A Counter Argument to Evolution

Does the scientific evidence truly favor evolution? It is amazing how those who believe in evolution are certain that you and I were created by natural selection working on chance mutations. They believe the evidence is overwhelming and that anyone who does not believe this is a dumb bunny, if not a simple-minded Bible believer. But what they don’t understand is that it is impossible for matter to arise from nothing since nothingness by definition has no creative mechanism.

While it can be argued that God, although invisible, exists and is therefore something, it would be logically impossible for Him to be physical since anything physical would have constituent components and therefore require an overseeing, observing self and an image as the means by which the physical components are bound together as a whole. This transcendent Observer is referred to in the Bible as pure Spirit.[1] We are, if you will, akin to qualia in His visual field — even if we can only see the manifestation of His inviolable  nature: worldly beauty and, more deeply, the laws of physics – in which, according to the Bible, “we live and move and have our being.” As explained in other posts, the equation E = mc2 could not apply to either energy or matter apart from an anticipated image since it is the momentary absence of an image which transforms energy into material form. It is this contrast between the anticipated and the actual, referred to in other posts as an expectancy gap, which explains the release and channeling of energy into the creation of matter — as revealed to us by the cortico-limbic design of the human brain. (Please see my recent book, Consciousness Finally Explained: A Perfect Synthesis of God and Brain, for an amplified discussion of the supernatural nature of this limbic design. See my earlier and longer book,  Journey to the Center of the Brain: Explaining Mind in a Universe of Matter, for an in-depth discussion of brain anatomy and how the many centers of the brain work together in synthesizing an image out of the many sensor qualia streaming into the weight- and temperature-regulating nuclei of the limbic brain — after being expectantly abstracted in the cerebral cortex.)

God did not in some human sense “think us all up.” Nor could we have evolved – in His mind or elsewhere. Rather, we mirror the very nature of His being. Further, Jesus, it becomes apparent, is the incarnation of the spiritual Father apart from whom the brain could not function. Indeed, the Bible is clear that Jesus is the One who made us and everything that exists.

Why, given all the religions of the world, is Jesus the only way? Because He is the only one without sin. What is sin? It is anything which separates us from a righteous God. Other religious prophets, all of whom were legalistic (the exact opposite of unconditional love) — and none of whom had an empty tomb – fall short of the righteousness and perfection required for entering the kingdom of God. Why? Because they are not God-in-the-flesh. “Eternal” life is therefore only available through Jesus. We must by faith in Jesus “be clothed with the righteousness of God.” Otherwise, not out of spite, but consequent to His righteousness — meaningless apart from consequences — we will be excluded from His Kingdom.

Some say evolutionary theory, like gravity, has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. But such a claim, in my opinion, is the result of scientists having been taught from a very tender age that matter is fundamental — justifying, when they meet resistance, by selecting and twisting the evidence to accommodate their worldview. This may fall short of intellectual dishonesty since it is what anyone would do given an arbitrary, limited, materialistic worldview. Indeed, from my well-researched perspective, the evidence – for example, the fossil record – strongly favors a biblical interpretation: a worldwide flood in which fossils of all descriptions were laid down by receding waters, including in clusters where species supposedly separated by millions of years are found all mixed together – not to mention layers having trees vertically aligned across many layers. Also, marine life has been found on the top of the highest mountains all around the world.

And so much more, including radiometric and cosmological data, overwhelmingly pointing to creationism and the supernatural accuracy of the Bible. Indeed, if cannot be taken  literally, the entire Bible becomes untrustworthy and its gospel message can and should be doubted. The Gospel is only “good news” if we are in fact redeemed by faith as contrasted with the oft flaunted Golden Rule which, if you  stop to think about it, engenders more hate than love. It’s best that we acknowledge and accept Jesus as the only way to become the righteousness of God.[2]

A new rebellious front against God is emerging even in subatomic physics. The argument goes something like this: there is now evidence that “something routinely comes from nothing and God is no longer needed.” For example, atheists believe that the discovery of the Higgs boson rules out the need for a transcendent Creator. Why? Because the Higgs boson can be envisioned as responsible for the creation of matter, creating mass by slowing the movement of particles as they move through the “Higgs field.” Unfortunately, the origin of such a field remains a mystery and we are back to “quantum fluctuations” for explaining how something comes from nothing, essentially doing an end-run around the image-mediated restraint of the Second Law — proving the existence of God since every image is personal by definition.

1.  John 4:24

2.  2 Corinthians 5:21


About Glenn Dudley

GLENN DUDLEY became interested in the mind-body problem as a Pre-Med student at the University of Colorado where he emphasized studies in physics, philosophy, and Judeo-Christian theology. He received his M.D. degree from the University of Colorado in 1969. After a mixed Psychiatry/Medicine internship, he worked for two years at MIT's Neurosciences Research Program -- a think tank whose objective was that of understanding how the hard-wiring of the nervous system mediates thought and emotion. Then, he spent a year in the Department of Psychiatry at Tufts Medical School in Boston reviewing the world's literature on psychological and emotional predispositions to cancer. From 1975 to his retirement in 1998 he practiced primary care medicine.
Comments are closed.