those pesky little problems of evolution

8/14/2019 Those Pesky Little Problems of Evolution

1/23

Those Pesky Little Problems

of Evolution

That Just Wont Go Away

Why Naturalistic Evolution is Not the Truthand Christian Theism Is

Freddy Davis

2008


2/23

Those Pesky Little Problems of Evolution that Just Wont Go Away:Why Naturalistic Evolution is not the Truth and Christian Theism Is

By Freddy Davis

Copyright 2008 Freddy Davis

All rights reserved. This book is protected under the copyright laws of the

United States of America. This work may not be copied or reprinted for

commercial gain or profit. However, it may be freely distributed in its entirety

in electronic or hard copy forms. Its use for personal or group study is

permitted and encouraged.


3/23

Introduction

Why is it that most Christians do not have confidence that their Christian faith is the

ultimate expression of Truth? And why do even those Christians who do have confidence

not have the courage to actually stand up to the people who try to put down our faith? The

answer is simple - sheer lack of knowledge. This is particularly true when it comes to the

topic of evolution.

This is not meant to be an insult to those who lack confidence. Rather, it is a call to arms.

The knowledge is available and is not that complicated. A person does not have to be a PhD

in order to know the problems with evolution and the strengths of our Christian faith.

The fact is, those who believe that evolution is the way that life emerged and developed on

this planet dont have a leg to stand on when it comes to scientific evidence. But that does

not stop them from doing a tremendous job of bluffing their way along. The folks who

believe in Naturalistic evolution have become strong enough politically that they have been

able to bowl over any opposition, in spite of their lack of proof.

If that is ever going to change, those of us who have the truth are going to have to step up

to the plate. It is not enough that a few professional Christian apologists write some books

and make speeches. What is required is that the masses of Christians learn not only what

the truth is, but learn to verbalize that truth to others.

I believe that there are more than enough Christians to turn the tide if we would simply

stand up. But there will not be enough people who are willing to stand up until the masses

of believers become educated on this topic.

This short explanation is designed to be a tool to provide the basics concerning the

problems related to Naturalistic evolutionary theory - and to do it in a way that almost any

Christian can understand. It is also a basic explanation as to why our Christian faith is the

truth.

This is not designed to be a comprehensive textbook which gives all of the nitty-gritty

details and arguments against evolution and for our Christian faith. There are plenty of

resources where you can get that kind of detailed information. The purpose here is simply

to lay out the basic facts as to why evolution is not viable and our Christian faith is. It ismore like an outline.

Once you understand the basic foundation, it becomes easier to dig deeper into the details.

With an understanding of the big picture, you will have all the knowledge you need to stand

strong against those who would oppose your Christian beliefs. And with the big picture in

hand, the more detailed study becomes very simple for those who have the interest.


4/23

Christian Theism is not an intellectually inferior way of thinking and believing. Not only

that, the Naturalistic evolutionary belief system isintellectually inferior. If we can learn

how that is so, it will make a huge difference in our own faith life and in our ability to share

the truth with those who need Christ.


5/231

Fact of Theory?

Fact or theory? Believers in evolution say that Darwins Theory of Evolution is a scientific

fact, while most Christians assert that it is a totally false concept. How can this be? If it is

a scientific fact, everybody ought to be able to see undeniable proof of it. If that proof cant

be demonstrated, it must not be scientific fact.

Ahhhh, theres the problem. Its not exactly fact. Its more like, well, a theory. Now, fact

is something that can be demonstrated without any real dispute - everybody sees it. But a

theory ...? Now that is something altogether different. With a theory what we have is a

bunch of evidence laying around which scientists gather up and try to organize in a way

that makes good sense.


6/232

Well, theres certainly nothing wrong with that. There are all kinds of things out there that

we cant prove by simply looking at it and performing experiments. We have to try to

understand those things indirectly by gathering up the evidence and organizing it in a

logical way.

For instance, there is a lot of stuff about nature that we dont

completely understand. There are issues related to space sci-

ence, atoms, gravity, the structure of the earth, living things,

and a whole bunch of other stuff.

So what do scientists do who study these things? Well, they get to know as much about

their subjects as they can by observing them and conducting experiments. But since there

are still things that they dont know, they gather up all the evidence they can find about the

unknown matters and put it together in a way that matches up with the things that they do

know. When they think they have a good match, they say, I think this is the way it works.

