Convoluted Evolution with David P. Barash

Evolutionary biologist and professor, David P. Barash, gives "the talk" to his students every year concerning evolution and creationism. He believes that the two ideologies are unable to exist together, and, therefore, one must lightly overlap the superior belief or be eliminated altogether. In one reasoning of Barash, he states, "God might well have used evolution by natural selection to produce his creation." This is Barash's form of "comfort" for his creationist students- that it is possible for religion to play a small part in the evolution theory. However, he also speculates that "...namely random variation plus natural selection, contains all that is needed to generate extraordinary levels of non-randomness", which implies the notion that he does in fact desire to leave Creationism out of the full equation. 


Here I turn to the classic argument: what existed before the single-cell organism? If you choose to venture further back, you have an impossible organism structure. A cell requires at least one component such as a nucleus, ribosomes, mitochondria, etc. to survive. In addition, there are at least seventeen arguments to refute evolution, but the far fetched probability of a cell popping up by chance ought to be enough to end the search for what or who created the earth. Sir Fred Hoyle, a British mathematician and astronomer, described the chance of evolution occurring "is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein." If that is not enough to stagger your mind, then what will?
Humans are constantly seeking out ways in which evolution might have realistically occurred. Sure, it might be fun to play God and pretend to know how the world functions and came to be as a glorified world-renowned professor, but where does the search finally end for the evolutionist? "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth", according to Genesis 1:1. One of my friends, whom I share this verse with, chooses to ignore it, because he feels that "evolution makes more sense than some guy in the clouds creating the earth single-handed", or something to that effect. But is evolution really that much more believable?
If you read the evidences against evolution and see how outrageous its philosophy is, then why can't I also quote scripture from a different belief and not stimulate another pattern of thinking that leads to truth? The answer is that we have been lied to by those who simply do not know this truth. That is why God gave us His word in the early on in the Bible in the first place, virtually at the point of creation. Only in the Bible will we find the truth. And so brings the cause for missionaries. 2 Timothy 2:24-26 says, "And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. Opponents must be gently instructed, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will." It is absolutely crucial to learn God's ways early on in youth, so you do not fall for the deception of our corrupted colleges, governments, and nations, which is not all that difficult to see past with the Holy Spirit in your soul. Colossians 2:8 says, See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.