Did God Use Evolution and/or Progressive Creation?

Is it possible that God brought all the different kinds of plants, animals, and even human beings into existence through the process of evolution? Can a Christian believe in God and evolution at the same time? Some Christians honestly wonder about the method God used to introduce the great variety of life forms that we see in existence today.

The idea that God created a fully functional universe in six literal days is staggering to the natural way of thinking. Non-Christian scientists completely reject such an idea, and believe that all living things came into being through the process of evolution. Evolution claims that higher and more complex forms of life developed from lower, less complex forms of life, without God, through natural selection of chance mutations, over extremely long periods of time. A true Christian can’t believe in atheistic (no God) evolution. However, some Christians have proposed the following “hybrid” evolutionary theories:

Theistic Evolution - God used evolution to bring about the variety of life forms in existence today.
Progressive Creation - The days of Genesis 1 were not literal 24-hour days. Rather, each “day” was a long time period - a geologic age - in which God did creative acts.

While these theories may help bridge the gap between Christian and non-Christian scientists, they distort the biblical account of creation, and require serious doctrinal compromise as well. Of course an all-powerful God could have used any number of ways to bring life into existence, but what does the Bible actually teach about this?

A. EVIDENCE AGAINST EVOLUTION FROM THE BIBLE

1. Biblical Chronology

A straightforward reading of the first 11 chapters of Genesis would indicate that God did not use evolution to create life.

Chronologies of Genesis 5 and Genesis 11: As we mentioned earlier in our study, the family records (genealogies) of Genesis 5 and 11 don’t allow for human life to be millions of years old. While there may be a few generational gaps in these genealogical lists, specific numbers of years are given, so there’s not much flexibility. There’s absolutely no possibility that millions of years could be squeezed into these presumed gaps, and there’s no biblical indication that human life began much more than about 6,000 years ago.
The sequence of Creation in Genesis 1: The sequence of events in Genesis 1 does not fit the theory of theistic evolution or the theory of progressive creation. For example, the theory of evolution states that fish evolved before fruit-bearing trees, but Genesis 1:12 & 20 state that plant life was created two days before all marine life. The theory of evolution claims that birds evolved from reptiles. Millions of years were required for the scales, forelimbs and solid bones of reptiles to evolve into the feathers, wings and hollow bones of birds — and many more years of evolution were required before birds were able to fly. But the biblical record states that God brought birds into being on the 5th day, while reptiles came on the 6th day (Genesis 1:20, 25).
Progressive creationists say that the “days” of Genesis 1 represent geologic ages, or long periods of time. This causes big problems for anyone who tries to fit a progressive creation theory into the Genesis record. One example: If the “days” of Genesis 1 were actually geologic ages, how long could the plants which appear in the “3rd geologic age” (the 3rd day) survive while waiting for the coming of sunlight in the “4th geologic age” (the 4th day)?

2. Biblical Theology

a. The Biblical authors and the Lord Jesus: Jesus never viewed the early chapters of Genesis as symbolic. (See Matthew 19:4-6 and Luke 11:50-51 as examples.) Speaking of human beings, the Lord Jesus said, “From the beginning of creation God made them male and female” (Mark 10:6). By using the phrase, “From the beginning of the creation,” Jesus Himself ruled out the possibility that millions of years of evolution or progressive acts of creation came before the creation of humans.

Many biblical authors wrote about God’s creative acts, and none of them ever considered the early chapters of Genesis as poetry, or imagery, or an allegory, or as representing long periods of time. Additionally, Hebrew poetry has a specific structure, and the Creation account of Genesis 1 and 2 is not structured Hebrew poetry.

b. Interpretation of the word “day” in Genesis 1: There’s no biblical indication that the word yom (the Hebrew word for “day”) used in Genesis 1 is meant to be interpreted as anything other than a 24-hour day. Although in some contexts yom is used to convey something other than a 24-hour solar day (“The Day of the Lord,” for example), the context of Genesis 1, along with the use of “evening and morning,” indicates 24-hour days. Even unbelieving Hebrew scholars are persuaded that the author of Genesis 1 intended to convey 24-hour days.

Some people will bring up 2 Peter 3:8 (“with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day”) as an equation, to try to substitute any amount of time for the word “day.” This is poor hermeneutics (biblical interpretation), and a serious misrepresentation of what Peter, the inspired writer, intended to teach.