So they write it down as a theory - which is simply a statement of how they think it works

based on what they already know. They still cant say their idea is proven, but based on the

theory they can try to run other experiments and make new observations to see how things

match up.

This is what has happened with the idea of evolution. There are things about matter, life,

and human consciousness that scientists do not completely understand. So to try and

understand them better, they have come up with theories which try to explain these things.


7/233

Science or Philosophy?

There is one more thing that you

need to understand about a theory,

though. In the ultimate sense, it is

not based on facts, but on some-

thing else. It is founded on beliefs.

The scientists who develop a theo-

ry believe things work a certain

way, so they take those beliefs and

test them. If the tests prove out,they can say their idea is no longer

a theory, but is a fact. But until

they can prove it, it is still a theory

- a statement about what they be-

lieve concerning their topic.

Now, lets take this thought and look at how it applies to the theory of evolution. This

theory operates in the field of biology. The word biology comes from two Greek words bio

(life) and logos (speech or word). So what it literally means is to talk about, or study, life.

So, biology studies the structure, function, growth, origin, evolution, and distribution of

living things.

Bio + Logos


8/234

Now, there are a lot of things in biology that

we can study directly. We can take living

things and put them in a test tube, observe

how they live in their natural habitat or view

them under a microscope to learn about them.

Doing these activities, we can learn about the

structure, growth and distribution of living

things.

But what about the origin and evolution of these living things? Now that is a different

matter altogether. There is nothing we can do to directly observe and test these two areas.

The origin of living things happened too far back in history for us to observe it directly.

And in our day, we simply dont see evolution happening in front of our faces. Both of

these things have to be studied by gathering fossils, studying the earth and other things. We

have to gather all of this evidence and try to put it together in a way that matches up with

what we already know by looking at nature and performing experiments.


9/235

So far, so good. But how do we go about organizing it? Now, that is the problem. And we

see this problem clearly when we look at the topic of evolution. People who believe in

Darwins theory want to organize the evidence in a way that supports the theory, while

Christians want to organize the evidence in a way that shows God created life.

Now, we cant simply say that it is okay for everyone to just believe what they want, and

that it doesnt matter. There is such a thing as Truth and the ideas of both Christian Theism

and Naturalistic Evolution cant both be right at the same time. One is right and the other

has to be wrong. But how do we get at this if we cant do it directly? Well, lets explore

that for a little bit.

The study of biology does not happen in a vacuum. It is built on a set of beliefs about where

life came from. These beliefs cant be proven by scientific study. They start with what a

person believes about God. If a person believes in God, that person can affirm that God

created life and can study biology using that belief. But what about someone who says that

there is no God (or at least that he did not directly create life). In that case, the person must

come up with some way of explaining how life could have come about on its own.

So this is the battle of evolution. We see that in order to study biology, there must be an

underlying foundation to build the study upon. And as we have seen, in modern society

there are two competing foundations that are fighting against one another. Both want to be

recognized as the proper one. The two beliefs are: 1) God created life and 2) life came

about on its own. Lets dig a little deeper, now, and understand these two beliefs.

TRUTH

BELIEFS

WAR


10/236

What are the Competing Views on the Origin of Life?

As we consider the possibilities concerning how life came into being, there are actually

several possibilities. Here, though we are only going to deal with two of them - the one

which is most popular in modern academia and the one we, as Christians, consider to be

the actual truth.

The first belief is called Naturalism. The central idea of

Naturalism is that there is no such thing as a supernatural

reality. If this is the truth, the material universe somehow

had to come into being on its own, and life had to have

originated by itself without any outside influence. For

Naturalists, there is no other possibility since no outside

being exists who could do such a thing. This point of

view gave rise to Darwins theory of evolution which

says that life emerged out of non-life by completelynatural means.

The second possibility is called Theism. This is

the belief that there is a God who exists outside of

the natural universe who, by his own desire andcreative power, created and sustains the material

universe. If this belief is true, there is an all

powerful and intelligent person who conceived of

the structure of the material universe, created it

based on his own thoughts and ideas, and populat-

ed it with living things.

