years, people who embrace the idea of evolution have
reverenced the term natural selection as a means of
explaining away God. Changes in the environment
through time, the evolutionist believes, molds and
shapes life from simple to the complex. A Creator is
not necessary for life, they say. Time, chance, and
a changing environment, according to those who
believe in Darwinism, can adequately explain away
the need for a Creator.
While it is possible to accept that random
changes within the genetic code could provide the
variation required for a species to adapt, how
reasonable is it to say that natural selection can
explain the complexity of all living things.
Evolutionists can make some pretty large claims, but
what evidence do they have to support their
For example, consider the human eye. Where in
the fossil record do we find the evidence to show
the development of the complex eye? How about the
feathers of a bird, or the organs essential for life
like the kidney, the liver, the heart, or the brain?
Although, Darwin is often credited with
providing the mechanism that explains away God, a
survey of the literature will show that he himself
realized there was more to life than blind chance.
Darwin once stated: “The belief that an organ as
the eye could have formed by natural selection, is
enough to stagger anyone. I have felt this
difficulty far too keenly to be surprised at others
hesitating to extend the principle of natural
selection to so startling a length.” 
Stop and think about what Charles Darwin, the
father of evolution, said. He was “surprised”
that others made “natural selection” the mother
of all miracles. As any scientist will tell you, in
order for a theory to be classified as scientific,
it has to be backed up by the hard cold facts. If
there are no facts, then the theory is only a belief
based on faith. Could it be the idea that life
developed by natural selection is nothing more than
a religious myth?
What would Charles Darwin say if he were
alive today? Modern science has revealed life is far
more complex than Darwin could have ever imagined.
If natural selection could not explain the
complexity of the eye when Darwin was alive, what
about now? Nearly one hundred and fifty years have
passed, and creationists are still asking the same
question Darwin asked – why do so many people jump
to such wild conclusions without any evidence? Is it
possible they would rather believe in evolution than
am Roger Oakland. This has been a biblical
perspective to help Understand The Times.
Understand The Times is an independent non-profit organization in
Canada and the United States.