Moses, the author of Exodus, intended to convey to his Hebrew audience that the universe was created in six literal days. He quoted the definitive statement spoken by God Himself about the Creation Week: “For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day.” (Exodus 20:11). If God had created in geologic ages, He wouldn’t have used the Hebrew words for “six days.” He could have easily have said the Hebrew equivalent of “geologic ages.”

c. Creation of Eve: Some evolutionists have proposed that the creation of Adam out of “dust from the ground” is the Bible’s use of figurative language to communicate evolution. If the story of the formation of Eve is also symbolic of woman being slowly formed through evolution, then God certainly gave us a very odd and misleading “symbolic” tale about Adam’s rib in Genesis 2:18-25.

d. Doctrine of death: Death is the biggest and most serious theological problem with the theories of theistic evolution or progressive creation. Even those people who believe in the so-called “gap theory” of Genesis 1 (explained below) have serious theological problems when the matter of death is considered.

The concept of evolution is based on the deaths of billions of weaker organisms, and the survival and advance of the most fit specimens. However, Romans 5:12-14 teaches that death is the result of human sin, and that human sin started with Adam. “Sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin…” (Romans 5:12). That is, death was not in the world before Adam and Eve sinned, just as in the Genesis 3 account.
Those who hold to the theories of theistic evolution or progressive creation deny the biblical teaching that death came into the world after the first human being existed. They argue that Romans 5 refers only to human death, and not to non-moral deaths of millions of “lower” animals, primates and “humanoids” leading up to man. But Romans 8:18-22 clearly indicates that the death and decay that we see in the natural world came about as a result of human sin.
The “Gap Theory,” suggests the idea that there was an original perfect creation in Genesis 1:1. This original creation became desolate and ruined because of divine judgment associated with Satan’s fall, and during this chaotic “gap” (referred to in Genesis 1:2), all life died. According to this view, the evidence of all this death is found in the fossil record of the geologic column. They then propose that God began a weeklong re-creation or reconstruction, beginning with Genesis 1:3.

Problems with the gap theory:

Since animal fossils are found in the geologic column, the gap theory must admit that there was death prior to mankind’s sin in Genesis 3. Yet Genesis 3 states that death was introduced at the Fall of Man.
Romans 8:18-22 places a huge and serious question mark over the gap theory, because it indicates that all death is the result of the Fall of mankind, as recorded in Genesis 3.
Human artifacts are found in the geologic column, which forces gap theorists to come up with the idea of a so-called “pre-Adamic human race,” for which there is no evidence. (The geologic column containing these artifacts is much better explained by the world-wide Flood of Noah’s day, rather than either evolution or a proposed gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:3.)
Ezekiel 28 indicates that Satan was in “Eden, the Garden of God” before he fell. The Garden of Eden was not in existence in Genesis 1:1-2. It does not appear in Scripture until Day 6 of the Creation Week (Genesis 2:7-8). So the fall of Satan cannot be the cause of the so-called “gap.”
Genesis 1:31 tells us that “God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good.” Could God have said that everything was very good if He knew that the earth contained a geologic column with the record of past catastrophe and millions of years of death?

B. EVIDENCE AGAINST EVOLUTION FROM NATURE

First, a word of caution. New scientific finds in the geologic layers, fossils, and other areas can provide great evidence for recent plant and animal life. But evidences must be interpreted, and therefore they can be misinterpreted. Sometimes they turn out to be faulty or even hoaxes, so Christians must also be careful not to jump on the “latest and greatest” discoveries too quickly!

Some evidence in the past, such as the purported human and dinosaur footprints in the Paluxy riverbed in Texas, and a Japanese fishing boat catching a recently deceased plesiosaur (aquatic dinosaur) have proven to have shaky evidence at best - and we should certainly avoid shaky evidence! As mentioned before, we encourage you to visit trustworthy Christian websites that are devoted to the topic of Creation research for up-to-date information on these subjects.

