The Evolution of Man

Because there has recently been a lot going around about evolution and the Adventist church, I thought I would write my perspective on the matter of evolution, Creation, and the Bible. Let me start off by making a ridiculous statement, as I often do. Evolution is no more correct, and no less accurate, than is the general creationist understanding of the origin of man. What I am saying, here, is that both views are equally as wrong.

In 1859, Charles Darwin released his book “Origin of Species” and the world of scientific inquiry changed forever. The world of religious philosophy and methodology changed forever as well. Previous to this release, most scientists were Deists. They viewed God as the ultimate creator of the universe, but nothing more. They saw God and nature as two separate realities; God had no interaction with his creation. For the first time in history, Charles Darwin had actually created a viable theory that appeared logical and seemed to do away with the acting hand of God in creation (see the first two chapters of my book for more information on this subject). The theory at the time was showing much promise for the future, and people were excited to see the scientific evidence to support this theory. Finally, someone had disproven the creation story found in the Bible.

It was not a large leap from disproving the creation story, to the rejection of God all together. If God did not create man, then he really had no purpose for us. We were not inherently special in any way; we were simply a fluke of nature. If we evolved from a single cell, if everything that makes us so complex evolved over time, than what was to say that the very first cell did not evolve over time as well? Even so, most did not reject the possibility of God starting creation, not even Charles Darwin, nor even Darwin's "Bulldog" Thomas Huxley. They still held on to a rudimentary belief in God, even if it was just a Deistic being having no interest in the affairs of man. However, with Einstein's theory of Relativity, and his subsequent discovery of the Big Bang, many scientists, especially biologists, rejected the notion of God all together. The Big Bang does not in fact give any notion that God does not exist. In fact, what Einstein did was state "In the Beginning, God" in scientific and mathematical terms (More on that in my chapter "The Big Bang, God in Disguise"). Never the less, the majority of the scientific community made the assumption that we now had fool proof evidence that God was not needed in this universe. This led to an even bigger surge in the acceptance of evolution. 

One might think that the theory of evolution is completely stupid and that no intelligent person in their right mind could believe such a lie. However, the fact of the matter is that it is a very high probability that we did indeed evolve from a single cell. It is so high, in fact, that many things in existence right now share most of the same DNA with each other. "Ah yes!" you might say, "proof that all creation has a common designer!" Yes, that is a valid point that is not entirely without merit. However, if you come from a standpoint that God does not exist, what does it look like to you? To me, it does indeed look as though everything is related to everything else, not because of a designer, but because of common ancestry. We have seen how things evolve. In fact, we can make chickens go "backwards" in evolution and grow teeth, claws and all sorts of funny things that begin to make them look very much like the dinosaurs of old. Through genetic manipulation, we can make many different types of creations that are mutations of, and in some circumstances appear to be, completely different than the animal they originally were. On a human level our mitochondria do appear to be related to prokaryotic cells and we share 95% of the same DNA with almost everything in existence. The list can go on and on of how similar our make up is to that of everything else. When you cut up a cadaver in the lab, it is nothing more than just a cleverly set up machine of biological processes. It is extremely awesome and awe inspiring, yes, but in the end it is just a collection of biologically active compounds and cells. 

Isn't it absurd to believe that an entire human, in all of its complexity, arose from a single cell? No, it actually isn't. We know today that given the right environment, an entire human can evolve from just two single cells. Two single cells is all that it takes to create an entire human. Do I need to explain the process of conception? "Ridiculous!" you might say, "that happens inside a place that God made just for that purpose!" Yes, you are correct. What if, though, in the not so distant future, mankind creates an artificial womb? I guarantee you it is not a long way off and is not outside the realm of possibility at all. The only thing stopping us from making such advancements is likely Christians and their superstitions about creating life. So what is my point? Humans can (and do, on a daily bases) evolve from single cells, just as evolution suggests. The only difference is that it takes nine months instead of four hundred million years.

I told you that both creationists and evolutionists were wrong, and true to my word I will now explain what I meant. Please hear me out all the way to the end of this one. In the beginning, there was nothing. Then, in the largest explosion of space in the history of existence, things just “were”. Science now thinks that the expansion of our universe from the Big Bang took no time at all. That means that our universe went from nothing to everything in zero time! The entire complexity of the whole universe arose in a single point in space time. The universe has more complexity associated with it than all the biological creations combined! Think of that! Every star, every planet, every black hole, every galaxy of whirling, swirling and twirling stars was created in an instant. One moment it was not, the next moment it was. No, that is not some Biblical fairy tale of creation. That is the current scientific understanding of what happened at the very beginning. Is it any wonder that not very many theoretical physicists are truly and wholly atheistic? 

Now, apply that understanding to this little tiny speck of space dust we call earth. Is it such a hard thing to imagine that biological life arose in an instant, taking no time at all? Could it be that biological existence was not here one moment, and then here the next? Does it break the laws of logic any more or any less than the theory of the creation and expansion of our universe? After all, biological life has much less complexity than does the universe at large. We are little creatures. It is so hard to imagine that we could have arisen in an instant? In my opinion, if you believe that creation required creatures to die and evolve over millions of years, you exclude the possibility of a loving God who intimately cares for His creation. The Christians who believe in such an extended creation are not stupid, or rebellious, they just have not thought through the implications for what it does to a philosophy on God. Now combine all this with what I said about how humanity could have arisen from single cells. Let's go to the Bible for this. 

Genesis 2:7 "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." You see, God did not create man ex nihilo (out of nothing) as He did with the universe at large. The Bible indicates that He created him out of something, the dust of the ground. Humanity was created by what was already here. We are a product of what was already living. God made us to be a part of the creation He created for us. Classical Christianity took this to mean that God formed man out of clay or dirt. But why assume that when the truth may be so much more cool!? God likely formed man out of one single cell, and man then developed into a loving soul. Did it take a day for Adam to mature? Did Adam grow up from childhood? We do not know, but it is certainly possible given what we know of how we create our offspring and how they develop. What if Adam developed from a single cell, or multiple cells, as God formed living single celled organisms into living tissue, and eventually into a living soul? What if Adam grew up with Jesus teaching him about what it means to have a relationship with God? It kind of changes your understanding of what the fall really meant, doesn't it. It was not simply Adam choosing to eat some random apple and rejecting a God he barely knew. It was Adam rejecting his father. What if? 

You see, the truth is not always as obvious as it may appear to you or me. What if the truth is a combination of two falsehoods? One propagated by Christianity and the other by science? What if both falsehoods are meant to lead the other party astray? What if the creation story, as told by most Christians, is a lie invented by satan to lead true thinkers and scientists to reject God all together? What if evolution, as taught by most scientists, is a lie created by satan to cause true thinkers and Christians to reject God all together, and to cease to believe in an ultimately good God? Thoughts to wonder indeed. Keep vigilant, keep studying. Never lose your thirst for truth, never be afraid to follow it where ever it leads you.