Selected Essays And Book Reviews

To adequately address the Theory of Evolution, one must consider both atheistic and theistic evolution. Atheistic evolution, also called naturalistic evolution, maintains that creation occurred without being influenced by a Creator and that life originated in a special prebiotic soup which then evolved into a variety of higher and lower life forms. Theistic evolution assumes that creation involved a Creator but then allows for the likelihood that God simply let each kind of life evolve on its own through natural processes. The evidence does not support atheistic evolution. Theistic evolution is close to atheistic evolution, so it is not a plausible creation theory, either. For the Christian, progressive creationism makes the most sense.

To adequately address the Theory of Evolution, one must consider both atheistic and theistic evolution. Atheistic evolution, also called naturalistic evolution [1], maintains that creation occurred without being influenced by a Creator and that life originated in a special prebiotic soup which then evolved into a variety of higher and lower life forms. Theistic evolution assumes that creation involved a Creator but then allows for the likelihood that God simply let each kind of life evolve on its own through natural processes [2]. In a broad sense, both of these kinds of evolution rely heavily on the concepts of macroevolution and microevolution.

Because it leaves God completely out of the whole creation process, though, Darwin's general theory has always caused concern for biblical theologians. His general theory has also caused concern for the scientific community. According to Mr. Denton, Charles Darwin formulated many of his ideas about evolution while voyaging on the Beagle and while studying the animal life of the Galapagos Archipelago islands. However, Mr. Denton adds that nothing witnessed by Darwin on that voyage supported the macroevolution processes of his general theory [5]. At the present time, there are a number of significant problems with Darwin's general theory of evolution, and the number seems to be growing.

One of the first problems with his general theory is the lack of evidence for the early existence of the so-called prebiotic soup. Dr. James P. Moreland writes that no geological evidence exists to support the existence of the needed concentrated organic pools in the early earth. The lack of this kind of evidence casts doubt on the whole existence of such a soup. In addition, Dr. Moreland also points out that the early earth had too much oxygen for the required chemical organic reactions to have occurred and that the evolution of life from non-life runs into even more difficulties because of the second law of thermodynamics [6].

A second problem with Darwin's general theory is the amount of time needed for a large-scale macro-level evolution to occur. Many theologians favor a young earth where the six days of Creation were six literal, twenty-four hour periods and where the earth, or at least life on the earth, is only about six thousand years old. However, Mr. Denton indicates that several thousand million years would have been necessary for the first forms of life to evolve from the prebiotic soup. Nevertheless, according to him, geologists have found some rocks that they say are that old. Yet, they still do not have any evidence for the prebiotic soup [7]. Even if the soup had existed, though, the development of the necessary amino acids in just the right order at just the right time to initiate life would have only had a probability of success of about one in 10^40,000 chances [8]. Mr. F. Hoyle and Mr. Chandra Wickramasinghe reported this extremely large probability in their book, Evolution from Space.

Another problem with Darwin's general theory of evolution is the lack of a fossil record and the intermediary life form fossils that should exist. If macroevolution were true, one would expect to find fossil representations of cross species attempts and other intermediate forms of life as species had mutated into newer, more advanced species. But none have been found. To counter this lack of evidence, some evolutionists have suggested that seventy-five percent of the entire evolutionary process had already occurred by the time that the first fossils were deposited [9]. However, there is not any evidence to support this notion, either.

Regardless of how one examines macroevolution, the theory is on shaky ground, and this means that atheistic evolution is also on shaky ground. Mr. Denton thinks that macroevolution is in too much trouble to even be salvageable [10]. Dr. Moreland says that Christians can accept microevolution, but they cannot accept macroevolution [11]. Therefore, with atheistic evolution in doubt, we can now examine the Christian's position on theistic evolution.

In talking about different interpretations for the first two chapters in Genesis, Dr. Moreland discussed progressive creationism, and this is a view that comes closest to satisfying both biblical teaching and scientific finding [14]. Theistic evolution says that God created the first organism and then the principles of evolution took over. Progressive creationism says that God created the first kinds of animal and plant life and then that these kinds of life evolved into more advanced life forms within the limitations of their respective kinds. Also, progressive creationism distinguishes between human beings and animal life whereas macroevolution does not.

The evidence does not support atheistic evolution. There is not any evidence that something can pop into existence without God, and there is not any evidence to support macroevolution. Theistic evolution is close to atheistic evolution, so it is not a plausible creation theory, either. For the Christian, progressive creationism makes the most sense. Progressive creation rejects macroevolution and accepts microevolution.

1. Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), p. 478.

2. Ibid, p. 383.

3. Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Chevy Chase, MD: Adler & Adler, Publishers, Inc., 1986), p. 86.

4. Ibid, p. 44.

5. Ibid, p. 35.

6. James P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City - A Defense of Christianity (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1987), p. 220.

7. Denton, p. 262-263.

8. Ibid, p. 323.

9. Luther D. Sunderland, Darwin's Enigma (Santee, California: Master Book Publishers, 1988), p. 45.

10. Denton, p. 342.

11. Moreland, p. 71.

12. Erickson, p. 481.

13. Hugh Ross, Creation and Time (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress Publishing Group, 1994), p. 80.

14. Moreland, pp. 215-216.

Denton, Michael. Evolution: A Theory in Crisis. Chevy Chase, MD: Adler & Adler, Publishers, Inc., 1986.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985.

Moreland, James P. Scaling the Secular City - A Defense of Christianity. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1987.

Ross, Hugh. Creation and Time. Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress Publishing Group, 1994.

Sunderland, Luther D. Darwin's Enigma. Santee, California: Master Book Publishers, 1988.