Just to be completely clear, there are many forms of Theism which have different ideas

about who that God is and what he is like. As Christians, we believe that the only true God

is the God who is described in the Bible. (There is a great deal of evidence to support thisbelief, but that is the topic of a different study. So here, as we discuss this topic, we will

not be dealing with Theism in general, but specifically with Christian Theism.)

Now, obviously, both Naturalism and Christian Theism cannot both be true at the same

time. God cant exist and not exist simultaneously. In a philosophical sense, it is, of course,

possible that neither of these beliefs are true. But it is certainly not possible for both of them

to be true. Our question is, then, which one is the most reasonable?


11/237

Understanding Naturalism

Lets begin with Naturalism. What has to be true in order for the Naturalistic approach to

to be right concerning the origin of life? There are four basic ideas that must be proven.

1. Matter has to either be eternal or to have spontaneously appeared out of nothing.

2. Life had to emerge out of non-life.3. More complex life forms had to evolve from lower life forms.

4. Consciousness had to emerge from non-consciousness.

All four of these must be true.

Looking at these four necessities, which of them have undeniable scientific proof to back

them up? Well, none of them. They are all faith statements. The primary belief is that since

there is no God to create anything, the only way that life could have come about is by

natural means. This whole approach starts with a belief (there is no such thing as the

supernatural), and then tries to prove the belief by coming up with a way that life could

have emerged on its own. Lets look at the four statements a little more closely to see how

it works out.

1. Matter has to either be eternal or to have spontaneously appeared out of nothing.

So, lets start with the Big Bang. According to this theory, what existed before there wasany recognizable matter? At that point there was nothing but a type of energy. About three

seconds after the big bang took place, the elements that we recognize as matter

began to form. But lets focus for a moment on that initial energy.

Where did it come from? It had to come from somewhere.

This is actually a huge problem for Naturalists. Since there is no supernat-

ural God to create it, they have to come up with some kind of natural expla-

nation. For them, there are only two choices. Either this material is eternal (has

always existed), or it spontaneously appeared out of nothing. There is only

one small problem with both of these possibilities. There is no science to indi-

cate that either of these options are even possible. They are both faith beliefs. In fact,

commonly accepted scientific principles actually discount both of these possibilities.

Those who try to say that the Big Bang was perhaps part of a larger process and that it was

simply the first step of a new cycle, still do not solve the problem. You can push the origin

question further back in history if you want, but at some point you have to address the

original origin of the material. Where did it originally come from?

? Eternal ? Spontaneous Appearance ?

POOF!


12/238

2. Life had to emerge out of non-life.

Well, since Naturalism cant solve the first problem, lets just skip to the next necessary

belief. This is the question: Where did life come from? Darwins theory proposes that

under the right environmental conditions, and given enough time,

various chemicals could get together and life would spontaneous-

ly develop. Again, Naturalists haveto say it happened this way.

They dont have any other choice. Since they will not admit that

there is a powerful God to do any creating, the only possibility is

for life to have emerged on its own.

To try and prove their theory, Naturalistic scientists have con-

ducted decades of experiments to try and develop a life form from

non-life. And finally, after all of this work they have created ...

well, nothing. In fact, not only have they not been able to get lifeto spontaneously emerge, they cant even make it happen by intentionally putting chemi-

cals together and actually trying. Even more than that, they dont even fully know what

kind of things need to be put together to make life.

So, what do we have here? Naturalists dont have any science to back up their belief that

life came out of non-life. All they have is a belief. Ouch! That is not a good position to be

in for people who claim that all of their beliefs are based on science. But lets give some

grace. Lets just skip this problem for a while and move on to the next necessary belief.

3. More complex life forms had to evolve from lower life forms.

As we have seen above, the first two requirements have utterly failed to help the cause of

the Naturalists. This third one, though, is where the evolutionary scientists try to say they

have the proof. To try and back up their view of evolution, they bring out several forms of

evidence. They trot out such things as pictures of various animals, bone fragments, dating

theories, natural selection, and on and on.

Some of the presentations of this material, as it is seen in many science books and

professional journals, can actually look pretty convincing until you realize one thing - all

they are doing is organizing evidence in a way that makes their theory look good. But

organizing evidence is not the same thing as giving proof. The hard truth is that they are

not able to show even one actual piece of scientific proof that their interpretation of the

evidence is actually true.

? Life from Non-life ?

