Creation or Evolution?


What the vast majority of the information that is provided below focuses on is the conflicting beliefs that all that we see and all that we can scientifically investigate in our world and the universe, either points to having been created by undirected random chance (Evolution) or an unidentified intelligent causal agent (Intelligent Design). Intelligent Design does not specifically identify the intelligent causal agent as God and consequently is not based on Biblical sources. Where Biblical sources are taken into account would be where Creationism comes into consideration.

We live in a materialistic world, where what we have been taught in school and in many universities is the prevailing materialistic worldview. Materialism is the view that everything is ultimately material in nature. At the most fundamental level, everything that exists consists of nothing but matter and energy. Everything is governed by the basic laws of physics and, in principle, can be completely explained in terms of those physical laws. Materialists deny the existence of spirit, and they look for physical explanations for all phenomena.

Darwinism is a theory of biological evolution developed by the English naturalist Charles Darwin (1809–1882) and others, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual’s ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. Natural selection does not acknowledge any specific intelligent causal agent but advocates that what happens through natural selection is undirected and simply the result of random chance.

There are usually two sides to every case that is being made. The information in this blog post presents the other side. All I would ask is that you carefully read over and consider the information that is presented.


What you think you know about Evolution, what is currently being taught about Evolution and what scientists are actually saying about Evolutionary Biology behind closed doors are not necessarily one and the same.

Take a look at this link: Scientists Confirm: Darwinism Is Broken

Or this 2014 post: renowned-chemist-says-evolutionists-do-not-understand-the-origin-of-life/

Or this recent post: evolutionary-theorist-concedes-evolution-largely-avoids-biggest-questions-of-biological-origins

And what-evolution-controversy-scott-turner-gets-high-praise-from-quarterly-review-of-biology/

A direct quote from the Darwinism is Broken link above reads as follows:

“The technical literature in biology is now replete with world-class biologists routinely expressing doubts about various aspects of neo-Darwinian theory, and especially about its central tenet, namely the alleged creative power of the natural selection and mutation mechanism.” “Nevertheless, popular defenses of the theory continue apace, rarely if ever acknowledging the growing body of critical scientific opinion about the standing of the theory. Rarely has there been such a great disparity between the popular perception of a theory and its actual standing in the relevant peer-reviewed science literature.”

And this article which presents an up-to-date overview of the sheer improbability of evolution evolving via mere chance:

Or this article authored by Nathaniel T Jeanson. Dr. Jeanson has a Ph.D. in cell and developmental biology from Harvard University.

And this quote ” I have concluded that we are in a world made by rules created by an intelligence. Believe me, everything that we call chance today won’t make sense anymore. To me it is clear that we exist in a plan which is governed by rules that were created, shaped by a universal intelligence and not by chance. — Michio Kaku (cited in, String Theory Co-Founder: Sub-Atomic Particles Are Evidence the Universe Was Created)

Franklin M. Harold, Emeritus Professor of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Colorado State University wrote the following concerning the origin of life: “I do not mean to disparage serious scholars who are doing their level best to crack the hardest nut of all. Quite the contrary: I would argue that, if our purpose is to understand life, the origin of life is the most consequential question in all of biology. It holds the key to understanding the relationship between the living and the inanimate, the quick and the dead. Each new bit of evidence strengthens our belief that organisms obey the laws of chemistry and physics; and scientific investigations have turned up no traces of a vital force to nurture the wellspring of life. We assume, then, that cells are material systems that arose by some sort of evolutionary process four billion years ago here on earth (or conceivably, someplace else). I share this premise, but feel obliged to note that, in the absence of evidence as to how this came about (or even of a plausible hypothesis), this explanation is merely a belief–a leap of faith. … Of all the gaps in our understanding of life, this one is the widest. Until we bridge it, we cannot lay to rest lingering doubts as to whether science has read nature’s book of biology correctly.”

