The Doctrine of Evolution - Genesis 1:20-31

As we’ve been looking at the story of creation in Genesis, we’ve seen that the Bible teaches that God created the universe, all the animals, and human beings. The question we must ask is whether God indeed created these things, or whether they evolved by natural processes.

Whenever you talk about creation, one of the questions people invariably ask is whether Christians believe in evolution. For many in the scientific community, belief in evolution is the litmus test of whether a person is a true scientist or not. If a person questions any element of the doctrine of evolution, they are deemed to be unscientific. When I was in college I studied biology at a state university. One day we were sitting outside my lab, and the topic came up that I was a Christian who believed that God had created the universe, and that evolution did not explain the origin of life. The Graduate Assistant in charge of my lab was shocked. I don’t recall his exact words, but he said something along the lines of, “I thought you were smart. I thought you were a good scientist. How can you believe that?” Though he had seen me as smart and a good scientist based on my work and his interactions with me before, the fact that I held a different view of evolution caused me to immediately be labeled a bad scientist and unintelligent.

Sadly, this attitude is pervasive in our society today. To disbelieve or to even question any element of the current evolutionary theories is to be deemed unscientific. This morning we are going to tackle this issue head-on. We will look at what scientists mean when they talk about evolution, whether this view is compatible with the Bible, and how Christians ought to respond to those who believe differently. Even if you haven’t had a science class in decades, you will still find our study today to be relevant.

What is Evolution?

Before we get too far into the discussion, we must define the term evolution. Definitions of evolution can range from something as simple as “change over time” to highly technical, complex definitions. When we discuss evolution, it is important that we settle on a definition at the outset, as sometimes people switch definitions without warning.

One definition of evolution refers to the changes we see within a given species as they adapt to their environment. Using this definition evolution is clearly seen in the world around us. This type of evolution is what Charles Darwin observed and what led him to formulate his theory of the origin of life and the diversity we see all around us. Darwin described the mechanism by which species evolve as natural selection.

The idea of natural selection is pretty straightforward. Within any given population there are varied traits among individuals. If you look around the room today you will see every person has different traits, abilities, skills, and genetics. Natural selection says that the traits present in a population change based on what is most advantageous for survival. For example, if we had a bunch of deer, half of which were white and half that were brown, the brown deer would be much better adapted to survive because the white deer would stick out like a sore thumb and would be much more likely to be killed by predators (including hunters!) Over time, we would see fewer and fewer white deer, and a greater number of brown deer because more brown deer would live long enough to reproduce. This is one example of how natural selection works. A given population will adapt to its environment, and over time the traits of that population change based on what is most beneficial for survival.

This type of evolution is clearly visible in the world around us, and there are many examples we can see both in our current world and throughout history. This is often where discussions about evolution begin—with this clearly visible and established definition. However, this is not the only definition of evolution that exists…and often people jump from one definition to the other without warning.

The other definition of evolution states that just as we can see how small variations happen in organisms over time, big changes will also happen over much greater periods of time. This definition of evolution is used to describe the origin of life on the earth, and it describes how we ended up with all the different species we see in the world.

This is a very different definition of evolution, and one that does not have the scientific support we are often led to believe. Unfortunately, because the same word is used in two very different ways, sometimes people argue that if you deny the second type of evolution, you are also denying the first (well-established) type. That is not the case at all. I believe the scientific and biblical evidence clearly supports the first type of evolution but not the second.

Scientific Problems with Evolution

Though much of the scientific community would have you believe otherwise, there are several issues with evolution as a theory of origins. I want to take a few minutes to explain some of these issues.

First, there is the issue of the formation of life. If you have taken a science class in the last 20-30 years that discussed evolution you may have heard about a famous experiment that supposedly proved that life could have come about by purely natural means. It was the Miller-Urey experiment. This experiment put together a bunch of chemicals together to simulate an atmosphere in a closed environment. In this closed environment, they introduced electrical charges to simulate lightning strikes that might have been present in the early earth. (There is no evidence to support the notion that any of these conditions ever existed on earth, however).

When the experiment concluded they discovered amino acids, which are the basis of proteins, which are complex chemicals that do almost everything within our cells today. Some argue that this experiment shows how life could have come about by purely natural means. It does not. I don’t want to bore you with too much chemistry, but there are more than 2,000 different kinds of amino acids in nature, yet only 20 are used in proteins. And amino acids occur in both right-handed and left-handed variants, but only the left-handed ones are used in proteins. Natural processes typically result in a mix of both left and right-handed amino acids. So, even though amino acids showed up in this experimental soup, it does not mean that proteins were close behind. And the same electrical charge that created amino acids would have destroyed any proteins that did form. Scientists have so far been unable to come up with any real solution to how life could have arisen by natural means.

