The Evolution Theory
As taught in
our public schools today, the Organic Theory of Evolution accounts for
the origin of mankind as follows:
this planet originated several billion years ago, when electrical
disturbances caused reactions to occur in the chemicals of the primeval
ocean, and these reactions produced amino acids, and these amino acids
organized themselves into living cells. As time went on, more chemical
reactions caused the descen dants of these one-celled organisms to
mutate and develop into a variety of types of multi-celled plants and
continued, and as each new variety of organism appeared, natural
selection would result in its being either better or less suited to the
environment, and therefore it would either flourish or disappear. In the
long run, then, species of plants and animals better and better suited
to their respective environments appeared and developed.
“Man is the
highest product of this development. He is immediately descended from
the same ancestors as the apes; more remotely, from the same ancestors
as all mammals. He is himself still developing; that process is stalled
by our present lifestyle, but biologically it is inevitable.”
—The Bible Friend
“It Appears That,” Etc.
The theory of
the evolution of man is based on suppositions and inferences. As an
example, the first chapter of Charles Darwin’s book The Descent of
Man contains within a few pages, 20 expressions of uncertainty, such
as “seemed,” “it appears,” “take for granted,” “may,”
and “implies.” The concluding chapter of 14 pages has more than 50
such expressions. Within 30 years after publication the book was changed
in 87 places.
—Elizabeth A. Schroeter
Darwin’s Reversed Significance
1859 appeared Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species. It has been
called the most significant book of the nineteenth century. If so, it
was not because it set forth the theory of organic evolution—this had
been done before. Its importance was in Darwin’s explanation of the
“how” of organic evolution—natural selection. Evolution has
survived into the middle of the twentieth century, but Darwin’s
explanation of it has been largely rejected by modern evolutionists. In
other words, the feature of the Origin of Species most significant in
1859 (natural selection) seems to be least significant in 1980s while
the feature least significant in 1800s (organic evolution) seems to be
most significant in the present.
Getting Up To 4 Billion
Some feel that
great antiquity of men is necessary to produce the present population of
over 4 billion. This apparently is not the case.
If the flood
did occur 4,300 years ago (and it was probably much earlier), and if
only the people in the ark survived on the whole earth, there would
still be sufficient time to produce the present population. Even if each
two people produced, on the average, only 2.6 children in their lifetime
the population of the earth would then double each one hundred years.
the population each one hundred years for 4,300 years would produce a
population of 10,000,000,000,000. This is 3,000 times our present
population. No, the population of the earth alone does not require a
great antiquity of men.
Story Of Three Monkeys
Have you read
the humorous story of the three monkeys discussing the theory of
evolution? Sitting in a tree, one says to the others, “Listen, you
two. There’s rumor going around that can’t be true—that man
descended from our noble race. Why, the very idea is a dire disgrace!”
Then, listing things monkeys don’t do, he continued, “You’ll never
see a monkey build a fence around a coconut tree and then let all the
coconuts go to waste, forbidding all others a taste. Here’s another
thing a monkey won’t do: go out at night and get on a stew, or use a
gun or a knife to take another monkey’s life. Yes, man
descended—that ornery cuss. But brothers, he didn’t descend from
—Ray O. Jones
It’s Also A Fact
It’s a fact
… that the unearthed remains of plants and animals, called fossils,
are often found in a graduating scale of complexity, with the simpler
organisms being deepest in the rock strata. This fact has been used by
evolutionists as evidence of the slow development and great changes in
life over long ages of time.
It’s also a
fact … that fossils of all major branches of the animal kingdom have
been found in the Cambrian system of rocks, reputedly the second-oldest.
This shouldn’t have happened, if organic evolution is true, and the
evolutionists admit it is a problem.
Creation: The Easier View
Broadcasting Company once carried a symposium on the Origin of Life. All
the speakers took the view that life had in some way arisen
spontaneously from non-living matter at a remote epoch in time. But in
his summation, Dr. J. D. Bernal, who was in the chair, and who is
well-known for his materialistic views, made a striking statement. “It
would be much easier,” he said, “to discuss how life didn’t
originate than how it did.”
—Robert E. D. Clark
Literal Interpretation of Gen. 1
creation” view of Genesis 1, we think, has the strongest merits. It
has the following foundational observations:
(1) Heaven and
earth were created in six literal days. There is no interval between
Gen. 1:1 and 1:2.
(2) The earth
was created “empty and void” in the sense that no life and no
outstanding features, such as hills, valleys, were visible.
fall occurred after the creation of Adam and Eve. Gen. 1:31; Rom. 5:12.
came into existence at the time of Noah’s Flood. Gen. 6–9 recorded
an universal catastrophe.
Earth is probably not older than 10,000 years. Rocks and earth-materials
were created “of age.” Man and animals were not millions of years in
origin but of relatively similar years.
Paul Lee, Encyclopedia of 7,700 Illustrations, (Garland,
Texas: Bible Communications, Inc.) 1996.
to "Illustrations Plus" MENU