? Evolution to Higher Life Forms ?


13/239

Lets take one example and show how this is done. We could actually do this with many

other examples, but this one gives us the methodology. You have, no doubt, seen the

famous series of pictures where they start out with a small monkey on the left, a modern

human being on the right and numerous in between creatures in the middle. In putting

forth this picture, evolutionary scientists are trying to show that mans original ancestor

was some kind of monkey and, through a natural evolutionary process over millions of

years, those creatures evolved to higher and higher forms until modern man came forth.

But here is the problem. The Naturalistic biologists

say that this is how it happened, but cannot offer any

known scientific method as to how it could have

happened. There has never, ever been even one case

of a scientist being able to take one species of plantor animal and convert it to another. They dont even

know how it could be done. But according to their

theory, this is what must have happened so they

create the picture based on their beliefs - not on any scientific findings. Simply showing a

series of pictures is not proof of anything.

Of course, as Christians, we believethat God created man - and we make no bones about

it. The funny thing is, it takes less faith to believe that God created each type of creature

independently than that one species evolved from another. There is no scientific proof atall to back up Darwins theory.

As you can see, the beliefthat evolution is true comes first. Then, based on the belief, those

who support the theory try to make the science fit within it. As was mentioned before, there

are many other pieces of evidence that Naturalists try to use to prove their point, but every

single attempt has the same problem. The belief comes first and they try to make the

evidence fit the belief. If you start with a different belief (for instance, that God created the

world) you can use the same evidence and the interpretation is entirely different.


14/2310

It is important, here, to clarify one more point. There are two parts of the theory of

evolution.

The first is called micro-evolution. This is simply a fancy word for the concept of natural

selection. Natural selection is simply the idea that life forms (both plants and animals) are

able to make small changes to adapt to their environment. We see this happening all over

the place. In fact farmers use this process to make

hybrid versions of various plants and animals. No

one has any dispute with this.

The second part of the theory is called macro-evolution. This is the part of the theory which

states that more complex life forms evolved from lower forms. This is the place where

evolutionists get into trouble. This is the place where

there is absolutely no science to back up the claims.

Here are ten absolutely essential issues that Darwinian

evolution cannot deal with.

1. No one has ever seen anything evolve to higher forms (macro-evolution).

2. The fossil record shows no intermediate forms.

3. Living species show no intermediate forms.

4. Natural selection removesrare mutations, not adds them.

5. The Law of Biogenesis (living organisms develop only from other living organisms)

proves that Darwinian evolution is impossible.

6. The DNA Code Barrier (trait changes have a ceiling) proves Darwinism is impossible.

7. Gene Depletion (the farther the species strays from its central original pattern, the

weaker it becomes) proves Darwinian evolution is impossible.

8. The First Law of Thermodynamics (the total energy of a system and its surroundings

remains constant) and the Second Law of Thermodynamics (inevitable and steady

deterioration of a system) proves Darwinism is impossible.

9. Mathematical probability says Darwinian evolution is impossible.

10. No one has ever seen nature add new and beneficial data or information to an existing

gene pool.

One of the things that evolutionary scientists try to do is to confuse people by using the

word evolution to mean both micro-evolution and macro-evolution. But when we do not

allow the two concepts to be mixed up, the beliefs of the evolutionists are shown for whatthey are - beliefsrather than facts.

So far, the believers in evolution are not doing so well in proving their position. But we

said there are four things that have to be proven. Lets look at the fourth one.

Natural Selection = Truth

Evolution = Falsehood


15/2311

4. Consciousness had to emerge from non-consciousness.

The subject of consciousness from non-consciousness only has to do with human beings.

It is a fact that human beings are self-conscious crea-

tures. That simply means that we are aware of ourselves

and are able to do various kinds of abstract thinking and

reasoning. This ability is completely unique to human

beings. No other creature among all natural living beings

has this ability.

As it relates to this ability, the question that Naturalistic

biologists must answer is: How did humans develop this

ability? As before, Naturalists only have one way to

answer the question it had to have happened by natural evolutionary means. After all,there is no other possibility.

But, once again, we bump into that same nasty little problem. There is no science to show

how that could have happened. The belief of the evolutionists is that humans evolved a

brain that was big and complex enough to run the computations necessary to give humans

a sense of self-consciousness. In the same way, they believe that any animal would be able

to do this if their brain evolved to a high enough level.

