Evolution, man says, is a result of accidental changes (mutations) in
the genetic make-up of an organism

Evolution, man says, is a result
of accidental changes (mutations) in the genetic make-up of an organism. This
genetic make-up is the organism’s "blue print" which tells the cells
of the developing embryo what structures to make in order to become an
offspring similar to its parents. If an accident occurs such that the
organism’s blueprint is different from that of its parents, it will "grow
up" into an organism which differs from its parents. Evolution says that
if such a difference is beneficial toward the organism’s survival, the
difference would tend to persist from generation to generation. If other such
beneficial mutations occur, still more changes would take place, and over
billions of years, such accidental changes could result in the formation of a
man whose ancestry could be traced back to a unicellular protozoan. Such is
man’s reasoning as to his origin. The evolutionist thus attributes his
existence to accidental mutations. He exists only by chance.

 

But, man shows his own folly of
such faulty reasoning with regard to the question of differentiation (the
process by which a two-celled zygote is transformed into a child). The early growth
of a fertilized egg (the zygote) takes place by simple cell divisions which
produce many cells which are similar to each other. Hence we might suspect that
the genetic blueprint for these cells must also be similar. If this is true, a
zygote could never develop into a child, for the genetic blueprint would know
nothing of bone, muscle, nervous tissue, etc. But, we now could use the same
reasoning as man does with regard to evolution, that
is, "accidents" occur which change the blueprint as the embryo
develops, thus enabling it to form the complex structures of the body, just as
accidents occurred in the protozoan blueprint which resulted in the formation
of man. Such reasoning sounds utterly foolish, and rightly so. Man himself
realizes that such a complex organism as a child could never be thus produced
from a zygote merely by accident; yet, he claims his ancestry to be one of mere
chance. Man thus condemns his own carnal reasoning as to evolution by his
reasoning in connection with differentiation.

 

What a
contrast we have in God’s word, where the "fear of the Lord is the
beginning of wisdom." Man apart from God can not even attain to this
beginning of wisdom. It is not therefore surprising that he is so far from the
truth so many times. God says, "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of
the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a
living soul" (Gen. 2:7). What a resource! What a rock to stand on in the
midst of man made follies which would say otherwise! We ought to hearken to
God’s word rather than man’s for surely the wisdom of
this world is foolishness with God.

A CHALLENGE

 

How could an amoral
process, evolution, produce a moral being—man?

 

There is not a maze
of falsehood, not an error by which Satan has deluded man, and kept him thus
from God, which is not met in the Word.