Few deceptions in human history have  caused more damage to the truth of Yahweh’s Word than the theory of evolution.  Most people consider the theory of Darwin harmless, but truth be told this  theory is anything but harmless. 
The  ultimate goal of evolution is to remove Yahweh, the creative source and power  behind this universe. If Darwin’s theory of creative advancement can convince  this world that evolution was the mechanism for man’s existence, then man has no  need for Yahweh or the morality of His Word. 
A  Harvard geneticist and leading evolutionist, Richard Lewontin, confirms this  view, “We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of  its constructs…no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the  uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a  Divine Foot in the door” (In Six  Days, John Ashton, Ph.D., p. 76). 
It  is the goal of this article to prove by Yahweh’s Word and scientific evidence  that the theory of evolution is nothing more than a deception and a lie of the  Evil One. Some of the scientific proofs that this article will consider are the  “evidence” for evolution, the second law of thermodynamics, the facts of  mutation, and complexity of life. After considering this evidence we hope that  those who may give credence to this unholy theory might agree from both Yahweh’s  Word and science that evolution is indeed a deceptive travesty of  HaSatan.
In  one of the plainest passages showing Yahweh’s creation, the Apostle Paul offers  prophetic insight that few could disagree with. “…because what may be known of  Yahweh is manifest in them, for Yahweh has shown it to them. For since the  creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being  understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and [Majesty], so  that they are without excuse” (Rom 1:19-20, NKJV).
The  Apostle Paul verified that the heavens and the earth serve are a visible sign  and testimony to not only Yahweh’s existence, but also to His very attributes.  Since Yahweh’s creation testifies of his creative power and existence, those who  reject Him have no justification for their rebellion. 
Paul  was not alone in writing of man’s rejection. Peter, one of Yahshua’s most  devoted apostles, also told of man’s rebellion. “For this they willfully forget:  that by the word of Yahweh the heavens were of old…” (2Peter 3:5, NKJV).  
Peter affirms in this passage that it was through  Yahweh’s Word that the heavens and earth came into being and verifies that man  deliberately forgets and ignores this truth. Why? As Satan rebelled with the  intent of becoming equal to the Most High (Isa. 14:14), mankind is doing the  same through the theory of evolution. If man can remove Yahweh’s creative  presence from this universe then man is free to believe that no power, no Being,  and no authority higher than man exists. This gives man the claim that he is the  supreme mighty one. 
From  a Biblical perspective it is clear that the heavens and earth are testimony to  Yahweh’s inspired creation. Now when it comes to this universe, does science  contradict scripture? While many scientists might say that scripture and science  are in opposition and incompatible to one another, there are many who see the  harmony between the two.
Evolution Versus Science
Is  Darwinian or macroevolution science? One person of many who share the belief  that Darwinian evolution is not science is Dr. John Kramer. According to Dr.  Kramer: “No one has ever demonstrated macro evolutionary changes on a molecular  level, yet many people readily speculate evolutionary links between bacteria,  plants, animals, and man” (In Six Days, p. 47). 
Dr.  Kramer, who holds a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of Minnesota and  currently serves as associate editor of the Scientific Journal,  raises an important question. What does this mean for those who advocate that  Darwinian evolution is a legitimate science? The answer depends on how one  defines science. According to most definitions science contains three elements:  observation, hypothesis, and reproduction. In a recent essay, Dr. Jeremy Walter  corroborates this definition: “Science is the human enterprise of seeking  accurately and quantitatively the nature and processes of our universe through  observation, hypothesis, and experimental validation” (In Six  Days, p. 47).
The  problem is that no observable evidence has ever been found to verify and  substantiate the claim of macroevolution. With this being the case it is the  opinion of many leading scientists that Darwinian evolution is not a valid science. “Scientists who utterly reject  evolution may be one of our fastest-growing controversial minorities…Many of the  scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in  science” (The Case for a Creator, Lee Strobel, p. 31).
Second Law of Thermodynamics 
A  basic law of nature that contradicts macro evolutionary changes is the second  law of thermodynamics. Dr. John Cimbala, Ph.D. from CalTech, offers the  following definition for this scientific law: “A formal definition of the second  law of thermodynamics is: ‘in any closed system, a process proceeds in a  direction such that the unavailable energy increases.’ In other words, in any  closed system, the amount of disorder always increases with time. Things  progress naturally from order to disorder, or from an available energy state to  one where energy is more unavailable” (In Six Days, p.  201).
According to this natural law all aspects of the universe  break down over time and become unusable. We see that every day, as buildings  left unattended will decay and collapse; the same is true with anything that man  constructs. Dr. Don DeYoung states that death itself is a consequence of this  law. “The second basic law of nature…Stated in another way, everything  deteriorates, breaks down, and becomes less ordered with time. Ultimately, death  itself is a consequence of the second law of thermodynamics”  (Ibid., p. 343). 
If  death itself is a result of the second law of thermodynamics, how could life have evolved as explained  by Darwinian evolution? In other words,  how could life go from disorder to order – wonderful in its complexity  and design? The cornerstone theory of evolution defies a basic law of nature.  
Mutations and Loss of Information
Darwinian evolution also contradicts the laws of  mutation. It is believed by most evolutionists that life arose from numerous  mutations over million of years. Before delving into how mutations occur, it is  first important to establish that the mutation supported by Darwinian evolution  is macroevolution. A theoretical example of macroevolution is a bird evolving  from a reptile. Now it is absolutely essential to point out that macroevolution  has never been confirmed through human observation or even by the fossil record.  The missing link that so many evolutionists speak about is just that – a missing  link. 
