Thoughts on the Different Focus of Two Views of Creation

The divide between those who believe God brought everything into existence, and those who believe mutations caused the entities we now see in space and earth, grows wider these days. Thirty years ago, my professors admitted to weaknesses in evolutionary theory or their theories of origins. Today, I think these same professors might fear for their jobs.

Similarities

• Both sides look at nature and see science at work.
• Both can invent ingenious devices or pharmaceuticals without a thought to their theories.
• Both are awestruck at the beauty and engineering in creatures and physics.
• Both have logical conundrums: Natural selection-ists cannot predict the next species to evolve. Creationists cannot explain with certainty Noah’s ark.
• Both believe we will discover new species in remote places.

The creationist sees beauty and says, “Isn’t God great?!” The evolutionist exclaims breathlessly, “Isn’t it amazing how mutations caused this moth and this plant to co-evolve?!” One excludes the amazing beauty of random but life-giving mutations. The other excludes the power of a superior being’s intellect.

Searching for Meaning

• Evolutionary theory searches for meaning in connections to other creatures or physical processes.
• Creation theory looks for impossibly complex but elegant designs that only an infinite mind could design.
• One has faith that all came from common ancestors thus we have a bit of crayfish, amoeba, and monkey in us.
• The other has faith that male and female together bear the stamp of God’s image.
• One believes that given enough time, a chimpanzee’s DNA will evolve into a human’s DNA.
• The other believes that some people look like chimpanzees, but really aren’t related except by similar design.

Fears and Logic

• An evolutionist fears wearing the label superstitious or religious nut-case.
• A creationist is baffled by intelligent scientists trying to explain how this-animal-became-another-animal by showing rough similarities but with absolutely no observable or repeatable evidence every other scientific discipline demands.
• “Evolution is real because I see no God and too much randomness.”
• “God is real because I see his design and too many mysteries.”
• The possible option that a real God exists who knows more than the scientist, who has more creative ingenuity than the scientist, and who has abilities beyond the mindless god of random mutations is rarely considered. The option for God is logically excluded.

A professor at our local University did not know I was a minister. We both attended the ground breaking for our local Fossil Center. He said to me, “I’m half expecting those crazy creationists to show up. Whenever I give a tour of this place some dumb a** Christian asks a stupid question about the age of the earth.”

I think that evolutionists believe deep down that their logic is flawed about the process (since no one has ever seen a new species evolve in the last two hundred years and quad-zillions of mutations have occurred in nature and in the laboratory), and that their jobs are in peril if the logic is wrong. I value the research that establishes relationship, connection, and understanding of vital processes in our world, but is it really that hard to give God credit?