I find lots of logical problems with that. The least of which is this question: How is the a priori exclusion of God any less religious than the inclusion of Him? But that isn't the question I am seeking to address here.
Rather, I want to address this evolutionist philosophy on the basis of progress through mutations. That implies that no single step can have any features that are absent in its predecessors. Rather, each step can only be an adjustment.
Yet, do we look at those animals most similar to us, the apes, and see something that is different only in degree? I don't think so. On the contrary, we see differences of kind! We have the power to reason, an esthetic sense, imagination, and even science itself. We have a culture, which is as inherent in us as are any of our physical qualities. Can we conceive of any human being, short of one who is mentally incapacitated, who does not imagine stories or demonstrate a spirit of inquiry? No, such a person would cease to be human. We wouldn't think of him as an 80% human, but only as a beast. Such qualities are absolutes, not subject to degrees.
Those qualities of humanity cannot be explained by evolution, because they do not proceed from our supposed predecessors. They are, however, explained by the creation account of Genesis. Humans differ in kind from animals because we alone were created in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). We alone were created to display the attributes of God (in a finite, analogical sense).
The dogma of evolution cannot explain all of the factors of the case, while biblical creationism can. So, by simple logic, evolutionary dogma must be rejected.
No comments:
Post a Comment