Discovered God?” (See Daily Express Archives Saturday, December 11th 2004 for the full story.)
To appreciate this scientific challenge to Flew’s atheism, find out more about the DNA molecule by visiting  www.allaboutthejourney.org/dna-molecule.htm