But oops, theres that problem. This is a faith assumption. There is no science to show that

this is what happened. Even more, there is no science to show how it even could have

happened. Since Naturalism requires this Naturalistic, scientific confirmation, it becomes

a huge obstacle in believing this approach about how to understand reality. Naturalism

simply does not support its own requirements. It bases its entire structure on a set ofbeliefs

which it cannot prove.

? Non-consciousness Consciousness ?

Faith

Faith

FaithFaith

Faith


16/2312

Understanding Theism

Looking at Naturalism, we can see that there are some very difficult obstacles which it is

simply not able to overcome. But to be fair, we have to also subject Christian Theism to

the same kind of evaluation that we did for Natu-

ralism. We want to see what kind of evidence

exists to support this belief. Of course, ChristianTheism is the belief that there is a God who exists

outside of the material universe. For his own pur-

poses, he created material reality and is responsible

for keeping it going. To be completely clear, this is

the God who is revealed in the Bible.

Since we are claiming that this view is the truth, it

is only fair to give it the same scrutiny that we gave

Naturalism. We must explore whether or not theoperation of the real world matches up with the teachings of Christian Theism. We will

start by determining what must be true if the Christian Theistic approach to biology is to

be right.

So, just what has to be true in order for the Christian Theistic approach to to be right

concerning the origin of life? Here, there are two basic ideas that must be proven.

1. An all powerful God must exist.

2. God had to have created the natural universe in an orderly way which could be

understood by those who are studying it.

As we look at these two statements, there is an important point that we must address before

we can move forward. It is the point that neither of these statements can be assessed using

the same approach which was used to evaluate Naturalism. With Christian Theism there isnothing in the requirements which we are able to put under a microscope or in a test tube.

Christian Theism doesnt require a natural explanation as did Naturalism. This belief

insists that there is a supernatural God, so we are required to use other means to address

the proofs since there are no scientific experiments to deal with it.

This fact, though, does not thwart our search. Just because there is no scientific way to

get at God, does not mean there is no evidence for his existence. It is just that the evidence

is of a different nature.

How can we know?


17/2313

To give an example of this kind of thinking, con-

sider this. Occasionally an armadillo comes into

my yard at night and digs holes everywhere. I have

actually never seen it, but when I go outside and

see the holes, that is pretty strong evidence that he

actually exists. God has left plenty of evidence of

his existence. So even though we cant see him

with our physical eyes, there is evidence that is

pretty compelling.

The fact that Christian Theism is based on faith does not disqualify it from being the truth.

As we have already seen, Naturalism is also based entirely on faith, even though Natural-

ists try to make the case that it is not. Something is not the truth because we can prove it in

a scientific experiment. It is the truth if it matches up with the way the real universe is

actually ordered. We have already seen the lack of evidence for Naturalism. Now lets see

what evidence exists for Christian Theism.

1. There must be an all powerful God.

For Christian Theism to be true, an all powerful God must exist who is capable of creating

the material universe. Obviously there is no scientific proof for this, but there are several

lines of evidence which back up the Christian belief in God.

A. Christian Faith Matches up with the Way Human Beings Experience the Reality of Life

Christian beliefs match up very nicely with the way human beings actually experience life

in the material world.

We experience life as personal, self-aware beings.

The Bible teaches that God is a personal, self aware being and

mankind is created in his image.

We have a sense of transcendence.

The Bible teaches that God is a transcendent person.

Human beings in virtually every society throughout the ages have

had a sense that there is a transcendent God. We experience life in relationships.

The Bible teaches that God interacts with mankind in a personal

relationship.

The structure of the human psyche and social organization is based

on human relationships.

We experience life based in spiritual qualities.

The Bible teaches that God is a spiritual being and that man is made in his image.

All Powerful God


18/2314

Mankind operates in this world as a spiritual being. This is revealed in such things

as: self-conscious personality, intelligence, morality, creativity, ability to self-con-

sciously communicate, etc.

We experience life based on natural, universal laws.

The Bible affirms that material reality is based on a fixed set of natural laws, while

also acknowledging that God can supernaturally intervene in material reality.

We are capable of knowledge.

The Bible reveals a God who has knowledge and teaches that mankind is created in

his image.

