The Bible

What Came first the chicken or the egg? For centuries man has struggled with the question of our origin. Why are there so many distinctions in the creatures that inhabit this planet. Why are structures similar in a bird, a whale, a bat, and a human being creatures that seem to have no relation to one another. Although several theories have sprouted from different great thinkers of many cultures in many diverse parts of the world all of the theories seem to center around two main points divinity vs chance or for a more famous colloquialism Evolution Vs Creation. Once complete this paper should allow the reader to see not only the folly and boldness of evolution in the face of so many discrepancies, but also the sheer irrefutable beauty of creation in all of its complex simplicity

In the beginning God Created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, Darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. And God said "Let there be light" and there was light Genesis 1:1-3 NIV

The bible, one of the oldest pieces of written history that follows an entire civilization for over 4000 years not only gives fascinating tales of mystery, intrigue, wars, famines, loves and loses also gives a very specific account of the origin of man and indeed all life on this planet as well as in the universe. The simplicity of the verses tells us that the big bang was possible, with divine help, it gives no more than God said it and it was so which would agree with the abrupt abitrary eruption of the solar system that scientist describe. This insight allows us to delve even deeper into the awesome power of Gods word. Here in the beginning we see how just the word can form solar system, delving even deeper we catch a glimpse of what that means for us as human beings and our origin.

Classical evolutionary theory teaches that creatures change from one thing into another. For instance, amoebas changes from one celled creatures to multi celled creatures over time. Genesis in the first chapter tells us that things must reproduce "each according to its kind". Recorded history and fossil records should support one of the theories. Evolutionist claim that it supports theirs however noted paleotologist have even noticed the apparent gaps in the record showing that there is a missing link. There is no gradual change but instead there are abrupt creatures that tend to burst on the scene and just as abruptly disappear which would imply spontaneaous generation and extinction instead of a gradual coming into existence.

Instead of finding the gradual unfolding of life, what geologists of Darwin's time, and geologists of the present day actually find is a highly uneven or jerky record; that is, species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record. and it is not always clear, in fact it's rarely clear, that the descendants were actually better adapted than their predecessors. In other words, biological improvement is hard to find. (Raup, David M., Conflicts Between Darwin and Paleontology, Bulletin, Field Museum of Natural History, vol. 50, 1979, p. 23)

If things happen gradually and animals change there should be abundant examples of this in the fossil record. The best scientific evidence to date support the creationst theory of life not evolution. One celled animals existed for 3.8 billion years and globular life forms lived for another 650 million years then the Cambrian explosion gave life to the "ancestors" of all life we know today. Plant and animals appear in the fossil record fully formed and complete. In 1999 Time magazine published an evolutionary chart in their August 23 issue page 55 that claimed to have an established line of decent for Homo Sapiens. However each line of descent begins and ends with itself.

A complex system as our universe and our earth could not exist without a designer to create it. There is not enough time. Even with the thousands and billions of years given for evolution, to bring about the variety and complexity of creatures living on the planet without divine assistance would be impossible.

"The origin of life is still a mystery. As long as it has not been demonstrated by experimental realization, I cannot conceive of any physical or chemical condition [allowing evolution]...I cannot be satisfied by the idea that fortuitous mutation...can explain the complex and rational organization of the brain, but also of lungs, heart, kidneys, and even joints and muscles. How is it possible to escape the idea of some intelligent and organizing force?

(d'Aubigne, Merle, How Is It Possible to Escape the Idea of Some Intelligent and Organizing Force? in Margenau and Varghese (eds.), Cosmos, Bios, Theos, p. 158)

S. Weinberg in an article in Scientific America, October 1994, titled life in the Universe wrote that "life as we know it would be impossible if the energy of the big bang were different by one part in ten to the 120 power." Gerald L Schroeder describes the fine tuning required to pull off that feat with this simile "The precision is as if one could throw a dart across the entire universe and hit a bulls eye one millimeter in diameter on the other side."

In his book The Science of God Schroeder describes the creation of the universe in terms of a person winning the lottery. Someone is going to win the lottery this is certain out of the billions of players one person will certainly benefit. This is not news it never arouses suspicion or even elicits surprise. What would happen however if someone won the lottery twice? Not likely. What about three times? This incredibly lucky persons good fortune would be short lived, because the proper authorities would see that this person is hauled off to jail before he can even collect the winnings This seems logical even warranted. It doesn't take a statistician to see that it is not possible without criminally tampering with the entire lottery process. Why then are scientist trying to pawn of the scenario of evolution on the public where we not only won three times but countless others on the way to becoming us.

We won at the choice for the strength of the electromagnetic force (which encourages atoms to join into molecules). We won at the strength of the strong nuclear force (which holds atomic nuclei together; were it a bit stronger the diproton and not hydrogen would be the major component of the universe, and no hydrogen means no shining stars). Other winning lotteries were the strength of the weak nuclear force and the strength of gravity (which dominates the universe at distances greater than the size of molecules and clusters mass into galaxies, stars, and planets), the mass and