One of the greatest tragedies of modern civilization is that man has turned his back on the only Book in the world that tells us where we came from, why we are here and where we are going. In its place we have taken the guesses of man. It is true that for many years the Bible was the world's best-selling book, but it probably has the dubious distinction of being the only book that has been a best-seller that very few people have ever read. Oh, everyone has read a little of it; everyone has read at least the Lord's Prayer, the Beatitudes, the Twenty-Third Psalm, and some other well known passages, but very few have really studied God's Holy Word to learn of His plan for our lives.
There was a certain pastor who was visiting one of his parishioners. As he prepared to leave the home, he asked the lady if he could use her Bible for he wanted to read a passage of Scripture and have prayer before he left. She turned to her little six-year-old girl seated beside her and said, "Honey, will you get the Bible for the minister? He wants to read something to us before he goes." A questioning look came upon the little girl's face. She obviously didn't know what her mother was talking about. The mother, quick to cover up the embarrassment said, "You know, Honey, the big book that we use so much." The little girl brightened up and immediately left the room. Soon she was back with the Sears-Roebuck Catalog. She had done exactly what her mother had told her to do, she got the big book that they used so much.
One of the major questions in the world today is with respect to the origin of life. I suppose the overwhelming majority of people, even Christians, would have to be classified as believers in evolution. There are still a few people who believe in special creation as recorded in the first chapters of Genesis in the Holy Scriptures. Even among those who believe in special creation there are those who are a little uncertain. They read things from week to week in the paper; they hear things on the radio; and they wonder just how the Bible-believing Christian should relate himself to some of the so-called scientific facts that are presented. They seem to be in direct contradiction, and indeed they are, to the facts that are given in Scripture. If science is really true, and we cannot doubt but that true science is, then how can the Bible be correct when the two present entirely different pictures regarding the origin of life?
Now I will use the word faith to apply to every one of you whether you class yourself as an evolutionist or as a believer in special creation, because one thing we must acknowledge at the very outset is this, you cannot scientifically demonstrate today either evolution or special creation. Neither is taking place right now. The evolutionist will admit that he has never witnessed a change from one "kind" to another. And obviously the believer in special creation does not claim that creation is taking place today. Therefore, whichever theory you believe, you must believe it by faith. My purpose is to show you, to the best of my ability, that there is a solid basis for real faith in believing the account of special creation as recorded in the first two chapters of Genesis. There are some weaknesses in the theory of evolution that I want to mention. I do not wish to ridicule or anything of that nature, but we must recognize the fact that in spite of the claims of some, evolution is not an established scientific fact. It is only a theory. Charles Darwin himself admitted, "There are two or three million species on earth. A sufficient field one might think for observation; but it must be said today that in spite of all the evidence of trained observers, that not one change of the species to another is on record." Life and Letters, Vol. 3. p.25.
Now, let us look at some things in close detail. Whenever we discuss the theory of evolution and special creation we must remember that there are various kinds of scientific words that we will use. There is a great deal of evidence according to most scientists today to support the theory of evolution. You must realize that the theory of evolution is supported entirely by persuasive evidence, or subjective evidence. Now the opposite of this is coercive evidence. Coercive evidence is evidence that admits of only one truth. Persuasive evidence is evidence that can be interpreted more than one way. Let me give you an illustration of each.
A good illustration of persuasive evidence would be the evidence contained in the study of geology, the fossil record such as found in the layers of sandstone, shale or whatever type of deposit it is. Generally speaking, this evidence is stacked up like this, the deeper you go into the earth, the more simple forms of animal fossils are found. Now, not all of it is like this, but the majority of it is. To the evolutionist, you see, this tends to support his theory that the earth is billions of years old, that life has developed from the simple to the complex over millenniums. They believe that as time passed deposits settled on the earth, the simple remains of life left their fossil remains buried deep and that the closer we come to the surface the more complex forms are found.
