It’s safe to say from reading my previous posts you can infer that I am definitely not an evolutionist. I am a proponent of Intelligent Design through a theory called Irreducible Complexity. In a very broad sense, Irreducible Complexity is the theory that many aspects of life are far too complex to have originated by chance through natural selection; and, therefore, show evidence of a designer. As a Christian, I believe this Designer to be God Almighty and He has shown Himself in creation. Romans 1:19-20, “Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:” Sounds like the typical atheist is out of excuses, doesn’t it?
Now to the topic at hand, which is the inability of evolutionists to
think like evolutionists should think. I thought about this topic when
reminiscing about a debate I had with an evolutionist which culminated
in the person quoting a heralded supporter of the cause. The quote was
something along the lines of, “Well, the first thing we need to realize
is, we are not starting from scratch.” The sheer ridiculousness of this
quote in light of abiogenesis and a lack of irony detection from my
opponent’s mind took me aback for a little bit. I answered with an
obvious, “Of course you’re starting from scratch, you’re an atheistic
evolutionist. Where else would you start?” Unsurprisingly, he failed to
see my point. This individual debate brings to light a huge problem in
evolutionary thinking: evolutionists rarely ever start from scratch.
Rarely do you ever hear an evolutionist who goes all the way back to
the beginning; but if we are to discuss the origin of anything attaining
to life through an evolutionary lens, then it must go back to the first
proteins and how those developed. The problem is that we can’t explain
how proteins developed and how they started forming complex structures.
One prevailing view is that certain proteins are just attracted to other
certain proteins and thus stick together. However, advances in
biochemistry have shown that DNA is needed to build protein structures
which leads to another issue of where DNA has come from. This, in turn,
leads all the way back to questions about the big bang.
Inability to start from scratch is the least of evolutionist worries.
Have you ever wondered about the list of endangered species? Most of
the animals on the list are said to be almost driven extinct because of
human expansion. What’s funny is that a majority of the people who
maintain this list are most likely evolutionists. If we were to really
follow evolutionary thought to its logical conclusion shouldn’t we
realize natural selection is running its course? These species are not
able to survive the apparent rise of human evolution and thus are not
adapting quick enough to be deemed strong. Shouldn’t we let natural
selection follow through?
A common answer to this point is mentioning that man’s actions
against nature are contrary to evolution, speeding up the process, and
therefore must be stopped. This thinking is not conducive to a Godless
origin because isn’t man a product of mutation just like the rest of the
species on this planet? If we are nothing special as a species, then
our actions should just be part of the natural order of things.
I believe the reason people don’t follow this train of thought is due
to three reasons. The first reason is the fact that man was created
with a conscience or ability know right from wrong, however skewed it
may become. Number two would be historical precedent in the views of
Social Darwinists. Social Darwinism gave rise to eugenics which viewed
many human actions of preserving life as blight to evolution.
Eugenicists wanted to help natural selection along by eliminating “weak”
individuals and groups of people from the human gene pool. This type of
thinking is well demonstrated in the Holocaust and the Tuskegee
Reason number three is that if we really are nothing special then
what’s the point to human life? The extreme of pointless random life is
Nihilism which can be very depressing indeed. Nobody, including the
evolutionist, wants to believe that life is meaningless. However, if we
were to really think in a totally evolutionary vein then, essentially,
life has no point because we are just another species on this planet in a
stage of perpetual progression toward a random end.
Paul, In 1 Corinthians 15:32, describes the very sentiment of
pointless life, “If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at
Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? Let us eat and
drink; for tomorrow we die.”