|
97 Chapter 16 Pitfalls for
Creationists In addressing the
problems connected with
the Evolution versus
Creation controversy it is
as well to
bear in mind
certain pitfalls into
which it is
easy to fall.
Some of these are as follows:- 1.
Assuming that the doctrine of evolution is wholly error and
contains no truth at all. It has
been well said
that there is
a particle of
truth in every
error and that
is what makes it
so dangerous. Take
for example what
the serpent said
to Eve in
Genesis 3:5 "Ye will not
certainly die; but God
knows that in the
day ye eat of
it, your eyes
will be opened, and
ye will be
as God, knowing
good and evil".
This we find contains an element of truth. The last
part was correct,
for God Himself
said: "Behold, Man
is become as
one of us,
to know good and
evil" (Genesis 3:22).
Not seeing this
may lead us
to attack everything
that evolutionists assert indiscriminately. In
the past there
have been those
who have stressed the fixity
of kinds to
such an extent
that they would
preclude any possibility
of a creature adapting to
its environment or
there being any
variation within a
species. Such a
view can give a
handle to evolutionists to
say that the creationist
is shutting his
eyes to demonstrable facts and
his judgment about
scientific matters is
therefore worthless. It
is therefore necessary to weigh
the value of
the evidence provided
by the evolutionist, accepting
proven facts, but not
always the conclusions
that the evolutionist arrives
at from those
facts. Thus, the evolutionist extrapolates from minor variations to
major ones, assuming
that given enough time almost anything can
happen. He assumes
from the fact
that many creatures have an
inbuilt ability to
adapt to their
environment, that over
millions of years
they can turn into
something quite different.
Again, the creationist
can accept that
there is an
order in creation: the
sea creatures and
the birds were
created first, then
the land dwelling creatures and
lastly mankind. This is
not greatly different from
the evolutionists thinking,
or in fact from
the order in
1 Kings 4:33,
going downwards: "He
(Solomon) spoke also
of cattle, and of
fowls, and of
creeping things, and
of fishes." (The only difference here from the order in
Genesis is in relation to the creeping things). 2. Treating a possible explanation
as if it were a fact. It is
often possible to
suggest an explanation for a
difficulty that may arise in connection with
creation or the
flood. The explanation
may be correct,
but should not
be asserted to be
so unless there are
clear scriptures to
support it or
other strong evidence.
For example, it is
sometimes said that
the animals in the
ark were probably kept there
in a state of
hibernation. This would
have overcome to
a large extent
the logistical problems
of keeping so many
animals in a
confined space for
a long period
of time. However
there is, so far
as I am
aware, no specific
scripture or other
evidence to support
this suggestion and it
should not therefore
be assumed that
there may not
have been another
means used to maintain
the animals safely
during their stay
in the ark.
God saw to
it that the
animals came to Noah
(Genesis 7:8 &
9; 7:15). Noah could build the ark, furnish it with food,
but collecting the animals together was no doubt beyond him, hence God was
involved in this |