An even greater problem is the information required to create life. We’ve talked before about DNA and its complexity. DNA contains all the assembly information for a cell and for an organism. It has instructions on how to replicate itself perfectly, for what parts of the code should be used and when, and it has all the information necessary to make a human a human, a dog a dog, and a fish a fish. Every cell in your body contains all the information necessary to become a brain cell, a heart cell, a skin cell, a bone, or a tooth, but the code found in DNA tells the cell what bits of information to use and what bits to ignore in order to become the type of cell it is supposed to become. DNA tells all the machinery of a cell how and when to operate. Modern science still cannot explain how either the information or the machinery came to exist.

But even once life did exist, evolution still does not explain how species develop new traits and evolve into something different. In order to develop new traits, information needs to be added to the genetic code in an organism’s DNA. Evolution proposes that small changes can eventually add up to big changes, which makes sense on a large scale, but it doesn’t work at the chemical and cell level. The problem is that according to the theory of evolution, traits only become prevalent in a given population if they are beneficial and help the organism survive better. A half-finished, non-working eye, lung, or set of gills is unlikely to convey any advantage for survival (and may even make it impossible to survive). These traits only become beneficial when they are fully realized. The problem is that the amount of information in DNA that would be required to bring about a fully-realized new trait would likely be on the order of millions of letters. A change like that is no longer a small change that could happen randomly. Darwin himself pointed out that if certain traits could not have evolved by many small changes, then his theory would break down. The odds of trying to randomly produce so much new information are astronomical—to the point that it is impossible, even if we allow for millions (or billions) of years for such evolution to happen.

Interestingly, there is absolutely zero evidence of organisms evolving completely new traits. The scientific community has studied tens of thousands (possibly millions) of generations of simple organisms (like fruit flies and bacteria) and yet has never observed the evolution of new information in DNA resulting in new traits or abilities in these organisms. There are cases of variation within the existing genetic code resulting in adaptations (like antibiotic resistance), but no instances of new information somehow showing up in the genetic code. And yet, this is the predominant view within the scientific community today.

Biblical Problems with Evolution

Christians who have been taught the absolute certainty of evolution as a theory of origins are left with a difficult choice when they come to the Bible. Do they trust the Bible or do they trust what they have been taught in the science classroom? Some have tried to reconcile these two views with an idea called “Theistic Evolution”. The idea here is that God created by utilizing evolution. They propose that the days of creation were actually much longer periods of time, and that the reason the earth is so old is so God could allow evolution to take its course.

There are several problems with this notion. First and foremost, it’s not what the Bible says. The Bible says God created all the animals and human beings. It says He did it in six days. The rule we’ve mentioned before still applies: if the plain sense makes sense, seek no other sense. There is no biblical reason to believe God “created” through evolution.

Second, is that evolution requires death to work. The idea behind evolution is that those with weaker traits die while those with stronger traits live to pass on their genes to the next generation. The problem for the Christian is that there appears to be no death in God’s creation until sin entered the world. We are told that prior to the fall the animals didn’t eat one another, and we see no mention of death until we get to Genesis 3, when God sacrifices animals for Adam and Eve.

This means that even if each day of creation was millions of years in length, evolution would not happen until after the fall. Without death and competition, there is no survival of the fittest—because there would be survival of everyone.

Third, is that the Bible says the animals reproduced according to their kinds. This is the death knell for theistic evolution if we believe the Bible. Three different times in Genesis 1 it says the animals reproduced according to their kinds. In other words, a lizard didn’t give birth to a bird, and a fish didn’t give birth to an insect, and a monkey didn’t give birth to a human. Rather, each type of animal gave birth to its own kind. If we believe the Bible, this repeated statement alone is enough reason to disbelieve the idea that God used evolution to create life.

Fourth, is that the predominant model of evolution assumes naturalism. As we talked about in the first sermon in this series, naturalism is a religious belief that says there is no god and that matter is all there is. It is summed up by the famous saying of scientist Carl Sagan: “The Cosmos [universe] is all that is or was or ever will be.” In other words, matter is all that exists, and there is no god. Evolution is the attempt of naturalists to explain our origins without invoking a creator. The biblical account is quite clear, “In the beginning God created…” And at every step along the way, we are told that God created. This really puts the Bible at odds with evolutionary thought.

Finally, the best explanation for the order we see in creation is that it was put there by a Creator. As we marvel at the complexity of the cell, our bodies, and the way everything works together in the world around us, we are naturally drawn to conclude that it was designed by a creator rather than arising naturally. We do not expect order (particularly of the level we see in living creatures) to simply come about randomly.