However, this can also be explained another way. This type of evidence, we believe, establishes the truth of the flood recorded in the sixth chapter of Genesis. You see, the Bible plainly states that the flood did not come in one day but about six weeks passed from the time the waters began to build up on the earth until the earth was eventually covered by water. During this period of time, the simple forms of life which had no means of escaping the water perished first. From the flowing of the silt and dirt and debris back and forth over the surface of the earth these simpler forms of life were buried first. The stronger animals were able to retreat and flee to higher ground and were buried last because they were able to escape the lower places. This is persuasive evidence. I can use it to support the record of the flood as found in Genesis 6:8, and the evolutionist can use it to support the theory of evolution. It can be used both ways.
An illustration of coercive evidence is the shape of the earth. All of us agree that the world is round. One of the things that demonstrates this is that the passengers of a ship crossing the ocean see the tops of mountains first as they approach land. This can be explained in no other way except that the world is circular. The fact that the astronauts out in space have taken pictures hundreds of miles above the earth, in which we can clearly see the curvature of the earth can only be explained by the fact that the earth is round. So you see what I mean by the two types of evidence. Now we find that supporting the theory of evolution is no coercive evidence. All of the evidence in that theory is persuasive evidence. This is a significant point to remember.
Another thing we need to understand is a definition of special creation. The fact that people for centuries have misunderstood what the Bible-believing Christian actually believes about special creation has led some to doubt creation when they actually did not understand what was meant. In the Middle Ages it was commonly believed that the first two chapters of Genesis taught that in the beginning God created fixed varieties of species. That every time a species reproduced itself, be it plant or mammal, every generation was as exactly like its parents as the coins from a mint. But this is not what Genesis teaches.
Take your Bible and turn with me to the record given in Genesis. This is what God tells us took place at the time of creation. I want you specifically to notice that the word, "species," nowhere appears. But another word is found which I have used earlier in this broadcast. You may have wondered just exactly what I meant. In Genesis 1:24 we read: "And God said, let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind: cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so." Someone will say, "Well, preacher, what is the difference between the word "kind" and the word "species," as used in this discussion?" Simply this, a kind is a basic type, a family group. A simple illustration would be the horse family.
Now in the horse family there are many species. There are Arabian horses, Shetland ponies, etc.; and these are species within the horse "kind" or horse family.
Now there is something interesting here. There are no two things in this world exactly alike in the field of nature. Even identical twins are not completely identical. The maple tree may have a thousand leaves, but no two of them will be exactly alike. In the field of horses again, in the same species no two animals are exactly alike. But when you see a horse you have no difficulty knowing it is of the horse family. You don't ask yourself, "Now, is that a horse or a cow?" That question never enters your mind. In spite of the fact that there are many species within the horse family, they are a distinct "kind" and easily distinguishable as horses. There is no connecting link between horses and cows.
There are many species within the kind but there is no overlapping of the kinds. Every time a female duck hatches one of her eggs, there is never anything but a duck inside. Now, that almost seems ridiculous to mention, but this is of vital importance. There is no connecting link between a duck and a chicken. They both have feathers, they both lay eggs, they both have very similar habits; but there is a distinct difference between the two kinds. Many species of chickens, many species of ducks; but there is a distinct barrier between them. The same is true of animals. This is true of every living thing.
We have all kinds of hybrids in the world today. But scientists have never produced any new kinds. Never! Changing the species, yes. They can change the color of the kernels on the ear of corn; they can change the color of the petals of the flower; they can even change the characteristics of animals. For instance, in the poultry business they can produce a hybrid such as the New Hampshire Red chicken which has the hardy characteristics of the Rhode Island Reds, but the egg-laying characteristics of the Leghorn. But they cannot produce a new basic type.
The very reason for the theory of evolution is that Charles Darwin as he studied theology at Cambridge University was taught that the Bible said that God created various species, and as he observed nature, he saw that there was a great variety of species. So he concluded that the Bible must be wrong. The trouble with Darwin was that he took hearsay for what the Bible said, rather than reading it for himself. When he saw these many varieties within the species, he thought that this was conclusive proof that the Bible account was incorrect. The truth of the matter was that the Bible did not say anything about species. How tragic that the theory of evolution grew out of a misunderstanding of what the Bible actually taught.