top of page


You are not violating any principles of science by being a creationist, nor do the various scientific disciplines disprove creation.


Rev. Matthew W. Rueger, Author

Jan. 1, 2020

Even more than high school, the philosophy of evolution will dominate nearly every field of academic study at college. Evolution will not be presented as theory but as fact. It will be a given in every academic discipline. Those who do not hold to an evolutionary mindset will be ridiculed and their mental capacities questioned. Professors will not be above giving bad grades or even failing students in assignments when they voice objection to given evolutionary doctrine.


Not a battle between science and religion

The standard line given by the proponents of evolution is that their position is based on science and therefore should be accepted as fact. Views that question evolution, they will say, fall into the realm of religion or even superstition and therefore are not worthy of academic consideration. By painting the debate in terms of science vs. religion it becomes easier for them to dismiss disagreements as "not scientific."


Evolution vs. Creation is not a conflict between science and religion. It is instead a conflict between two competing religions. Evolution is a religion in that it demands a worldview without God (or at least without God’s interaction in creation as a starting point). That is atheistic at heart – which is a religious position, not a scientific one. It holds two tenants, which as we will see cannot be verified by science but must be held only by faith. Accepting things as true that cannot be proven is the heart of religion. Evolution qualifies as a religious belief because it accepts what cannot be proven (even what scientific law disproves).


Creation, however, begins and ends with God. God created the heavens and the earth with His Word (Gen. 1 “And God said, “let there be . . .” and there was). Christ was at the heart of God’s creation:


“He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” John 1:2-3


God especially formed man distinct from the animals and stamped him with a quality higher than the animals:


“Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” Gen. 1:26-27


While creationists readily admit to the religious nature of their position, evolutionists deny the religious nature of their position.

What is science?

Science is the search for knowledge based on experimentation and observation. Scientists speak of basing their conclusions on “empirical evidence.” 'Empirical' means experiment or observation. In order for something to be the stuff of science it must be both testable and observable. Taking it another step, it must not just be testable once in one experiment, but able to be repeated by others doing the same experiment – in other words, verifiable or falsifiable.


True science is based on natural laws that have withstood constant experimentation, observation, and verification. Scientific laws have developed that have proven incontrovertible because tests and observations have proven things will always work that way. As an example: An object at rest remains at rest unless an outside force acts upon it. Both observation and testing proves this to be true 100% of the time. It is therefore truly a scientific principle.


Is evolution science?

Can something be 'scientific' if it is not observable or testable? No. Is evolution testable? No. No one has been able to move a creature to evolve from one species into another. Is it observable? No. No one has observed a creature changing from one kind or species into another. All we can observe are the normal adaptation and variation of species consistent with their genetic code. One cannot observe evolution, which is the addition of genetic material that significantly changes the nature of a species. Adaptation is not evolution. The two most basic elements of science, then, cannot be said to apply to evolution.


Evolutionists may protest and say they have the fossil record to prove evolutionary movement. But note that the fossil record does not prove species changing from one to another. Instead it proves mass extinction. It is a record of death, not of emerging life.


Both evolution and religion stand on the same ground. Both proceed from assumptions that cannot be tested, observed, verified, or repeated. Religion admits that. The problem is that evolutionists do not.

Yeah, but what about..?

Actually, creationism upholds certain scientific laws that evolutionists are forced to deny. Two laws in particular prove impossible hurdles for evolution.


1. An object at rest remains at rest unless an outside force acts upon it. (Newton’s first law of motion)


The beginning point of evolution is the “Big Bang” – the moment in time when a cosmic explosion launched the “stuff” of the universe outward. This “stuff,” they say, cooled to form planets, stars and other cosmic matter. The “thing” that exploded is said to be very small mass of some unidentified material.

But what about that law that a thing at rest remains at rest unless acted upon by another force? Should not the material that exploded in the Big Bang have remained at rest indefinitely (unless an outside force triggered it – but what outside force)? Big Bang proponents assume that this point of energy spontaneously exploded without an outside force acting upon it. This violates scientific law.


Take a step back from there. Ask an evolutionist where the first point of pre-cosmic material that exploded came from. Was it always there? Is it scientific to assume something can be eternal or that something simply pops into existence from nothing? Clearly it is not science but religion that would draw such conclusions. One of the two must be assumed by evolutionists in order to make the Big Bang possible.


Questions about the origin of the universe led no less a scientist than Einstein to conclude there must be a god of some sort. Though he was no Christian and did not believe in a personal God, Einstein did see the necessity for god in creation:


“I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings." 

Reply to Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein's (Institutional Synagogue in New York) question to Einstein, "Do you believe in God?"


2. All things tend toward entropy.


In other words, everything decays. It is the basic thought behind the second law of thermodynamics.

Evolution proceeds on the assumption that some things don’t decay. In fact, they move from simple to complex. They improve over time. Some excuse this contradiction with the second law of thermodynamics by claiming evolution happens in “an open system”, whereas the law of entropy only applies to “closed systems." The problem of course is that evolution is not really happening in an open system. The genome of every living creature is a closed system. Individual worlds, like the earth, is also much more of a closed system than an open system. Such discussions confuse the simple fact at point, which is that everything decays and moves toward disorder, not more order.


J.C. Sanford in his book Genetic Entropy [FMS publications, Waterloo, NY, 2008] debunks the myth of evolution at the level of the genome and shows the utter impossibility of assuming genetic error can move a species forward in a positive way. Genetic error is over 99% destructive. Over time genetic error results in the loss of genetic information, not the gaining of new orderly genetic information. In order for evolution to work, information has to be added to the genome in such a way that it “fits” into the overall function of the genome and helps rather than harms. But scientific observation and testing prove the opposite happens. Genetic information is lost and corrupted over time. Species are in a state of decay, not positive evolution.


Creation upholds the scientifically provable principle of entropy. We believe all things were created good and then decayed, including the human genome. Evolution violates the scientific principle of entropy at every level, and yet this is simply brushed off as inconsequential.


What’s the point?

You are going to be challenged. People will try to persuade you that your religious instruction was mere myth, and that the stories of the Bible about God and creation belong to an age of superstition that we have now moved beyond. They will tell you their truth is honest and agrees with observable reality and what you hold to be true is dishonest to science. It is important that you see their argument for what it is – a gross overstatement and an old-fashioned lie.


God’s Word warns us,


"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables." 2 Tim. 4:3-4


Evolution is one of many attempts the devil will use to convince reasonable people like you that God’s Word is not to be trusted. It is part of his overall propaganda war against your soul. You stand on firm ground believing in creation. You are not violating any principles of science by being a creationist, nor do the various scientific disciplines disprove creation. One can be a good student of science without adopting the godless philosophy of evolution. Many of the great scientists throughout history have been people who believed in God and His creative activity (Copernicus, Francis Bacon, Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, and Isaac Newton, to name a few). It was their belief that God is an orderly God who established natural laws. This in turn fueled their scientific exploration and made them better scientists.

bottom of page