The  only observable form of mutation is what occurs on the molecular level, such as  DNA and different forms of bacteria. It is important to understand that this  mutation, however, is not supportive of macroevolution. The reason why mutation  on the molecular level does not support macroevolution is that these mutations  always occur from a loss of genetic information, thus not allowing macro  evolutionary advancements. Dr. Ariel Roth, a leading biologist with a Ph.D. in  biology from the University of Michigan and an editor for the Origins  journal for 23 years, verifies that for the above reasons macro  evolutionary advancements through mutation are highly improbable: “…mutations  are not a great breakthrough for evolution. They are almost always detrimental,  and as such are more representative of a mechanism for degeneration than for  advancement” (Ibid., p. 91).
In  addition, Dr. Stephen Taylor verifies that all the examples of mutation used to  support macroevolution are contradictory to the evidence: “For large-scale  evolution, mutations must on average add information. In a recent book,  bio-physicist Dr. Lee Spetner shows with detailed probabilistic analysis that  this is completely precluded. He examines the classic textbook cases of  mutations cited in favor of neo-Darwinism evolution and shows conclusively that,  without exception, they are all losses of information. There is so such thing as  a mutation that adds information” (Ibid., p. 307).
For  macroevolution to occur it is fact that additional genetic information is  required which according to the above sources cited, this simply does not  happen. Without additional genetic information it would be impossible for a bird  to evolve from a retile or a bear to evolve from a whale, as speculated in  Darwin’s book Origin of the Species.
Complexity of Creation
The  last point of evidence to examine is the complexity of creation. Few areas of  study are more fascinating than the intricacies of this universe. Most people  live their mundane lives without ever asking, “How did all this come to be?”  Yahweh’s creation is truly an awesome work once we understand the complexity of  this universe.
Physicist Paul Davis offers this remarkable observation,  “It is hard to resist the impression that the present structure of the universe,  apparently so sensitive to minor alterations in numbers, has been rather  carefully thought out…The seemingly miraculous concurrence of these numerical  values must remain the most compelling evidence for cosmic design” (The  Case for a Creator, p. 125).
What  Dr. Davis is stating is this – this universe is far too complex for chance and  time to be the basis for its existence. For example, consider for a just the  moment the distance of the earth from the sun. If the earth were any closer to  the sun it would be too hot to support life and if the earth were any farther  from the sun it would be too cold to support life. The earth is exactly the  right distance away and has the right elements to support life. In this way, the  earth is unique from its other planetary neighbors in the galaxy. Science knows  of no other planet in this galaxy or in fact in this universe that shares these  necessary phenomena.
Because of the complexity of this universe many believe  that such theories as natural selection cannot account for its existence. For  example, Dr. Roth offers this astonishing revelation, “The problem is that the  very system of natural selection which Darwin proposed will tend to eliminate  the interdependent parts of complex systems  as these systems develop. The parts do not function until all the interdependent  parts are present and the system works and provides some survival value to the  organism” (In Six Days, p. 90).
What Dr. Roth is proposing is that the theory of natural  selection, which puts forward the notion of mutation for the purpose of  survival, does not explain or offer a probable explanation for the complexity  and interdependencies of life; in fact, this theory is counter intuitive to the  universe. Evolutionists advocate the idea that all life arose from mutation  through the process of natural selection; however, the process of natural  selection would advance an organism only if that advancement served some sort of  survival value. Since mutation can serve no survival value until all the parts  were complete and working, such theories as natural selection do not offer an  adequate explanation for Darwinian evolution via mutation.                             
Evolution has a big problem. For instance, the first man  would have no need of blood clotting mechanisms until he cut himself. But by  then it would be too late and he would bleed to death. This survival mechanism  has to be working by the time he first cuts himself. But evolution says it would  not exist until something like a cut in the flesh makes it necessary to exist.  So our first man bleeds to death and the human species ceases to survive,  according to the logic of evolution! Many other similar and complex  self-preservation mechanisms are built into human and animal bodies that must  work right the very first time or else the animal or human dies. Evolution’s  basic premise of millions of years of development cannot explain or answer this  quandary.
One  of the foremost men in the field of creation and author of Darwin’s Black  Box and 20-year professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University, Dr.  Michael Behe offers this significant observation about the complexity of the  human body:  “Evolution can’t produce an irreducibly complex biological machine  suddenly, all at once, because it’s much too complicated. The odds against that  would be prohibitive. And you can’t produce it directly by numerous, successive,  slight modifications of a precursor system, because any precursor system would  be missing a part and consequently couldn’t function. There would be no reason  for it to exist. And natural selection chooses systems that are already working”  (The Case for a Creator, p. 198).
Those who have taken time to study the human body know  its awesome design. The complexity of a single DNA strand is far too complicated  to evolve unguided through mere chance. According to Dr. Jonathon Sarfati, a  physical chemist, the amount of information that could be stored in a pinhead’s  volume of DNA could fill a pile of “paperback books 500 times as tall as the  distance from earth to the sun” (In Six Days, p. 80). In another  analogy, Dr. John Marcus, who received his Ph.D. in biological chemistry from  the University of Michigan, states that the information in one human DNA cell  could “fill almost 1,000 books, each containing 1,000 pages of text”  (Ibid., p. 174).
No  matter what aspect of this breathtakingly complex universe we consider, the  fingerprint of Almighty Yahweh is stamped on everything we see. As it written in  Psalm 19:1: “The heavens declare the glory of Elohim and the firmament shows his  handiwork.”  There is no other explanation for the creation of this universe  other than Yahweh’s direct hand (Ps. 150:6).  
The evolutionary theory has been the catapult for today’s secular movement. In what began as a denial of intelligent design will end in a removal of Yahweh and His Word from the culture. It is absolutely essential that Yahweh’s people reject an irrational and impossible humanistic theory rooted in the denial of Yahweh and His authority.
Comments