Lesson 4: Creation Apologetics

Jia was walking in the park on a Sunday afternoon. As she looked at the beautiful flowers, she began to praise the Creator and to think about the Genesis creation story. Soon she met Lee walking towards her.

Jia called out, “Lee, isn’t this a beautiful park! How do you think it got here?”

Lee laughed. “You probably believe that your invisible God made all of this. But I know science; every real scientist knows that the world evolved over billions of years. Simple creatures evolved into more complex creatures. All this beauty came as the result of chance plus billions of years.

“The difference between us, Jia, is this: your belief in creation is based on blind faith; my confidence in evolution is based on facts. You can’t name one great scientist who believed in creation!”

Jia said, “That’s very interesting. I tell you what – let’s trade challenges. Next Sunday afternoon, we’ll meet back in this park. I will answer your challenge: ‘Name one great scientist who believed in creation.’ But you must meet a challenge for me: ‘Give me one example of a non-living article evolving into a living creature.’ I think that your belief in evolution is based on ‘faith’ just as much as my belief in creation! Let’s talk next Sunday.”

► What do you think about Jia’s statement?  Is belief in evolution based on faith, or can it be proven scientifically? What about creation?

In this lesson, we will study evidence that we were created by God. It is amazing how hard some humans try to deny our Creator. Many books have been written by people who want to deny that we were made by God.

Evolutionists claim that creation is not true science. They argue that real science cannot claim a supernatural explanation for anything. To them, everything must be explained by natural causes. However, the claims for both evolution and creation must be taken by faith.  They are both “faith propositions.”  What do we mean by this?

Neither evolution nor creation can be “proven scientifically.” Both creation and evolution attempt to explain something that happened in the past. This is an historical issue, not a scientific issue.[1]

No human living today saw how the world was formed. None of us observed either the creation or the evolution of man. We must either:

1. Trust someone else’s report for the beginning of the world or
2. Look for clues in the world around us.

[1] To review this topic, see Lesson 2 on “Misconceptions about Apologetics.”

It makes sense that if God made us with the capacity to reflect on our origin and purpose, he would tell us about creation. In the Bible, God claims to have made the world and everything in it in six days.  In a future lesson, we will study evidence that the Bible was written by God. If we can persuade people that the Bible is from God, we can encourage them to trust what God said in his Word about origins.

Christians who believe in creation say that we can trust God’s report about the beginning of the world. We believe that his words in Genesis 1-2 are a true account of creation.  We have faith in the creation story because we have faith in the God who inspired Genesis.

While we are trying to convince non-Christians of the truth of the Bible, we also need to point them to the world around us and help them see that the biblical account of origins makes the most sense of our world. We can’t use the scientific method itself to determine the historical event of creation because we cannot see the beginning of the universe. However, we can show people how scientific evidence supports the biblical view of creation.

A detective looks at fingerprint evidence at a crime scene to determine which person committed the murder. The evidence that is left behind points to the truth. We can look at scientific evidence like DNA to show that God, not time and chance, committed the act of creation. God’s fingerprints are found everywhere in our universe.

One way to approach the evidence from the world around us is to look at what evolutionists or creationists would expect to see if their belief were true.

► If evolution were true, what would we expect to see in the world around us?[1]  If creation were true, what would we expect to see in the world around us?[2]

After we know what each theory predicts, we can ask, “Does what we see around us best fit the expectations of evolution or creation? Which approach is most consistent with the evidence? Do the observations of scientists fit better with evolution or creation?”

When we study the evidence of the world around us, we see that the world fits the expectations of creation, not evolution.[3] In fact, the theory of evolution is anti-scientific. It does not fit the evidence of our world.

[1] Some correct answers include: transitional forms in the fossil record, evidence of mutations producing new information, simplicity rather than complexity, randomness in how the world operates, etc.

[2] Some correct answers include: evidence of design, limits to variations within kinds of plants and animals, evidence of distinct kinds in the fossil record, established laws of science that show that the universe was put in place by an unchanging Master Designer, etc.

[3]“If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will force you to believe in God.”
- Lord William Kelvin

“In the absence of any other proof, the [design of the] thumb alone would convince me of God’s existence.”
- Sir Isaac Newton

“A little science takes you away from God, but more of it takes you to him.”
- Louis Pasteur

One hundred years ago, most people believed that life could suddenly appear from something that was not living. They thought that if you left a box of rags in the corner long enough, it might spontaneously generate mice — from the non-living rags.[1]

Louis Pasteur, a famous scientist who was also a devoted Christian, did many experiments that proved the law of biogenesis. The law of biogenesis says: life comes only from life.

