I listened very carefully today to an evolutionist explain how life forms mutated over the course of millions of years. The life forms that survived to reproduce were those with favorable mutations that made it superior to those that perished. It was the survival of the fittest. I like that argument. It sounds very logical. The argument I heard explained how the first parts of an eye came into being and it was millions of years and millions of adaptations that finally enabled that organ to see. What I do not understand is why the parts of the eye continued to develop if for millions of years the eye was not functional. If it was not working for millions of years it would not have contributed anything to the survival of the life form and therefore would not have been retained for further development. At least that is how my mind sees it. No pun intended.
It has become fashionable in some scientific arenas to scoff at creationists. We are looked down upon as beings with inferior intellect. But really now, doesn’t it make more sense to believe the eye is the product of an intelligent creator? They would say, “No.” I would say “Yes.” And my “Yes” is just as good as their “No” because we are both making statements of faith. He has faith in a non-logical process and I have faith in a loving Father God. I do like mine better. I’m sorry. Now I am sounding snobby and that puts me in the same category as the evolutionist who thinks he is more intelligent.
Written by Roger Bothwell on January 12, 2010
Spring of Life Ministry, PO Box 124, St. Helena, CA 94574
Rogerbothwell.org