Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Christian Crier

Home
About

Home
Evangelical
5 Flaws In The Theory of Evolution

5 Flaws In The Theory of Evolution

Last updated on: November 11, 2014 at 8:26 am by Jack Wellman

5 Flaws In The Theory of Evolution 2014-11-11T08:26:57-06:00 Jack Wellman

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

What are 5 flaws in the theory of evolution? Why do these flaws make it difficult to believe in the theory of evolution?

Flaws Not Taught

Unfortunately, evolution is taught as an absolute fact. It is sad that public education doesn’t reveal the weaknesses in this theory. They refuse to show the roaring silence of evidence of the transitional fossils. They decline to state that such random mutations cannot possibly increase an organism’s capabilities. They fail to say how such complexities of life forms could have occurred by random chance or blind luck. They don’t reveal the impossibility of life developing on its own. They ignore the fact that spontaneous generation has never been proven and in fact is a concept ridiculed by biologists. The theory of evolution doesn’t have any real idea on how life arose. Evolutionists readily admit that the theory of evolution doesn’t address the question of how life arose but only how it evolved once it did arise. If you were to teach anything else in the public schools without having concrete evidence it would be confined to philosophy where pure conjecture, speculation, and hypothetical assumptions would be discussed. How evolution is thought to be factual without lines of evidence it simply astounding.

The Lack of Transitional Fossils

When we hear about certain the discovery of “missing links” from time to time I ask “How can a missing link mean anything when the entire chain is missing?” What good is finding a missing link when we should expect to find millions upon millions of them and that a specific chain of transitional fossils could be established showing one specie evolving into another? Instead, they find fossils mislabeled as “missing links” that are in reality either a newly discovered species or a now-extinct species. They find one fossil and try to make it into the crucial missing link when there isn’t even a transitional chain in which to fit this supposed missing link into. A missing link means nothing when there is no line of evidence in the form of transitional fossils that can show us a gradual change of one species into another, new species. Public school and college textbooks have to depend on graphs, drawings, and computer images to fill in these enormous missing spaces. There are billions of fossils on or under the earth and hundreds of millions of living and now extinct species, yet there is not one single set of transitional fossils that clearly show one specie evolving into another or different species, therefore a lack of transitional fossils is, to me, a fatal flaw in the theory of evolution.

The Origin of a Species

Sadly, evolutionists do not include as part of the theory of evolution the answer of how life arose in the first place. I have heard many say that life had to arrive from outside of the earth but doesn’t this just push back the question? If life did come via an extraterrestrial source then how did that life arise? How could life have arisen where it was supposed to have come from? Either way, we have no scientific evidence that life can arise spontaneously. There have been multiple experiments over many years where scientists and/or biologists have tried to create a life form, even at the microscopic level, and time after time have failed miserably. Can life be generated from non-life or inorganic matter? The Law of Biogenesis states that life only comes from previously existing life. Spontaneous generation is now an obsolete theory on the origin of life. Even the more modern hypothesis called abiogenesis in which life is believed to have arisen over a time span of millions of years has never had any subsequent evidence to prove this is true. That’s why this topic is sometimes called “The Elephant in the Living Room.” It’s too big it miss and it’s so obvious but it’s still wantonly ignored.

The Complexity of Life

To believe that the information contained in DNA/RNA simply happened by random luck or blind chance is to believe that you can throw a stick of dynamite into a printing factory and come out with the U.S. Constitution. Information infers intelligence. To believe that eons of time could, on its own, create information is to give time the power to create. Although Neo-Darwinism necessitates that mutations must generate new information, not once have any mutations ever been observed where they created new and more complex organism that theorists of evolution see as necessary. Instead, genetic mutations, from the microscopic level, up to the animal or mammal levels, have resulted in less efficient DNA/RNA information and instructions and more often than not, produced mutations that are fatal or harmful to the organism.