Evolutionists deny this basic law of science when they say that life had to come from non-life at least once. Most evolutionists think that life spontaneously arose out of early (non-living) chemical compounds. Even though they know the law of biogenesis, they are not willing to accept that God created life. Instead, they insist that life arose from non-living matter. However, no scientist has ever been able to form life from non-living matter.

[1] “Spontaneous generation” means the appearance of life out of non-living matter.

1. What does it mean to say that both evolution and creation are “faith propositions?”
2. What does the law of biogenesis teach?

We studied the Laws of Thermodynamics in Lesson 3, but let’s review them.

► What is the first law of thermodynamics?[1]

The first law of thermodynamics states that matter/energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Existing matter had to come from somewhere; it could not create itself. This means that matter and energy was created by an outside source, God. New matter and energy cannot appear from nothing.

► What is the second law of thermodynamics?[2]

The second law of thermodynamics states that the amount of usable energy in the universe is depleting. It is changing from usable energy to unusable energy. For example, sunlight is produced by the tremendous energy of the sun; but most of that energy goes off into space, and even what comes to the earth is mostly not conserved for use. The unusable energy in the universe is called “entropy.”

Together, these two laws state that there is a fixed amount of matter/energy in the universe that is becoming more and more unusable. The universe is deteriorating. So how does this contradict evolution?

Atheistic evolutionists must say that 1) matter/energy came from nothing or 2) that matter/energy has always existed. The first option contradicts the first law of thermodynamics (matter cannot come from nothing).

The second option contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. If the universe has always existed with a fixed amount of energy, and more and more of this energy has become unusable, then by now the universe would be completely deteriorated and we wouldn’t be here! Evolutionists are unscientific when they contradict the laws of thermodynamics.

[1] The correct answer is:  The first law of thermodynamics states that matter/energy can neither be created nor destroyed.

[2] The correct answer is: The second law of thermodynamics states that the usable energy in the universe is being converted slowly into unusable energy.

According to the theory of evolution, modern forms of animals gradually evolved from simpler forms, beginning with a single cell. If this is true, we should see many transitional forms (from simpler to more complicated) in the fossil record. But after more than 150 years of digging, scientists have still not found evidence of transitional forms.

The lack of transitional fossils contradicts the predictions of evolution. By contrast, creationists predict that there should be distinct organisms based on each day of creation, with no need for transitional forms.

► Read Genesis 1 and list what God created on each day of the creation week.

So what do we find in the fossil record? We find distinct kinds of plants and animals. The fossil record suggests that the biblical creation is much more reasonable than evolution.

► If there were only two dogs on Noah’s Ark, why do we have so many different types of dogs today?

Many evolutionists argue that variations among animals, such as different kinds of dogs, are proof that evolution occurred through natural selection. They say that genetic mutations produce new kinds of plants and animals.

However, most changes we see in animals are due to genetic information that has always been in their DNA. Look at the varieties of dogs, for example. Are the differences between beagles and bulldogs largely the result of genetic mutation? No. Mendel’s Laws of Genetics explain that various combinations of genes produce different features in offspring. A cocker spaniel is not so different from a collie because of mutations, but because a certain portion of the dog population was separated from the rest and interbred. The genes for a cocker spaniel were already part of the dog gene pool. Though mutations can have some effect on populations, the majority of characteristics we see in different varieties of dogs are the result of breeding.

Breeding can change a dog only a limited amount. No matter how much breeding a dog owner does, his dogs will still be dogs. A dog will not become a cat through breeding!

Mutations cannot do what evolutionists say they can do. A mutation can change existing genes and thereby change the information of the DNA, but a mutation cannot add new information to DNA. For example, a mutation can cause a cow to be born with an extra leg, but it cannot cause a cow to grow a turtle shell. The cow simply does not have the genetic material to produce a turtle shell. There are limits to how far an organism can change.

Creationists would expect limits to change within the various kinds of organisms. The observations of life around us indicate that there are limits to change.

Evolutionists would expect to see evidence of change from one major kind of organism to another. The evidence the evolutionists predict is not there.

To allow time for animals to evolve by chance, evolutionists claim that the earth is billions of years old.  We have already seen that evolution would be impossible even if the earth were billions of years old. But there are many reasons to believe that the earth is young. Ninety percent of the methods used to determine the age of the earth argue for a young earth. Here are examples that demonstrate that the earth cannot be billions of years old.