If you would like to read a well documented and eye opening lengthy history of how the “Theory of Evolution” evolved itself, to it’s current status of “fact” versus “theory”, I would strongly encourage you to read this article authored by Bert Thompson, Ph.D. : Is Evolution a “Fact” of Science?

Do all critics on the validity of Darwinian Evolution come from a “religious” perspective? No they do not, as this link validates but it does bear witness to the intense opposition that will quickly surface should anyone question Darwinism. Becoming “persona non grata” is a reality that nonreligious scientists and scholars who challenge neo-Darwinism and/or sympathize with ID, often face, in pressuring them to conform to the materialist party line. And if you don’t think that there is a materialist party line I would recommend you check out this link.  Richard C. Lewontin is Alexander Agassiz Professor of Zoology and Professor of Biology at Harvard University.

I know this is a complex subject and I am by no means any type of authority on this subject matter, but ….. and this is important, there are many highly qualified scientists who ARE authorities on this subject and they disagree with the basic tenets of evolution and what they are saying needs to be heard and considered.


What is Intelligent Design all about and is there a Case for Intelligent Design? To get an good understanding of what is being questioned and advocated, please click on this link.

For an additional easy to read and understand overview of how Intelligent Design originated and the specific problems within undirected evolution that it addresses click on this link.

Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Is Intelligent Design the Same as Creationism?
No. The theory of intelligent design is simply an effort to empirically detect whether the “apparent design” in nature acknowledged by virtually all biologists is genuine design (the product of an intelligent cause) or is simply the product of an undirected process such as natural selection acting on random variations. Creationism typically starts with a religious text and tries to see how the findings of science can be reconciled to it. Intelligent design starts with the empirical evidence of nature and seeks to ascertain what inferences can be drawn from that evidence. Unlike creationism, the scientific theory of intelligent design does not claim that modern biology can identify whether the intelligent cause detected through science is supernatural. Though intelligent design is not based upon religious belief, it does affirm a key tenet of a biblical worldview—namely, that life and the universe are the products of a designing intelligence.

If one is to believe all the information that is put forward with regard to “Intelligent Design” by the scientific community, one could easily make the assumption that belief in “ID” is pretty much a joke. This link provides a typical overview of

The problem being, it isn’t a joke and there are many Peer-Reviewed and Peer-Edited Scientific Publications being produced that support the Theory of Intelligent Design. Of course, if you didn’t actually check to see if these scientific papers are being produced in support of ID, you’d never be aware of this fact. The list of scientific papers that have been submitted total 107 pages and have been updated as of 2017.

You may download the full bibliography of these Scientific Publications in Adobe pdf format from the link in this sentence.

There are multiple hubs of ID-related research. Biologic Institute, led by molecular biologist Doug Axe, is “developing and testing the scientific case for intelligent design in biology.” Biologic conducts laboratory and theoretical research on the origin and role of information in biology, the fine-tuning of the universe for life, and methods of detecting design in nature.

Another ID research group is the Evolutionary Informatics Lab, founded by senior Discovery Institute fellow William Dembski along with Robert Marks, Distinguished Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Baylor University. Their lab has attracted graduate-student researchers and published multiple peer-reviewed articles in technical science and engineering journals showing that computer programming “points to the need for an ultimate information source qua intelligent designer.”

Other scientists around the world are also publishing peer-reviewed scientific papers supportive of intelligent design. These include biologist Ralph Seelke at the University of Wisconsin Superior, Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig who recently retired from the Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research in Germany, and Lehigh University biochemist Michael Behe.

These and other labs and researchers have published their work in a variety of appropriate technical venues, including peer-reviewed scientific journals, peer-reviewed scientific books (some published by mainstream university presses), trade-press books, peer-edited scientific anthologies, peer-edited scientific conference proceedings and peer-reviewed philosophy of science journals and books. These papers have appeared in scientific journals such as Protein ScienceJournal of Molecular BiologyTheoretical Biology and Medical ModellingJournal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent InformaticsQuarterly Review of BiologyCell Biology InternationalRivista di Biologia / Biology ForumPhysics of Life ReviewsQuarterly Review of BiologyAnnual Review of Genetics, and many others. At the same time, pro-ID scientists have presented their research at conferences worldwide in fields such as genetics, biochemistry, engineering, and computer science.