B. Mankind Matches Up with the "Image" Characteristics of God That Are Revealed in the

Bible

One of the important aspects of human existence that is taught

in the Bible is that man is created in the "image of God." That

being the case, if we know what those "image" characteristics

are, we can compare that with humanity and see if they match

up. This is one more piece of evidence that points to the truthof Christian Theism.

It is important to understand that the Biblical idea of "image"

is not a physical characteristic. In other words, man does not

physically look like God. Rather, it is a set of characteristics

which define the personhood of God and, thus, the personhood

of humankind.

We know, at least, what some characteristics are because his character and qualities are

spelled out in the Bible. Let's examine for a moment what we do know. God is understood

to be:

Eternal (Revelation 1:8)

Self-conscious (Exodus 3:14)

Reflective (Jonah 3:8-10)

Self-determinate (Matthew 6:10)

Personal (Isaiah 55:6-7)

Transcendent (Jeremiah 23:24)

Spirit (John 4:24)

A being with knowledge (1 Corinthians 1:20-25) Able to have dominion over the world (Genesis 17:1)

Good (Mark 10:18)

Just (Romans 2:1-2)

Loving (1 John 4:8)

Existing in relationship (Revelation 3:20)

As we look at these characteristics, we see that, indeed, mankind matches up. We,

certainly, do not necessarily have these characteristics to the degree that they are revealed


19/2315

to be in God himself, but they are evident to the degree that it is possible within the human

frame. This, by itself, is not proof of the existence of God, but it is one more piece of

evidence.

C. The Christian Faiths Authority (the Bible) has been Validated

Now, let's look at some of the evidence which points to the truthof Christian Theism based on the claims made in the Bible.

Obviously, there are many books and research papers which go

into great detail concerning each these matters. It is only our

intention here to list the main lines of evidence for this so that we

can see the big picture.

1) Accurate Preservation of the Bible

The Bible has been accurately preserved and transmitted to us throughout the ages.

The evidence for this is overwhelming.

The Bible is consistent with itself even though it was written by approximately 40 authors over about a 1500 year period.

2) Fulfilled Prophesy

The Bible contains literally hundreds of prophesies that have been fulfilled in minute

detail. Some of those prophesies were made hundreds of years before the fulfillment.

Jesus matches up with the identity of Messiah from prophesy.

3) Jesus Christ Was Who He Said He Was

If Jesus was who he claimed to be, the truth of the Christian faith is virtually assured. Bymaking his claims, he was either crazy, lying or truthful. There is no evidence that he was

either crazy or lying.

Jesus Christ believed he was God. (Matt. 20:225-28, Mark 2:6-12, Luke 22:67-71,

John 4:25-26, Rev. 1:17-18 - and many more.)

The eyewitnesses that lived and worked with Jesus believed he was God. (Matt. 28:9,

John 1:1, Acts 7:55-60, Romans 10:13-14, 1:Cor. 1:1-2, Phil. 2:5-11, Col. 2:9,

Hebrews 1:6 - and many more.)

People who knew Jesus and were present are the ones who wrote the gospels and other

New Testament writings.

Jesus life stands the test. He lived up to what he taught. Medical descriptions of the death and resurrection of Jesus are strong.

After the resurrection, Jesus body really was gone.

Jesus was seen after the resurrection by the apostles, close associates and over 500

more people.

4) Outside Historical Evidence

There is strong evidence of the truth of the New Testament's information outside of

the Biblical text from secular historians.


20/2316

5) Scientific Evidence

There is overwhelming archaeological evidence that the places and events recorded in

the Bible are true.

6) Direct Effects of Jesus on Individuals and Society

The disciples were willing to die for their beliefs. No one will put their life on the line

for a lie.

The conversion of skeptics based on what they actually saw and experienced. (ex.

James, Paul)

Changes to key social structures and a completely new theology among former Jews.

Literally thousands experienced this life change and were willing to adopt the beliefs.

Communion and Baptism (the celebration of an execution and a curse) became the

focal point of the belief system - an unheard of element.

It is virtually unheard of for a belief system to emerge and grow as this one did without

any kind of violent coercion whatsoever.

Billions of people throughout history have had their lives changed because of their

relationship with God through Jesus Christ, and will testify to his actual existence.