DNA in “ancient” bacteria

Evolutionary scientists found bacteria in a salt crystal that they considered to be 250 million years old, but they were surprised by their observation that the bacteria were very similar to [modern] bacteria. Scientists were also surprised that the DNA of the bacteria was still intact. If the salt beds in which the bacteria were found were actually deposited by a worldwide flood that occurred 4500 years ago, then it would be more likely to be intact and similar to modern bacteria.

Soft tissue in dinosaur bones

In 2005, Dr. Mary Schweitzer found red blood cells and hemoglobin in dinosaur bones located in Montana. This creates a problem for evolutionary theory. Scientifically, soft tissue cannot last more than a few thousand years.  It certainly cannot last the 65 million years from when evolutionists think the last dinosaur lived.

The amount of salt in the sea

Salt is pouring into the sea faster than it is escaping. The sea is not nearly salty enough for this to have been happening for billions of years. The earth cannot be billions of years old based on the amount of salt in the sea.

The global catastrophic flood

Noah’s Flood argues for a young earth because if a global Flood [destroyed] the earth, and caused most of the layers in the geological column, then the layers were not laid down over millions of years.

If rock layers were rapidly deposited and folded without being fractured, also showing evidence that distinct kinds of plants and animals were buried by these massive flows of sediment, then the geological column should not be explained by millions of years of slow development of species, but instead should be explained mostly by reference to a global catastrophic flood that preserved many intact fossils on a relatively young earth.

1. According to the laws of __________________, there is a fixed amount of usable matter and energy in the universe. This energy is becoming more and more unusable.
2. According to the theory of evolution, what kind of fossils should we find?
3. What does the biblical account of creation predict about genetic change?
4. Give three examples of scientific evidence for a relatively young earth.

There are some questions evolutionists have a hard time answering, because evolution is not an adequate explanation of reality. If you talk to a person who accepts evolution, these questions might help them think about what they believe and to question their beliefs.

1. How did emotions such as love evolve?
2. How did higher thinking evolve?
3. How did the process of photosynthesis evolve?
4. Which evolved first, the plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?
5. Can you give me an example of a mutation that has added new genetic information to an organism?
6. How do you explain the origin of the first living cell from non-living matter?
7. Why do some evolutionists who realize that life could not have come from non-life on this planet suggest that life was transported from another planet—when they know they are just moving the problem to another part of the universe?
8. If you believe that matter/energy has always existed, how do you deal with the Laws of Thermodynamics, which say that there is a set amount of energy in the universe, but that this energy is becoming more and more unusable? Would the universe not have run down by now?
9. Are you sure your answers are reasonable, right, and scientifically provable, or do you have blind faith in the theory of evolution?

In this lesson, we have seen that evolution is not consistent with the facts of science. The predictions of evolutionists are not supported by the evidence of our world. They expect to see evidence that life could come from non-life; they expect time and chance to be capable of producing complexity; they expect mutations to explain evolution from single-celled organisms to man; and they expect to find transitional forms between major kinds of plants and animals. Yet their expectations are not fulfilled.

Evolutionists contradict the laws of thermodynamics; they contradict genetic laws; they contradict the fossil record; and they contradict the evidence for a young earth. They are unable to answer the tough questions about their theory because their theory is untrue.

Those who believe that God used evolution have compromised with man’s theories about the age of the earth and evolution, while ignoring the clear teachings of the Bible.

The evidence from the world around us clearly supports a belief in God and creation rather than in evolution. The expectations of creationists are supported by scientific research. Christians realize that life must come from life; and that ultimately our physical life and spiritual life comes from the One who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. We realize that we could not have come into existence by chance.

We believe in the Master Designer. We accept the laws of thermodynamics and the principles of genetics. These are not contradictory to our beliefs. The fossil record is consistent with our belief that God created everything according to its kind. We believe that the Bible teaches that the earth is relatively young, so the evidence for a young earth does not trouble us. Creationists have both God and science on their side! We have faith in the creation story because we have faith in the Creator.

Listen to the testimony of a trained scientist who faced the evidence and became a committed creationist and Christian.

Dr. Richard Lumsden[1] (1938-1997) was professor of parasitology and cell biology at Tulane University. He served as dean of the graduate school and published hundreds of scientific papers. He was trained in Darwinian evolution. Science was his religion. Dr. Lumsden believed Darwinian evolution was an established principle of science, and he often ridiculed Christian beliefs.