1. Evidence for recent plant and animal life

a. Radioactive carbon dating: This test dates former living materials, and can be cross-checked for calibration and accuracy by other dating methods. What are the results? Specimens taken from throughout the geologic column, all over the world, have shown radioactivity. This indicates that these specimens are only thousands, not millions, of years old.

b. Intact large molecules: Some fossils contain organic matter that can be checked for the break-down of large molecules, like proteins and DNA. If organic material is really millions of years old, all the proteins and DNA should be completely broken down. However, both intact protein and DNA molecules have been found in both plant and animal fossils, including dinosaur fossils. This indicates that these plants and animals lived only a few thousand years ago, not millions!

c. Extinct fossil animals: Evolution assumes that certain extinct species must be very ancient. But sometimes so-called “extinct” species show up unexpectedly, and are found to be very much alive in nature.

d. Geologic column inaccuracies: Sometimes “older” rock layers containing what are thought to be older fossils are found above “younger” rock layers that contain what are thought to be younger fossils.

e. Pre-Cambrian period fossils: The oldest fossil-bearing rocks are from the Cambrian period, where billions of fossils from the simplest organisms to highly complex organisms have all been found - all levels of life forms that lived in the same period. But almost no fossils are found in rocks older than the Cambrian layer. The supposed forerunners of the Cambrian fossils are nowhere to be found.

f. Polystrate fossils: Some large fossils, such as tree trunks, pass through multiple layers of strata. This shows that these geological layers of rock had to be laid down rapidly - not over the course of even a single year, never mind hundreds or thousands of years. Animals or plants that are not buried rapidly would decay before ever becoming fossilized.

g. Transitional forms: In the geologic column, the Cambrian period contains an explosion of fully formed multi-celled organisms. It’s a sudden burst of all levels of life forms! However, throughout the geologic column there are no transitional forms. There are no “halfway” fossils between invertebrates and vertebrates (life forms with skeletal structure). And there are no “half-way” fossils between “lower” vertebrates and “higher” vertebrates. For example, there are no fossil horses with any indication of toes to support the supposed evolution of horses from multi-toed animals to horses with hooves. The well-touted archaeopteryx fossil is not a transitional form between reptiles and birds, but clearly an extinct bird.

Even secular scientists admit that there is a staggering lack of evidence for any transitional forms to support evolution. The late Dr Colin Patterson, a senior paleontologist (fossil expert) at the prestigious British Museum of Natural History, once said, “If I knew of any, [transitional form] fossil or living, I would certainly have included them [in my book].”

2. Evidence for recent human life

a. Population statistics: Population statistics provide very powerful evidence for recent human life and for the reliability of the records in the book of Genesis. In spite of wars, plagues, and famines, worldwide human population has always increased. Using well-established equations and very conservative estimates, it can be shown that the known universe could not contain the number of people that would be alive now. Population statistics show that there’s just no way humans could have been in existence for 1,000,000 years. This extremely powerful evidence is not mentioned by the popular press, textbooks, documentaries, or evolutionary scientists.

Interestingly, calculations show that if we start with eight people in 2500 BC (approximately the date of the biblical Flood), and use figures in line with the Bible and the other historical records, the resulting population number is very close to the number of people living on the earth today!

b. Fossil man: Evolutionist paleontologists (scientists who study fossils) claim to have found fossils of “ape-men,” or “hominids,” that are supposed to be the ancestors of true humans. However, the fossils they found are actually fossils of true apes, or true humans. In fact, fossils of “ape-men” or “hominids” have never been found.

The “hominids” that are used to demonstrate evolution are bone pieces that have been unearthed and assembled by paleontologists. Often the skeletal reconstructions are made from scattered bones that were found across a large area, and may not even belong to the same skeleton.

Sometimes only a few bones are real, and the rest are made up to fit the paleontologist’s desired outcome. In at least one case, a well-known paleontologist admitted to reshaping a hip bone with a power tool, so it would fit his theory that the skeleton must have come from a “hominid” that walked upright.

Extremely deceptive “artist’s impressions” of the imagined physical appearance of these “hominids” appear in textbooks and museum displays as if they were fact. This causes most people to believe that full fossils of these hairy “ape/man” creatures were actually found, and that they actually existed. This is simply not true.