The Cosmological Argument

Here is something that makes believing in the theory of evolution hard to accept. It is what is called the Cosmological Argument. This argument goes back thousands of years ago where it was Plato who believed that the Cosmos had to have had an “imparted motion” and must have required a “self-originated motion.” Thomas Aquinas’ conceived the idea that the universe had a First Cause which he believed to be God, Who Himself is uncaused. William Craig gave us the general form of the Cosmological Argument as such:

Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
The Universe began to exist.
Therefore, the Universe had a cause. [1]

For example, Craig said that “The first question which should rightly be asked” is what G.W. L. Leibniz wrote “Why is there something rather than nothing?” [2] R.C. Sproul of Ligonier Ministries once said that “If there was ever a time that nothing existed then nothing would exist now.” Since we know something now exists there must have been something that existed prior to this something. What in the physical universe did not have a beginning? What in the universe is eternal? What in the universe will not have an ending? To believe that the universe is eternal seems to go against conventional thought that the universe had a specific time and starting point or place like taught in the Big Bang theory. To believe that all that there is now was a result of time + chance + space = everything is attributing causative power to time or to chance or to space (nothingness). It’s like saying 0 + 0 + 0 = everything! Chance has no power as it is not a thing…or nothing in the sense that it is not physical and we know that nothing cannot produce or create something…even a little something. Having a 30% of rain does not cause rain to occur. Rain depends upon physical properties not on something like chance which is not tangible like chance.

The Scientific Method

Finally, there is the scientific method which typically establishes something previously theoretical into an established scientific fact so another flaw in the theory of evolution is that it is a historical scientific theory which clearly is non-repeatable. Operational science deals with repeated observations of currently existing phenomena so it is hard to confirm evolution as factual or as a concrete, absolute truism or axiom because it can’t be repeated or observed as it is taking place, thereby making it impossible to falsify. The word science means “knowledge” and science is the accumulation of knowledge. Science is an intentional, systematic and logical approach to discovering how things work in the universe so evolution cannot ever be a proven theory that shows that it works. Why do I say that? Because the scientific method must include these steps;

There must be observations made and recorded.

Information must be accumulated and questions must be asked about these observations.

A hypothesis must be formed from these observations and the information collected and predictions must be based upon this.

Then the hypothesis and predictions can be, hopefully, reproduced in an experiment.

Then the data can be analyzed and conclusions can be drawn that either result in the acceptance or rejection of the hypothesis.

Finally, the experiment should be reproduced until there are absolutely no discrepancies between the observations and the theory.

The bottom line is that the hypothesis must be testable and falsifiable, otherwise it cannot be accepted so my question to you is this; how can evolution be observed, then reproduced by experimentation, then analyzed, then reproduced again until there are no discrepancies found between the observations and the theory, and then be falsified? The answer is that it cannot nor can it ever be.

Conclusion

There are many more than these 5 fatal flaws in evolution. The theory of evolution is actually a faith-based belief since it must be accepted by faith. There is truly only One Source for the entire universe and all life forms and that is the Creator God. He doesn’t care if you believe this or not. He only cares that you repent and believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior. Your flaw will be after you die, you are judged according to your works (Rev 20:11-15) and since no one can ever be saved by works (Eph 2:8-9) you will be eternally lost, however if you have believed in Christ, then God will see you just as He does Jesus Christ (2 Cor 5:21). That is my hope for you.

Another Reading on Patheos to Check Out: What Did Jesus Really Look Like: A Look at the Bible Facts

Article by Jack Wellman

Jack Wellman is Pastor of the Mulvane Brethren church in Mulvane Kansas. Jack is also the Senior Writer at What Christians Want To Know whose mission is to equip, encourage, and energize Christians and to address questions about the believer’s daily walk with God and the Bible. You can follow Jack on Google Plus or check out his book Blind Chance or Intelligent Design available on Amazon

1. Craig, William L. “The Existence of God and the Beginning of the Universe.” Truth: A Journal of Modern Thought 3 (1991): 85-96.

2. G.W. Leibniz, “The Principles of Nature and of Grace, Based on Reason,” in Leibniz Selections, ed. Philip P. Wiener, The Modern Student’s Library (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1951), p. 527.

Previous Post

November 11, 2014

What Evidence Is There For Life After Death?

Next Post

November 11, 2014 Parable Of The Fig Tree: Summary, Meaning and Commentary

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Bible Answers Bible Definitions Bible Story Bible Study Bible Verses Christian Books Christian Entertainment Christian Fathers Christian Mothers Christian Quotes Devotional Famous Christians Music News Parables Prayers Quotes Sunday School Lesson Uncategorized Youth Sermons

Select a Month October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which Old Testament book is entirely written as a dialogue between God and a prophet?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Habakkuk Amos Malachi Zechariah