One day, a student came to his office to ask questions about the day’s lecture on evolution.  The student did not argue with anything he taught. Instead, she asked a series of questions:

• How did life arise?
• Isn’t DNA too complex to form by chance?
• Why are there gaps in the fossil record between major kinds?
• What are the missing links between apes and man?

This student didn’t argue; she just asked questions. Dr. Lumsden gave the standard evolutionary answers to the questions. But he was uneasy about the conversation. He was not prepared for honest questions. While he was answering, he began to think, “This is wrong. What I know about biology is contrary to what I’m saying.”

After a while, the student thanked him for his answers and left. On the outside, Dr. Lumsden appeared confident; but on the inside, he was devastated. He knew that what he had told this student was wrong. Dr. Lumsden had the honesty to face his doubts. He began to study the arguments for evolution. Eventually, he realized that based on the scientific evidence, he must reject Darwinism. Dr. Lumsden became a creationist.

But then Dr. Lumsden faced a new question. “If the world was created, who is the Creator?” A short time later, Lumsden’s daughter invited him to go to church. In the past, he had no interest in religion; but now he wanted to know if the Bible was true. Did the God of the Bible create our world?

Dr. Lumsden heard the Good News that God sent his Son to pay the penalty for our sin and to offer men forgiveness and eternal life. At the end of the service, the pastor invited unbelievers to publicly receive Christ. That morning, an atheistic evolutionist who had seen the evidence for creation bowed before his Creator and became a believer.

[1] Adapted from "From Evolution to Creation: The Testimony of Dr. Richard Lumsden" (November 19, 2009). Retrieved from http://www.wayofl ife.org/database/from_evolution_to_creation_lumsden.html April 25, 2020. 

The next Sunday, Jia came to the park early. She was excited to meet with Lee! But when she saw Lee, Jia knew that he was not very excited. “What’s wrong? Did you bring an answer to my question?” Jia asked.

Lee said, “I have studied all week, but I cannot find one example of a non-living article becoming a living creature. I am starting to question my science! Maybe my belief in evolution is based on faith in Darwin instead of scientific proof. I don’t like that!”

Jia laughed, “I think you are right. You believe in Darwin; I believe in the Creator. I think the world gives plenty reason to believe in the Genesis account of creation.”

Suddenly Lee brightened.  “Well, I might not have an answer for your question, but I bet you didn’t find an answer for mine either! Did you find even one great scientist who believed in the creation story?”

Jia laughed. “You are right, Lee.  I did not find one scientist who believed in creation. I found dozens of great scientists who believed in creation! The more scientists study this world, the more they realize that the evidence points to a Creator. I won’t bore with the whole list; but see if you recognize any of these names, Lee.”

Jia began to list some of the greatest scientists in history:

• Copernicus, who first recognized that the sun is at the center of the universe.
• Galileo, who is considered the “Father of Modern Science.”
• Johannes Kepler, who first explained the movement of the planets.
• Sir Isaac Newton, who formulated the law of gravity.
• Robert Boyle, who is considered the first modern chemist.
• Louis Pasteur, who created the first vaccines for rabies and anthrax.
• Max Planck, who founded modern quantum mechanics.

“Lee,” Jia concluded, “If you examine the evidence, you will find that the greatest scientific minds in history have understood that the only explanation for the beauty and complexity of our world is a God of infinite power and creativity. There is good reason to believe in the Creator.”

(1) Apologetics and the Head: You will begin the next class with a test over the review questions from Lesson 4.  Study these questions carefully in preparation for the test.

(2) Apologetics and the Heart: You may have friends or family members who have been convinced that evolution is true. Before sharing this lesson’s information with them, pray for the Holy Spirit’s help. Ask God to convict them of the truth about God’s great creation.

(3) Apologetics and the Hands: Think of someone who has questions about creation. Ask this person if you can share the information you learned in this lesson. If the person believes in evolution, ask the questions from the last section of this lesson. Bring back to class a report of your interaction with this person.

(1) What does it mean to say that both evolution and creation are “faith propositions?”

(2) What does the law of biogenesis teach?

(3) According to the laws of __________________, there is a fixed amount of usable matter and energy in the universe. This energy is becoming more and more unusable.

(4) According to the theory of evolution, what kind of fossils should we find?

(5) What does the biblical account of creation predict about genetic change?

(6) Give three examples of scientific evidence for a relatively young earth.

(7) Write Genesis 2:1-3 from memory.