Doesn't evolution and modern science discredit a rational belief in the God of the Bible?

There is a common misconception people have which states that evolution and science are concerned with facts while God and the Bible are concerned with matters of faith. One deals with the seen, of which there is evidence, while the other is concerned with the unseen and cannot be proven with facts. Is that true?

Is evolution really science? Has it been proven by the facts?

Let us look at what it is that the person holding to evolutionary theory wants us to believe. Evolutionary theory teaches that time + matter + chance is what created the world. The person holding this would tell us that the earth has been around for 15 to 25 billion years. Right there we have quite a margin of error. However, the inadequacies of neo-Darwinian thought is being shown by modern mathematicians who now tell us that it would take hundreds of billions of years for these things to be true. Moreover, we would need new natural laws for it to be valid.

Another scientist has pointed out that to get one cell by chance would require 100 functional proteins to appear simultaneously in one place. The probability for each functional protein would be 10 to the minus 20 power or one chance in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000. If that was not bad enough, it is actually one hundred times worse than that or 10 to the minus 2000 power. Evolution requires that you believe that will happen.

Another scientist reported that to get 2000 enzymes in a random fashion is 10 to the minus 40,000 power.

What is fueling this belief in evolution? If you look at the fossil record, life appears abruptly. It also appears in complex forms. There are systematic gaps between various living kinds in that record. We have hundreds of millions of fossils and not one of them provides an intermediary form, or missing link. There are no fossil traces of a transition from ape-like creature to man.

Now there is a new explanation for this which is called Punctuated Equilibrium. The problem for the evolutionist is that the fossil record shows equilibrium, continuity. It does not suggest the development of one simple form getting more and more complex. Therefore, those who hold to this new evolutionary theory write that evolution must have taken place in short spurts rather than over the long haul. If that is true, they claim, then there would not be enough time to leave fossil remains which is why there is no evidence for the evolutionary hot periods!

In other words, we are asked to believe that the evidence for evolution is that there can be no evidence for evolution. Is that a scientific approach or does someone just have their mind made up before they look at the fossils?

Here is another dilemma for the one who holds that the facts point to evolution. We know that it takes about 1000 years to produce one inch of top soil through the process of wind and erosion. So, if the world has been around for billions and billions of years we would find a thick layer of top soil around the world. How much do we have? Between 6 and 9 inches!! There is not enough top soil to account for the earth being here that long.

Could it have been washed into the oceans? As we look there we would then expect miles and miles of sediment. What do we find? The average sediment is 0.56 miles. It is not enough.

What about meteor dust? As we are bombarded by small meteor showers, the dust is settling on the earth. At the current rate of dust falling, there should be about 50 feet of dust if the earth is billions and billions of years old. Because of its thin atmosphere, the moon should serve as a better indicator. In fact, when plans were being made to land a man on the moon, there was great concern that the lunar craft would be swallowed up in dust because of this. What did we find? On the moon, there is only 1/4 inch of dust!!

These are not sterling scientific credentials.

Think about the way that mammals have hearts, lungs and kidneys that work together. The evolutionist says that these evolved over time. However, you need all three working in tandem for any to be valuable. Even if you might picture them gradually evolving together, little heart, little lung, little kidney prototypes, they cannot work. In his book Darwin's Black Box, Michael Behe quotes Charles Darwin:

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.

So what kind of biological system could not be produced this way? According to Behe, a system that is irreducibly complex. Having defined irreducible complexity, Behe shows that such a complex system cannot evolve because, until it reaches its final state it is non- functional. Evolution kills off its own specimens.

What modern biochemistry has done is to show that most biological systems are irreducibly complex.

Every change in the evolutionary scheme is preserved because of its favorable interaction with the environment. Think about the change from non-eye to eye. Take that first step. That first change is only going to be preserved if it is favorable. How much is a proto-eye worth to an organism? Nothing. A fully functioning eye is helpful. But then think for a moment the way the eye works. It is wired to the back of the brain rather than the front, and it is backward wired coming in upside down. What is it about all that which is favorable to the organism?

So is sex. Where do babies come from? Human babies come through the process of copulation. The evolutionist says that we evolved from the primordial slime. Way back, billions and billions of years ago we were little amoebas. Amoebas do not copulate. They multiply by cell division. So what led to the change from cell division to copulation in the process of reproduction? What is the value of a partially developed genital?

Think for a moment how the evolutionist says that we arrived at where we are today. Evolutionary theory says that there was once nothing but disorder. Then the universe became ordered in one point and exploded. It was inorganic matter. Why did disorder become order?

Then we are told that the ordered, inorganic world became living or organic. How does non-life become life? Life is not just a more complex form of non-life! Bricks don't live, but if you put them in a certain way, they become alive, right? No. So what caused thing to become more complex?

Then we are told that which is living is all identical. Then this living, identical soup becomes living, varied life forms. What caused that?

Those varied, living forms were unintelligible, and eventually something developed that was intelligent and articulate. What caused all those non-intelligent life forms to jump to intelligent ones? What caused those inarticulate life forms to jump to articulate life forms? Then these language using life forms which did not have any traces of morality before begin to have moral notions. Where did these moral notions come from?

We are supposed to believe step by step that there were huge, unexplained, irrational changes. The inorganic became organic became diversified which became intelligent which then developed into moral forms of life which we call man. No rational person can believe all that.

 Stephen J. Gould wrote in 1974:

The general preference that so many of us hold for gradualism [evolution] is a metaphysical stance embedded in the history of western cultures. It is not a high order empirical observation induced from the study of nature.

Evolution then is a philosophical commitment. As Charles Darwin wrote:

The value of the theory of evolution is that it enables us to dispute the Biblical view of man's origins.

Far from discrediting a rational belief in the Bible, evolution shows itself to be an irrational leap of faith as it cannot even substantiate the claims that it makes. Far from being science, it is actually a philosophy of life.

That leads us to the question of which philosophy of life, the evolutionary, materialistic philosophy or the Christian philosophy best accounts for the world in which we live.