Romans 1 tells us that God’s character is clearly seen in His creation, and that human beings can readily see that (if they are willing). It is interesting that even those who deny God often invoke a creator in other ways. They speak of Mother Nature being brilliant, or they say things like, “Life finds a way”. Sometimes people even speak of evolution or nature choosing one trait over another. All these turns of phrase bely a simple truth: the best explanation for the complexity we see all around us is exactly what the Bible says—that it was designed by God.

Why Does This Matter?

You may be tempted to ask why we would devote a Sunday morning to talk about evolution. Why does it matter whether we evolved or were created? There are many practical implications regarding morality, the meaning of life, and the intrinsic value of all things, but there is one that is, in my opinion, even more important: whether we believe the Bible or not.

Evolution creates a crisis of faith. What do we trust more, the current consensus of the scientific community or the clear teaching of the Bible? When the two positions come into conflict, we must decide to which one we will give the most credence. Sadly, many have chosen to believe the loudest voices in science rather than the Bible. This is a slippery slope. If we dismiss some portions of the Bible as untrue and irrelevant, how can we be certain the rest of it is true? How do we know what parts to believe (if any)?

Please don’t misunderstand me. I am not saying that Christians should check their brains at the door and believe the Bible blindly. I am not saying that we should dismiss scientific inquiry as unbiblical. Rather I am saying we should examine what we are taught critically. In college I often said I thought being a scientist made me a better Christian and being a Christian made me a better scientist. The reason was simple: I didn’t simply accept what I was taught either in the church or in the lecture hall. I wanted to examine the evidence for myself. I would encourage you to do the same. Think critically. Recognize your bias and the bias of those who are talking to you (not just with scientists, but pastors as well!) Do not simply accept what someone says because they use big words, have a fancy title, or a lot of degrees. Examine the claims for yourself and answer the question simply: which is more reasonable to believe, that this all happened by chance, or that there was a Creator who made it all? I believe the evidence will lead you to the Creator of the Bible.

How to Respond

So how should we respond to those who disagree with us? What should Christians do when they are confronted with a friend, co-worker, or teacher who staunchly affirms the doctrine of evolution? What should we do when we are in a classroom where evolutionary theory is taught? I’ve got a few suggestions.

First, seek to understand then to be understood. I cannot tell you how many Christians I have talked to who clearly do not understand the theory of evolution. All they know is that “evolution is wrong.” When they talk to someone who does understand it, they appear foolish, and are easily dismissed as a crackpot. Any time you talk to someone who disagrees with you, sit and listen. Ask questions. Seek to understand where they are coming from before you decide how to respond. Chances are you will learn something.

Second, be gentle and respectful. If you believe in a Creator who created us in His image, it means each person is worthy of respect (we’ll talk more about this next week). So, we should be respectful of those who disagree with us rather than trying to make them feel stupid or to make them look bad. Making a scene in a classroom rarely accomplishes much, though many think it is the epitome of standing up for Christ. The goal should not be to win an argument, but to help people understand the truth. So be patient. Don’t make a scene. Don’t try to make someone feel stupid. Calmly and clearly explain your beliefs to the best of your ability, and if you still don’t agree, leave as friends who respect one another.

Third, ask questions. One of the best ways to help someone see the flaws of their arguments is to ask them to explain some of the difficulties or inconsistencies you see in what they are saying. Again, the goal is not to make the person look dumb, but to help them see that things aren’t as clear-cut as they might believe. Most people have never really taken the time to examine their own beliefs (this includes many Christians). Rather than trying to take down someone’s argument from the outside, ask questions and let them wrestle with the answers. Many times, they begin to see the holes for themselves and that’s when the walls really start coming down. Raise some of the questions you have about the difficulties of evolution and let them try to answer them. Some people may have answers (which gives you more opportunities for questions!), while others will never have considered those questions. But asking questions is usually a much gentler (and more effective) way of approaching those who disagree.

Fourth, trust God to work in people’s hearts. You don’t have to convince everyone to believe what you do about the creation of the world. You don’t even have to convince people to trust in Jesus. You must simply explain the truth the best you can and trust God to change hearts. Simply seek to be faithful to the truth and to love others and you will be amazed how God uses you.

Evolutionary thought dominates the conversation in academic circles today, but that does not mean it is right. There is validity to some evolutionary concepts, but evolution as a theory of origins falls flat. It is not supported by the evidence, and quite frankly doesn’t really make sense to our minds either. We must refuse to simply follow the voices that are the loudest, and instead examine the evidence. I believe that if we do, we will come to the same conclusion we find in Genesis: “God created the heavens and the earth.” And if that’s true, the implications are endless—which is why we need to make sure we get it right.