Collectively, this body of research is converging on a consensus: complex biological features cannot arise by unguided Darwinian mechanisms, but require an intelligent cause.

Am I aware that the majority of scientists currently reject Creationism and Intelligent Design? Yes I am. But could a materialist mindset or worldview that denies or rejects that a supernatural being (the Creator or Designer) may possibly have anything to do with what we see in our universe and our world, have anything to do with this determination? Check this link out if you don’t think it is a factor: reiss-resigns-as-royal-society-stifles-debate-on-evolution or this link.

Many learned scholars think it is a factor. Does all the new evidence being discovered support this materialist worldview? Many learned scholars don’t think it does.

This page will present a lot of information, a substantial amount of which you may not currently be aware of. Take the time to look at it, evaluate their collective findings and then make your own decision.

What science is discovering right now is simply amazing. You owe it to yourself and those you love to honestly look and consider. God says in His Word (Romans 1:20 NIV) that “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”

If you would like to examine the actual probability of simple life beginning by chance I would highly recommend you view the following discussion (including all of the comments) at the following link:

Honestly take a look at all of creation within our universe and gain an understanding of what has been made, how it’s been made, the utter complexity, the razor sharp fine tuning and balance, the extremely complex replication processes involved and the order and design of it all. It’s all around you, everywhere you look, both within and without. If the probability of all this happening by sheer chance (e.g. without an intelligent cause) is deemed highly unlikely if not downright impossible and we find that even the simplest single cell contains detailed DNA intelligent information that surpasses our wildest expectations, the question on how this intelligent information got there in the first place needs to be answered. By chance (without an intelligent cause) or by intelligent design (with an intelligent cause), you be the judge.


does-the-cumulative-case-for-design-point-to-a-divine-designer  Just type in “Intelligent Design” in the Search Option at the top right of your screen on the website for many more posts on this subject.

RECOMMENDED INTELLIGENT DESIGN WEBSITES – many links – many links  Dr. Michael J Behe  Dr Douglas Axe Greg Neyman Dr. Frank Turek   Experimental particle physicist Dr Michael G Strauss Luke Nix   Dr Hugh Ross (progressive creationism) – Douglas Axe

Programming of Life
Programming of Life 2: Earth
Apologetics And Worldview: An Introduction – Science and Personal Knowledge
Apologetics And Worldview: An Introduction – The Myth of Naturalistic Science
Apologetics And Worldview: An Introduction – Scientism and Circularity
The 3 above lectures given by Paul Martin Henebury, PhD.
The Scientific Evidence for Intelligent Design
The Mounting Evidence for Design
The Human Genome: ENCODED for Design – Dr. Fazale Rana
The Case for Intelligent Design in Biology
Dr. Stephen C. Meyer, PhD talks about the Case for Intelligent Design
Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design
The Edge of Evolution: the Limits of Darwinism | Michael J. Behe, PhD
Creation and Evolution: The Biological Evidence
The Great Debate: Creation, Evolution, or Both?
Why the Universe is the way it is
The Fine Tuning of the Universe
How the Fine-Tuning of the Universe Points to the Existence of God : J Warner Wallace
The “Simple” Cell: Abolishing Abiogenesis
The Case For A Creator: Lee Strobel
Do Scientific Discoveries Point to God?: Dr. Michael Strauss
Unlocking the Mystery of Life
Journey Inside the Cell
ATP Synthase: The power plant of the cell
The Workhorse of the Cell: Kinesin
Information Enigma
The Privileged Planet
The Privileged Species
Seminar on Intelligent Design by Stephen Meyer
Darwin’s Dilemma
Michael Behe and the Mystery of Molecular Machines
Water, Ultimate Giver of Life, Points to Intelligent Design
The Cambrian Explosion
David Berlinski Explains Problems With Evolution
Irreducible Complexity vs Evolution | RE: Intelligent Design | Michael J. Behe, PhD
Evolution: A Theory in Crises | Thomas Woodward, PhD
The Evidence of the Fossil Record
Honest Challenge Of Darwinian Evolution (Sean Mcdowell)
Author Douglas Axe presents his book “Undeniable”
Undeniable (Part 1 – Chapters 1 and 2)
Undeniable (Part 2 – Chapters 3 and 4)
Undeniable (Part 3 – Chapters 5 and 6)
Undeniable (Part 4 – Chapters 7 and 8)
Undeniable (Part 5 – Chapter 9)
Undeniable (Part 6 – Chapter 10)
Undeniable (Part 7 – Chapter 11)
Undeniable (Part 8 – Chapter 12)
Undeniable (Part 9 – Chapters 13 & 14)
Jonathan Wells (Icons of Evolution)
Jonathan Wells (Zombie Science)



