Creationism or Darwinian Macroevolution: Which is True?

Darwinian Macroevolution has been scientifically proven to be the process which created all of the life forms we see today. Right? Well not so fast… To the naive college student just wanting to pass a class, this article may be bad news.

With academic institutions teaching Darwinian macroevolution as if it were proven fact, should we be taking a second look at Creationism as a possible explanation for how we got here?

There are many philosophical and scientific arguments for and against Darwinian macroevolution. Many scientists believe that it is proven fact, and indeed it is taught as such in many academic institutions. But a groundswell of scientists have come to reject this theory as unproven and unscientific, in light of new knowledge.

Today I’ll share some philosophical arguments against Darwinian macroevolution and for Creationism. I’ll also give you some links to articles and books which do a much better job than I ever could of explaining the case against the crumbling theory of Darwinian macroevolution.

Moral Relativism in a Post-Modern Society

Without a divine Lawgiver that all are accountable to, any person’s idea of right and wrong, is just as valid as anyone else’s. When people start to think this way, moral relativism, situational ethics, and justification of all kinds of atrocities abound. We see this in our society today with rampant acceptance of homosexuality, along with the silent holocaust of over 40 million unborn American children since abortion became legal in the U.S. in the early 1970s.

As far as knowing what is right or wrong in a very basic sense, there are some things that people generally have a good sense for. Certain things we do, we know are wrong, because there is a universal sense of basic right and wrong among all men. But even this comes from God. Otherwise, how could one possibly explain the fact that, for example, murder is considered wrong in every culture? Or that it’s wrong to sleep with another person’s spouse? Or that lying, cheating, stealing are all wrong? Or that it’s a good thing to help out someone in need? Indeed, we humans do have an innate sense of basic right and wrong. We see God’s claim to have written His law on the hearts of men, in Romans 2:14-15. If you don’t have a Bible, here it is:
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

It’s About Credibility

I believe the Bible’s account of creation in Genesis chapter 1 is true enough to be relied upon as the most credible account of how we got here. An increasing number of scientists agree, and are becoming increasingly outspoken in this area. Scientists who are intellectually honest, will at least consider it as a possibility, as it does a much better job of describing our origins than macroevolution, which has always been just a theory,
has never been scientifically proven, and falls apart when the circular reasoning which is used to support it is exposed. Even in his book,
Origin of Species, Darwin admitted that it was all just a theory, and new scientific discoveries could prove him wrong. His research was so
primitive, that he thought that a cell was nothing but an outer membrane filled with water.

The Mafia of the So-Called “Educated Elite”

There are many cases where professors are being expelled from universities for even questioning the asserted factuality of Darwinian macroevolution. Remember, it was always just a theory, not fact, and again, has never been proven except by flawed circular reasoning, which starts with the assumption that it is true, and therefore doesn’t actually prove anything. If you go through the same set of arguments used to support this theory, only with the assumption that it may not be true, then it doesn’t pass the muster of the industry-accepted Scientific Method. In other words, it is a faith, a religion, but even at that, it is a less credible one than belief in a Creator, since the scientific evidence at least supports creationism as a reasonable explanation of how we got here. Yet when scientists consider Darwinian macroevolution, they speak of it as a proven scientific fact, never questioning whether the industry-accepted Scientific Method has been applied to it to test whether or not it is true. Indeed, under the scrutiny of the Scientific Method, Darwinian macroevolution would be disproven, or at the very least, not proven to be true).

I would posit (as has been admitted by many of the early believers in Darwinian macroevolution) that the reason most scientists place their faith in this religion, is that by believing in it, they can trick their minds into thinking that they are not accountable to a higher power (God) who is perfect and holy, and therefore they can live any lifestyle they choose, without accountability to a Creator.

