I grew up in church, but I believed for myself by looking at the evidence for or against belief in the natural world. That’s why today’s post will be pretty fun for me.

I’ve already talked about moral relativism at relative length, but the argument boils down pretty simply:

Without a Creator, there are no morals. Which means that we’d have to believe that a murderer, or a rapist, or the owner of the New York Yankees is just as right about what they think and do as we are. I’ve yet to meet someone who truly believes that.

So why do we accept moral relativism? It stems from our belief in the theory of evolution. We’ve been taught that evolution is true, and there is no Creator or intelligent design behind any of it. In the interest of spurring a controversy amongst my friends, as well as the pure joy that will come from the onslaught of e-mails from strangers, I’ll just come out and say it. Evolution doesn’t work. This is going to be fun :)

Evolution is the idea that through billions of generations and an incalculable number of mutations and adaptations we have managed to slowly transform from ooze to what we are now: more attractive looking ooze. It was designed to answer that most fundamental of questions; where do we come from? But there are problems, three of which I’ll discuss in a ridiculously annotated form:

1) Humans came from apes, who came from hockey players. They are theoretically just below us in terms of evolutionary development. But let’s examine the respective development of each in the past 10,000 years or so:

Humans: invent the wheel, build pyramids, create an alphabet, record history for posterity, build big castles, create governments, dream up literary epics, debate the fundamental truths or our existence, write orchestral pieces for symphonies, find vaccines, chart the stars, harness electricity, build airplanes, invent jazz, design computer systems, create artificial intelligence, think up shows like Fear Factorand Celebrity Boxing.

Apes: rudimentary tools, and the realization that poop makes both a terrific projectile or culinary delicacy.

But seriously, the gap between humans and every other creature is cavernous. We sit in large buildings made out of materials we invented and put together by tools we created, sitting in desks we made and discussing the theory of evolution while wearing shirts with brand names on them (brand names!) And all of this happened within the past couple millennia.

2) Let’s pretend we are indeed from apes. Who are from hockey players. Who are from….whatever. The theory is that through countless trials and errors we slowly figured out how to get from one small organism to where we are today. Most of those adaptations weren’t useful, and those organisms ended up dying. The adaptations that were useful helped to preserve the species. The sheer magnitude of trials and errors were what allowed us to get to where we are today.

But wait a second: we came from one organism. How did that organism figure out on its first try how to replicate itself? Even in the smallest organisms, that ability to reproduce is a somewhat advanced process. Most scientists admit that the odds of the first organisms just “knowing” how to do this are ridiculously small. First organism dies, end of evolution.

3) Let’s pretend that the first organism did get lucky and reproduce itself.

If you go back far enough, you still arrive at that problem. Where did the ooze come from?

The ooze came from single cell amoebas. But where did they come from?

They came from individual molecules. But where did they come from?

They came from the Big Bang. But where did it come from?

It was caused by quarks in the atmosphere. But where did those come from?

Umm…..they came from nothing. Spontaneous generation! Yeah, that’s it!

But Louis Pasteur disproved spontaneous generation in 1859, ironically while trying to prove spontaneous generation, and even more ironically the same year that Darwin came up with the Origin of Species.

Evolution doesn’t work without spontaneous generation. And spontaneous generation doesn’t work! George Wald, Evolutionist, Harvard University biochemist and Nobel Laureate, wrote:

“When it comes to the Origin of Life there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds; therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance!”
-Taken from The Origin of Life, 1954

According to science, either belief is impossible. But a supernatural Creator provides the belief that technically anything is possible. And yet we continue to believe in a theory for the origin of life that is impossible without divine intervention, which gives us moral relativism, which we don’t really believe in but claim to believe in anyway. And we do that so that people don’t think we’re dumb for believing in God.

Let the onslaught begin….