Some thoughts on evolution and creation

In this “Darwin Year” (2009), 200 years after Darwin’s death and 150 years after the publication of “On the Origin of Species,” there is still a lively debate about the credibility of the theory of evolution. Although most of the scientific establishment accepts the theory of evolution as a possible explanation, there are also many critical voices. This makes me wonder. Is there no convincing evidence? Are the critical voices just a bunch of stubborn people who refuse to accept the facts? Or are they the vanguard of a coming paradigm shift?

The origin and development of life
Today, there is essentially only one theory, the theory of evolution, which attempts to explain the origin and development of life in scientific terms. (1)

However, since the theory of evolution appears to be fraught with many weaknesses and question marks, it has been and continues to be criticized from many quarters, both within and outside the scientific establishment. Critics have not, however, formulated any new scientific theory about the development of life as an alternative to the theory of evolution. Instead, they point out the problems with this theory. (2) The criticism mainly concerns the idea of development through “beneficial mutations” and the idea of “natural selection.” Critics argue that none of these ideas can be proven to achieve what is attributed to them. They are based on intellectual possibilities but have no basis in reality. The absence of transitional forms in the fossil record further confirms that the theory of evolution lacks support in reality. According to Darwin, one would find many transitional forms when one began to dig for them, but this has not been the case. What has been found are species of various kinds, but very few that can be interpreted as transitional forms. And the few examples that the most devoted evolutionists believe to be transitional forms are strongly questioned by critics.

Critics therefore argue that the theory of evolution has not been proven in any way. It is a product of the mind that many people, for various reasons, choose to believe in. It is fundamentally based on faith, not on knowledge and scientific evidence.

What are the alternatives?
If you want a scientific explanation for the origin of life, there are really no alternatives. Neither what is called “creationism” nor “intelligent design” has formulated a scientific theory for the origin of life.

Christians who believe in creation generally believe that our universe was created by God as described in the Bible. They do not deny that there is evolution, an ongoing biological development in creation. However, they believe that this evolution does not transcend boundaries but is limited to their own group. They see no contradiction between “true” science/research and belief in the Bible. However, they believe that much of what is claimed in the name of science in evolutionary research does not meet the requirements of scientific rigour. But if one sticks to pure scientific facts, there is no contradiction between science and the belief that the universe was created by God in the way described in the Bible.

Intelligent Design argues that there are signs of intelligence in our universe that are inconsistent with the idea that everything came about by chance. There must be an intelligence, a designer, behind it all. They believe that evolution with chance as its “originator” is unreasonable. They are working to formulate a scientific theory that demonstrates this.

The well-known evolutionist and atheist, Richard Dawkins, says in the documentary “Expelled (3)” that signs of intelligence in the universe could be the product of some previous intelligent civilization, but not from any god in the religious sense. However, he does not provide any answer as to where this imagined civilization got its intelligence.

What many critics of evolution ask themselves is how random evolution from dead matter can create intelligence and consciousness. The theory of evolution has no explanation for these and similar things. The explanation, in that case, is that they exist and must have come about somehow. And since evolution is the only conceivable possibility, it must be evolution that has produced them in some way.

Critics argue that this line of reasoning is repeated in many other areas of evolutionary theory.

Can a Bible-believing Christian reconcile the theory of evolution with biblical faith? There are Bible-believing Christians who are also supporters of the theory of evolution. However, their view of evolution must differ from that of atheistic evolutionists. The latter, such as Richard Dawkins, see all religion as a collective delusion and use the theory of evolution as proof that there is no God behind the origin of life. A Bible-believing Christian cannot reasonably embrace this view. If, as a Christian, you embrace the theory of evolution, you probably believe that parts of this theory may be true, but that it was God, not chance, who set the evolutionary process in motion and who controls it. However, the theory of evolution is often presented in school teaching and in our media in a way that marginalizes God and the Bible and sometimes completely erases them.

Is a paradigm shift needed? 
Perhaps the question of the origin of life is not one that science in its current phase is able to answer. Perhaps a paradigm shift is needed to provide new basic conditions for moving forward. It may then turn out that some of the current ideas were not so crazy, while others are completely rejected. Science is constantly evolving, and new insights and discoveries can bring about dramatic changes in our worldview. Although we probably realize this now, we seem to have an excessive belief in our own generation’s knowledge within the paradigm we currently find ourselves in.

It may also be that the question of the origin of the universe and the emergence of life is so vast and complex that it can never be fully answered within the framework of science.

Let the debate continue
It is difficult to understand the fear and sometimes manic attacks of some evolutionists on creationism and intelligent design. A free and open debate should benefit all parties if we want to know how things really are.

The persecution of dissenters, as shown in the recently produced film “Expelled,” is unworthy of a society that advocates freedom of thought and freedom of research. This brings to mind the former Soviet empire, where one had to be an atheist and believe in evolution in order to have a career in society.

The limitations of science
One thing that should be taken into account, especially when it comes to extensive and complex issues such as the origin of the universe and life, is the limitations of science. Empirical science has proven to be a very effective instrument that has brought humanity much good and some evil. But science has limitations and absolutely no interpretive priority when it comes to existential questions. Science, based on its positivist stance, cannot answer the question of whether God created the universe. Such questions lie outside the realm of science. Those who rely solely on science as a tool for acquiring true knowledge in all areas will, in my opinion, have a very limited worldview. And attempting to address existential questions from this position will yield very strange answers or no answers at all.

If you use the Bible as a starting point for these questions, you will get clear, relevant answers. That is my experience.

Finally, as a human being, it is perhaps not so important to know in detail how I came to be. It is more important to know where I am going. The Bible and the Christian faith provide knowledge about this, and that is good news for anyone who wants to embrace this knowledge. Atheistic evolutionism offers only total annihilation as an alternative. Not much to look forward to.

Tommy Lindén

Footnotes

(1) A) Some scientists question whether the theory of evolution should really be considered a theory, as it does not meet the requirements usually imposed on a scientific theory.

B) Attempts at other theories, such as Søren Løvtrup’s theory of macromutations, have not gained acceptance within the scientific community.

C) The theory of evolution does not actually deal with the origin of life, but only with its development.

(2) See, for example, http://www.rae.org/darwinskeptics.html

(3) See http://www.expelledthemovie.com/

(This text is translated from Swedish to English using DeepL. If you find any serious errors, please let me know and I will correct them. Thank you. tommylindensweden@gmail.com)