To those who are still stubbornly pushing this counterfeit on our students, I would say REPENT, which means to CHANGE YOUR THINKING. You may have yourself fooled, but you don’t fool God and you don’t fool anyone who knows Him. We live in a world where there is so much information and so much research, that anyone who is intellectually honest, who truly desires to know the TRUTH, and can find it. There is no such thing as something being “true for you, but not true for me”. What is true is TRUE, to the EXCLUSION of everything else. What is true is true, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER A PERSON BELIEVES IT. Truth doesn’t require belief in order to be true, it remains true anyway, and woe to those who ignore it. Jesus pronounced judment on unbelievers who have heard His word, seen miracles, and yet were indifferent, in Matthew 11:20-24 (I thank my pastor, Rick Kress, for expositing these verses this very day):

20 Then He began to rebuke the cities in which most of His mighty works had been done, because they did not repent:
21 “Woe to you, Chorazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! For if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.
22 But I say to you, it will be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon in the day of judgment than for you. 23 And you, Capernaum, who are exalted to heaven, will be[a] brought down to Hades; for if the mighty works which were done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.
24 But I say to you that it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment than for you.”

If you remember anything about Sodom and Gomorrah, those were the two cities God burnt up because of rampant homosexuality and other immoral sexual behavior.

So, What Is the TRUTH?

Ok, so back to the original topic. Here’s a challenge for you. If you’re truly intellectually honest, then I challenge you to read This Article which compares Creationism and Darwinian macroevolution. It originally started out as an attempt to discredit Creationism, but went horribly wrong. I would encourage you to read the whole thing. They also have lots of other articles there that would be a great read, since they offer related information.

Recently, I’ve been reading a book title “The Case for a Creator” by Lee Strobel. I must say it’s very compelling. I would challenge you to read this book, I think it will really get you thinking. There are many deep thinkers who are interviewed in this book, and their testimonies of how they became believers in God THROUGH their studies of science, is very enlightening. It stands in stark contrast to the shallow-minded, circular reasoning that is used to support Darwinian macroevolution.

What I Believe

I do believe that God is holy, and that He has given us His law and made us accountable to Him to live by it. I do believe there will be a day when every one will stand in front of Him and give an account for our lives. I also believe that in our fallen state, since the original sin of Adam, we are unable to keep God’s law perfectly. I also believe it’s not what we do, but who we know, that gets us in. I believe Christ was
God who became a man, lived a sinless life, and died to pay the death penalty for our sins. This Web Site describes it pretty well.

In short, I believe that Christ is God, and that He already paid the penalty for our sins, and that we can know Him in this life, and have fellowship with Him for all eternity. It all depends on whether we will submit our will to His, and recognize Him as Creator, Savior, Redeemer and Lord of all. The one who spoke, and the universe exploded intoexistence.

I believe if you will seek Him in prayer, He will make Himself known to you. I would just encourage you to at least try. The difference in your life will be night and day. It’s so wonderful to know the God of the universe is by your side every step of the way, bearing your burdens. I’ve been a believer for over 22 years now. I’ve backslidden at times, but God always called me back and put my life back together better than ever before. I owe everything to Him.

My prayer is that you will know Him and be blessed by your relationship with Him, in the same way I have been. He created each and every one of us, made us unique for His pleasure and His glory. He loves you enough so that if you were the only person who ever lived, He still would have come to die for you.

If you would like to know more, you can contact me on the “Contact” page of this site or at

God Bless!

One response to “Creationism or Darwinian Macroevolution: Which is True?”

  1. I have found these arguments beyond the pale because they fail to rise to the level requiring attention. I think there is a crisis of belief in the US. Belief and faith, what this means is at issue. Human fallibility is tossed out the window. Faithful flock toward concepts that are not reconciled with observation, only to create community and identify each other. Creationism is a secret handshake. You must be careful following the example of Christ; he was a perfect man and could not err in judgement. We are not perfect. Who are we to say that we interpret the Bible exactly when the reader is broken. I would say don’t call it faith if you’re not facing weakness, vulnerability and uncertainty. Otherwise we are so vain that we can create truth using our minds the way God created the universe. So I’d rather not see this issue rising to the top. It’s a trap, divisive and vain.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.