  1. Very informative, Bruce. I found this quote excerpt to be very insightful: “… in the absence of evidence as to how this came about (or even of a plausible hypothesis) …” Kind it says it all about evolution.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Reblogged this on Brandon J. Adams and commented:
    Evolutionary scientists are admitting that Darwinism has failed to account for the diversity, ingenuity, beauty, and sheer imagination of plant and animal life in our universe. They still refuse to consider intelligent design, but let us pray that they get closer. The love and forgiveness of Christ awaits them and all who will assent to removing their junk-science blindfolds.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. The pseudo-scientists-scholars have been trapped in their own minds, blinded by neglecting the greatest tool of all: common sense.

    The carpenter takes the wood, creates the table. The design and perpetuity of the tree suggests the same. Creation 101. Genesis is verifiable, reliable, accurate, and historically truthful.

    As it was, as it shall ever be.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I’m not surprised to hear that scientists are now questioning the veracity of evolution.
    The Universe as we know it couldn’t have happened by chance. Evolution is deception in my own opinion. Creationism holds the answer for me.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. So, every little and larger theory still needs that leap of faith to accept it as ‘ truth ‘ … wow. And I must say I ve never seen a Post this intense, on the very things that call for such intensity. We need the detail, Its not enough anymore to just asdlib. Thank you for every bit of this one.

    Liked by 1 person

      • Interesting post. Are you related to GJ? Is GJ a Christian? Are you a Christian? The worldview of materialism that dominates most of the world’s thinking, out of necessity, disengages from any source of supernatural external intelligence. Yet we all come face to face with our own limitations and susceptibility to revengeful human logic from time to time and our own shortsightedness. That’s why maintaining a Christian worldview that not only believes in but also can make practical use of a higher guidance, lifts one from the norm. Following God’s will, from a Christian perspective, many times is contrary to materialistic humanistic thinking, which in itself is evidence of a possible alternate source guide. It’s only by diving in the pool so to speak that one becomes increasingly confident of the reliability of the higher source and ultimately the Christian hope. Read my latest post “God’s Love” if you get a chance. I’m 73 years old, I have many “stories” where the practicality of faith in Jesus has been instrumental in solidifying my faith in God over the years. Read my post entitled “Our God is Amazing” for one example of many. Our perception of “reality” is in most cases, very superficial. It is only when we take the time to investigate things like evolution and it’s claims, that negates any possible supernatural influence or take the time to study the Christian Bible and it’s historical source, message and the difference between it and other “religious” faiths, that one begins to see the “reality” that can be tested. I see by your narrative that you try to be an honest thinker, which is a good thing. As time permits, I’ll try to read more of your posts. In the interim I’d love to know your real name and a little of your background information if you would be so kind. – Bruce

