Before I joined the Reflector, I had already started becoming involved in a
debate in the Letters to the Editor column of my local community
newspaper.
The debate has run on for several weeks now and I would like to post my
letters to the Reflector, because they highlight what seems to me to be one
of the crucial difficulties of Darwinism, namely the claim that all mutations
that have ever occurred in the 3.8 billion-year history of life have been
undirected.
I have therefore decided to post then to the Reflector one at a time, starting
from the earliest, which is below.
My main protagonist is on Lex Bastian, a person unknown to me, who
claims to be "an active evangelical Christian" and who denies that
"evolution is in any way...incompatible with the Christian faith", and indeed
that "It is impossible for there to be a conflict between creation and
evolution, because the latter is an essential part of His sustaining work".
The letter limit is 250 words, and it is difficult to construct a tightly
reasoned argument under those constraints, so some logical "skipping" has
had to be done.
The published letter below left out some words and emphases, but I was
more than happy with the headline "Neo-Darwinism in deep trouble"
without even a question mark!
Mr Bastian's original letter is after mine.
Steve
================== BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE ==================
WANNEROO TIMES, June 1-7, 1999 - PAGE 15
Neo-Darwinism in deep trouble
Lex Bastian's claim (Community May 25) that "evolution is [not]...in any
way incompatible with the Christian faith", is misleading, because he uses
the word "evolution" in a way that is not used by mainstream science
today.
Mr Bastian uses "evolution" in the sense of God-sustaining, but Neo-
Darwinism, which is the version of evolution taught in public schools
today, claims to be self-sustaining.
According to Julian Huxley, one of its founders, Neo-Darwinism claims
that "there is no longer either need or room for the supernatural."
Therefore, for it to be "impossible for there to be a conflict between
creation and evolution", as Mr Bastian asserts, either the word "evolution"
must be used in a different way from how it is used in mainstream science
today, or "creation" must be reduced to the point that it is scientifically
undetectable.
However, there is no need for Christians to adopt such desperate measures.
Neo-Darwinism today is in deep trouble.
Its latest casualty is the famous Peppered Moth, which appears in many
textbooks as the example of evolution, but which has recently been
exposed in the scientific literature as false, if not fraudulent.
On the other hand, Intelligent Design, which Darwin was supposed to have
killed off, is making its comeback, with scientific evidence mounting that
there has been supernatural intervention by an Intelligent Designer at
strategic points in life's history.
The real question therefore is not, is Christianity compatible with evolution,
but is evolution even true?
Steve Jones
Warwick
----------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------
PAGE 14 - WANNEROO TIMES, May 25-31, 1999
Evolution part of sustaining work
FOR Don Jackson to lay the blame on evolution as a major cause of evil in
the world (Community, May 11 -17), needs to be answered because he
would like to have this nonsense taken as representing up-to-date Christian
thought.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
I have been an active evangelical Christian for more than 40 years, and not
once in all that time - despite the most careful probing of every 'creation-
versus-evolution" publication that I have been able to come across - have I
yet found any of their "proofs" to hold up, that evolution is in any way
sinful, or in any way incompatible with the Christian faith.
It is standard Christian doctrine that God is not only the creator, but also
the sustainer of the universe.
It is impossible for there to be a conflict between creation and evolution,
because the latter is an essential part of His sustaining work.
But of course, I must be wrong; no doubt the professional prostitute, the
drug addict, the home invader, and the man who chops his grandmother to
pieces, have each grounded themselves in the theory of evolution before
launching out on their chosen courses
Lex Bastian,
Beldon
=================== END FORWARDED MESSAGE ===================
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Our hypothetical nucleic acid synthesis system is therefore analogous to
the scaffolding used in the construction of a building. After the building has
been erected the scaffolding is removed, leaving no physical evidence that
it was ever there. *Most of the statements in this section must therefore be
taken as educated guesses.* Without having witnessed the event, it seems
unlikely that we shall ever be certain of how life arose" (Voet D. & Voet
J.G., "Biochemistry", John Wiley and Sons: New York NY, 1995, p23, in
Ashton J.F., ed., "In Six Days: Why 50 Scientists Choose to Believe in
Creation", New Holland: Sydney NSW, Australia, 1999, p165. (emphasis
in original).
--------------------------------------------------------------------