7) The Failure of Opponents to Disprove the Resurrection

Many have tried to discount the evidence for the resurrection and none have stood up

to scrutiny.

2. God had to have created the natural universe in an orderly way which could be

understood by those who are studying it.

The second thing that must be true if Christian Theism is to stand up as a foundation for

studying biology is that the natural universe must be under-

stood as an orderly and natural system. Indeed, Christian

Theism passes this test. The Bible reveals a natural universe

that is made in such a way as to operate by fixed natural laws.

The fact that Christian Theism asserts a supernatural God

who created the natural universe does not in any way take

away from the fact that the natural universe is completely

orderly and operates by natural law. In fact, the individuals

who invented modern science were all Christians who usedthis very fact as the underlying foundation for their studies.

They believed that God created the material universe in an

orderly and systematic manner which could be systematically

studied - and they proceeded to do so. It was not until many

years later that Naturalistic scientists tried to divorce this

foundation from science.


21/2317

In fact, the dirty little secret is that Naturalism would not have been able to birth modern

science. There is nothing in the worldview, itself, which would point adherents to see order

in the universe. It was only after the fact had been established, that order does, indeed, exist

in the universe, that Naturalism was able to come in and try to claim it as its own.

Now, some Naturalists might object that Christian Theists are not able to give scientific

proof that these two conditions have been met. But Christian Theism doesnt require that.

It was stated up front what must be proven for Christian Theism to be true, and evidence

has been given for that. Based on those requirements, and the assessment of reasonable

folks, we can assert that we have met the requirements. We believe that there is an all

powerful God who has created the material universe in a way which operates based on

natural law and which can be examined and understood. Just because God cant be

analyzed using a Naturalists requirements does not mean he does not exist. In fact, if the

Naturalist would seek God the way Christians suggest, they too would find God.

PROO

F


22/2318

What Shall We Say, Then?

So with Christian Theism, what do we have? We have an intelligent being (God) who

thought up a natural universe and created it out of nothing. As we look at the pieces of this

universe, what do we see? We see order, we see information, we see components in every

part of the natural universe that have the appearance

of being designed by a higher intelligence, and we seeelements within the natural order which have no logi-

cal natural origin (matter, life, consciousness).

The fact that an intelligent designer is put forth to

account for these elements does not take away from

the ability of scientists to study life, and study it

effectively. In fact, the knowledge that it all was

designed in an orderly and systematic way gives us

the confidence that it actually can be studied and known. As we have already seen, that is

how modern science emerged in the first place.

Now, if Naturalists want to put their theory on the table as a possibility and debate the

evidence, then let them go for it. But to try and sweep the inconvenient facts regarding the

problems with Naturalistic evolution under the rug as if they did not exist, and insult those

who want to propose a Theistic approach to understanding life, is quite disingenuous.

Indeed, the evidence points to the conclusion that Darwinian evolution could not possibly

be true. On the other side, the existence of an intelligent creator makes perfectly logical

sense, and the God proposed by Christian Theism has much supporting evidence.


23/23

About the Author

Dr. Freddy Davis is involved in a wide variety of ministry activities.

He is an, author, seminar speaker, Executive Director of MarketFaith

Ministries, pastor and the owner of TSM Enterprises.

Freddy received his BS in Communications from Florida StateUniversity as well as an MDiv and DMin from Southwestern Baptist

Theological Seminary. He spent more than 16 years overseas serving

as a missionary (11 years in Japan and 5 years in the former Soviet

Republic of Latvia).

Freddy lives in Tallahassee, Florida with his wife, Deborah. They have one son, Ken.

About MarketFaith Ministries

MarketFaith Ministries was founded for the purpose of challenging, teaching and encour-

aging Christians to clearly understand and faithfully live out the Christian faith in the

marketplace. We do this by developing resources and conducting training seminars on the

topic of worldview.

To inquire about speaking engagements or about obtaining worldview resources, contact

Freddy by e-mail at [email protected]. Or you may fax him at 850-514-4571. And feel

free to visit the MarketFaith Ministries website at http://www.marketfaith.org where you

can sign up for Worldview Made Practical, our free e-mail newsletter.

Books by Freddy Davis.

These books are available at:

www.marketfaith.org

those pesky little problems of evolution

Documents