        Liked by 1 person

      • GJ is a very close relative, a finer Christian than I will ever be. He faced an intense situation last week where he could’ve stared down a manipulation. Just that he is so in tune with Christ, and feels only the love of God. I agree, and it amazes me every time God’s rich grace pours through wounds, like Light, through the chinks of a torn down shack. I’m Rayla Noel, I love Jesus the Christ and all He stands for in the Godhead. Besides that I am pepper headed and pursued by the grace and love of God. I’m from India, my husband Noel and I have three kids ( 23- to age 17, the youngest of whom is a blind talented young one with heart and soul for God). This kid so stokes me to write about the Unseen. I get that this is a material world, whether any of us care or not, in the end the truth will hit us. I am motivated by some very dear friends who do not believe in the existence of God and would hate me if I dared try preach. Yes, one tries to be honest as they can 🙂 – I speak for those who hurt alone without the comfort of God, I ache, so I write. Not so much from personal hurt. but for the fact that I feel I do so little for God who’s tender mercies pursue me new every morning.


      • Well Rayla, it is my pleasure to know you! From what I’ve read, being a Christian in India is not easy. Thank you so much for giving me some background. My wife and I raised five children so I do have some experience with raising kids. I’m really glad that you found some of my posts helpful. Never underestimate what God can do through you, especially when you least suspect it. Keep on writing, I’ve found writing on my blog has been very faith building. It’s not always easy but it is worth it. If there is ever anything that I can do for you or you want to bounce something off of me, just let me know. I’m going to put you on my prayer list. May the Grace and blessings of our Lord Jesus be upon you and yours.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Heart warmed:) thank you for giving your time on this one. Love and warm regards from Noel and me, we were talking about this post on our way back from church. Oh yes, its quite a challenge some days esp. when theres riots and such like. Thank you for putting us on your prayer list, that sure means a lot. Is there an email we could use? God bless you, so inspired by your work. R&N

        Liked by 1 person

  6. I don’t see why God should be pitted against evolution since many Christians have known for centuries that Genesis is allegorical narrative literature. Many of the quotes here actually don’t concern evolution at all, they concern abiogenesis. Evolution is the development and change of life over time and generations, whereas abiogenesis is the origins of life from non-life. This article quotes Franklin M. Harold and Michio Kaku expressing questions about abiogenesis or belief in a supernatural agent creating the world, but both scientists believe in evolution. I don’t think there is a scientific rupture in the theory of evolution in the recent peer-reviewed literature.


  7. I found a few free minutes! My wife and I have to babysit some of our grandchildren early this morning so I’ll try to keep this short. I do thank you for your patience!
    Evolution equates to undirected blind chance while Creationism equates to God’s act of creation as in Matthew 19:4, key word being “created”. The point behind this post is that evolution doesn’t have the mechanics at it’s disposal via blind chance to produce the complexity and mind boggling intelligent coding and subsequent duplication processes to produce life as we are now discovering. Abiogenesis (origin of life) is the natural process of how live evolved from non-living matter. Key word again being “natural”. This has never been reproduced in a lab. Because of the lack of evidence and the now known complexity of even a simple cell, many scientists are now rethinking the claims of evolution. This post highlights some of that thinking. You infer that Genesis is allegorical narrative literature. Allegory is a figure of speech in which abstract ideas and principles are described in terms of characters, figures, and events. The creation of our planet, Adam and Eve are not abstract ideas or principles. Our world is here, Adam and Eve were real people who transgressed God’s direction. Is original sin also an abstract idea? Did Jesus give His life on the cross and rise again from the dead for an abstract idea? In Luke 11:50-51 where Jesus mentions the “blood of Abel”, is that allegory too?
    Are there Christians who believe in evolution, yes there are. The intent of this post was to show that many scientists are now rethinking their position about the many claims of evolution that are not evidenced. All I asked is that you look at what I presented, check it out and make an informed decision. If you chose to disagree, that’s your right. All I did was present an alternative perspective. There are also many Christians who do not believe that Genesis is allegorical narrative literature. I’m thinking that would be considered an alternative perspective too.
    Thank you for taking the time to respond to this post, I sincerely appreciate you doing so. I checked out your blog, I see we both are fans of Nabeel and Acts 17. Did you note the top banner on Acts 17? Grace and blessings!


Comments are closed.