Some examples of these deceptive “finds”:

“Cro-Magnon man” - was actually a true human, but has been misrepresented by artists to have the appearance of an ape-like man.
“Java man” - was reconstructed of human and ape bones.
“Lucy” - was created from a human knee bone and the upper body bones of a female ape. The knee bone was found over a mile away from the other bones in a different layer of sediment!
“Neanderthal man” - was probably a true human. Artists highly exaggerated their renditions of what this human supposedly looked like.
“Nebraska man” - was invented from one tooth, which was later found to be the tooth of a pig!
“Nutcracker man” - was actually a true ape fossil found in East Africa. Since true human fossils and human artifacts were found in rock layers below the ape fossil, it could not possibly be a hominid, based on evolutionary theory.
“Piltdown man” - was definitely a hoax.

c. “Cave Men”: Cave dwellings and drawings on cave walls are not evidence of early “pre-human” creatures. Throughout human history, intelligent, civilized, fully human peoples have lived in caves. In fact, right up until modern times, people have lived in caves (in Australia, Jordan and Turkey, for example), and many of these people still create beautiful artwork on cave walls.

d. Human artifacts: Artifacts are products of human (not “hominid”) civilization, showing human intelligence. Dolls, screws, nails, iron bands, tools, cooking utensils, and hundreds of other artifacts of human life and industry have been found in many locations throughout the geologic column, in rock layers which supposedly date much earlier than evolutionists claim any true humans existed.

C. Evidence against evolution from secular scientists

The following quotes, stating problems with evolution, have been made by secular scientists who are “authorities” in the field of origins:

Scientist: Charles Darwin

Quote: “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the connection of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” (The Origin of Species, J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971).

Quote: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” (The Origin of Species, J. M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971).

Scientist: Stephen J. Gould - Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University

Quote: “The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.” (“Evolution’s Erratic Pace,” Natural History, Vol LXXXVI(5), May 1977.)

Quote: “I regard the failure to find a clear “vector of progress” in life’s history as the most puzzling fact of the fossil record... we have sought to impose a pattern that we hoped to find on a world that does not really display it.” (“The Ediacaran Experiment,” Natural History, Vol 93, February 1984.)

Scientist: H. S. Lipson - Professor of Physics, University of Manchester, UK

Quote: “I think, however, that we must go further than this and admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject what we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it.” (“A Physicist Looks at Evolution,” Physics Bulletin, Vol 31, 1980).

Scientist: W. E. Swinton - British Museum of Natural History, London

Quote: “The [evolutionary] origin of birds is largely a matter of deduction. There is no fossil evidence of the stages through which the remarkable change from reptile to bird was achieved.” (“The Origin of Birds,” Chapter 1, Biology and Comparative Physiology of Birds, A. J. Marshall (editor), Vol 1, Academic Press, New York, 1960).

Scientist: Barbara J. Stahl - St. Anselm’s College, USA

Quote: “It is not difficult to imagine how feathers, once evolved, assumed additional functions, but how they arose initially, presumably from reptilian scales, defies analysis.”

Quote: “Because of the nature of the fossil evidence, paleontologists have been forced to reconstruct the first two-thirds of mammalian history in great part on the basis of tooth morphology.” (Vertebrate History: Problems in Evolution, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1974).

Scientist: Nils Heribert Nilsson - geneticist and Professor of Botany, University of Lund, Sweden

Quote: “The family tree of the horse is beautiful and continuous only in textbooks.” (Synthetische Artbildung, Verlag CWE Gleerup, Lund, Sweden, 1954).

Scientist: E. J. H. Corner - Professor of Tropical Botany, Cambridge University, UK

Quote: “I still think that, to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation.” (“Evolution,” Contemporary Botanical Thought, Anna M. MacLeod and L. S. Cobley (editors), Oliver and Boyd, for the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, 1961).

Conclusion

At first glance, theistic evolution may appear to be an ideal way to harmonize the theory of evolution with the early chapters of Genesis. However, a closer examination of the teaching of these chapters—and other Scriptures—indicates that such a harmonization is impossible.

Evolution has never been demonstrated in the laboratory, and it cannot be shown from the fossil record. Genetic variation should not be confused with evolution. God created the various “kinds” of Genesis 1 with the genetic capability of innumerable variations, but this is not evolution. For evolution to take place, new genetic information must be added. Mutations (the mechanism for evolution) have never added new genetic information.

True science is not in conflict with Scripture. The long ages needed for theistic evolution or any form of progressive creation are not seen in the Bible, nor are they proved by science. Biblical and scientific evidence both point to recent life.

Did God Use Evolution and/or Progressive Creation?