Zoffix Znet

Recently, I was dumbfounded during a conversation where I remarked on the process of natural selection, better known to some as the theory of evolution. The person said, "I do not believe in evolution, because I believe in God." My astonishment was not caused by that person's disbelief in natural selection, but rather due to their belief that evolution somehow disproves God.

Here's what I see: one group of people tries to prove natural selection and another group tries to prove that God exists. The problem here – what I don't think either group realizes – is that the two are not mutually exclusive! The theory of natural selection does NOT prove that God doesn't exist, it merely states that Creationists' interpretation of the Scriptures is flawed. In fact, I believe I can prove that evolution was God's idea, and that proof lies on two pillars.

Even though, there are religions that have multiple deities, I think it is valid for me to say that Creationists hold true the fact that there is only one God, not several. Nod if you agree.

If you are to accept my proof as valid, you must also hold the fact that God is omnipotent, that He is the most powerful being in existence, that His powers are limitless. Nod if you agree.

If you nodded twice, in agreement with my two assumptions above, I can prove both evolution and God are true; that God created evolution, it was His idea. If I were to describe two beings, I think you would agree that the one that is more powerful and skillful is the true God. If there's only one God, it's preposterous to think that there might be a being mightier than He. With that premise in mind, I shall now describe two beings.

First Being

The first being creates an average planet, near an average star, in an average galaxy, and along it creates billions upon billions of other galaxies, stars and planets – completely devoid of life. On said planet, he creates billions of various creatures. Some variations die, some seemingly need a “tune-up” every once in a while, as well as need to be watched over and guided.

Second Being

The second being creates an incredibly dense and incredibly hot chunk of pure energy. It creates only four simple rules by which, over the course of about 13.7 billion years, that energy evolves into stars, planets and galaxies. Eventually, the tiniest constituents of a planet learn to reproduce themselves, and over the course of few billion years evolve from rudimentary single-cell organisms into incredibly complex beings who are able to read this very sentence. This being anticipated those four basic rules creating such complexity as you and I.

I believe the second being I describe is much more powerful and insightful than the first one. This becomes much more obvious when you consider how finely tuned the laws of nature are. How improbable it is for carbon to be created, and for that carbon to evolve into us.

Since we agreed God is the most powerful being, I would argue that the second being – the one that created evolution – is the true God.

I believe much of the arguments of God vs. Evolution are ill founded and are nothing but the manifestation of pure ignorance. Evolution does not disprove God. Science does not disprove God. In fact, I believe Science only elucidates how much more powerful than we suspect God truly is.

Evolution only shows our interpretation of the Scriptures is invalid. In fact, if in the story of Genesis you replace word “day” with phrase “time period”, you will notice how perfectly it matches the scientific story of our world's creation.

Create new comment

• Name:
• E-mail:
• Comment:
• Leave this field without any text:

• Robin connon

  Sat Aug 25 05:08:39 2012

  love it,,so true,,I beleive God and evolution tye together in a oneness but people separated it making it as confusing as hell just like everything else.
  Also in the bible where adam and eve disobeyed god,,but no one thought about why a loving god would put a tree there to tempt them with in the first place,,,it really couldnt of happened god isnt devious like that,,hes a god of love,,another thing about Jesus coming on the clouds to do the work of his father,,now why would a god of love send his son to kill his creation who wasnt perfect in the first place,,really discrediting a loving god,,also why would god send his son to get the skin beat off him in pain,,,if he was nothing but love,,im sure a source of anything but love would of chose a different way,,,just a few things on how foolish
  people see things,,my view is god created everything also evolution,,,,but
  he isnt any of these things the religions discredit him of,,,churches,,no longer will be needed
  spirituality will ever increase,,because it doesnt show negative questionable factors,,theres more evidence to the story.

• dave

  Thu Oct 13 00:15:19 2011

  but the thing that makes us special is not what we have done, but what has been done for us. Much like a child's rag doll which began as one of a million identical toys, the child makes it special. Alone its just a rag doll.

• Zoffix Znet

  Thu Jun 30 17:41:23 2011

  I think that is a bit anthropocentric. Personally, I don't see humans as radically different from other animals. Sure if you see it as we built rockets, and animals don't have anything you might think we are so advanced, but our ability to invent and reason is really a product of minor biological difference. I don't think the "purpose" of the Universe is the human race. If we propose there are billions of other worlds, I am sure the first ones were created much long time ago. Also, I think a life of a fly is just as amazing as a life of a human being. In my opinion, taking a view that humans are so special and important is somewhat arrogant and is missing the bigger picture; the more beautiful picture.

• dave

  Thu Jun 30 15:53:19 2011

  hmmm, first thought: Natural selection and evolution are not the same thing. Natural selection just means that there's a reason why some are survivors and others aren't. Very few people are committed to this idea. How often do we take children to the doctor? If I were committed to natural selection I would let a sick child die because they are not 'selected'. Second though: the idea that is missing from this comparison of evolution and creation is that the human piece is significantly different than the animal piece. Evolution eliminates that difference. Humans were given a special place in creation with a special purpose. Evolution makes people into a phenomenal accident.
  Consider this about your 2 'beings': they both created the same set of rules ( whatever you've heard its far from simple ); the first created billions of worlds already in motion, photons flying through space to hit somebody's telescope and make him wonder, young stars, old stars, soon to be born stars ( sorry about the Seuss-ism )... the real difference between them is why the creation was done. The purpose was the human race, so why bother with the first 13.699 billion years? Just get to the point.
  thanks for a though provoking article.
  -dav