It should not come as a surprise that I believed in evolution when I was an atheist. That changed after I became a Christian – based on my investigation into a myriad of ‘sciences’ in 1971. I detailed some of that in earlier parts of this new series. However, what about the last 55 years? Have more recent investigations changed my mind back to believing in evolution over creation? Let’s take a look.
Evolution vs. Creation
AI Generated
How did the heavens and earth begin? Was it a lengthy, random process without purpose that took billions and billions of years to occur? Did some type of genetic variation in a population give some organisms an advantage over other organisms that were passed from one generation to another over a period of billions of years? Or, was everything created quickly and purposely by an All Powerful God (Genesis 1:1)? Are we here because of ‘natural selection’ or ‘God’s selection?’
- Atheist – ‘natural selection’
- Theist – ‘God’s selection’
I was convinced that God created the heavens and the earth when I became a theist, but did that conviction stand the test of continued scientific investigations over time?
Much of what I’ve already written in this series should answer the question, but I don’t want to leave any doubt in your mind that the growth of science (the accumulation of knowledge) during the last 55 years has only strengthened my initial decision to become a Christian. As I continued researching scientific studies that continued in the 1970s, 80s, 90s, 2000s, 2010s, and so far during the 2020s, the findings supported the idea that the digital code (DNA) in life cannot come from natural, unguided, random processes. An intelligent ‘mind’ was behind the coding and ‘specified information’ scientists found in DNA.
DNA stores information in a four-letter chemical alphabet similar to what computer scientists call ‘binary code.’ The human body is made up of trillions of cells. So, how much DNA in each cell?
“If you stretched the DNA in one cell all the way out, it would be about 2m long and all the DNA in all your cells put together would be about twice the diameter of the Solar System.” (BBC Science Focus)
Keep in mind that cells divide. So, ‘we need to know how many times cells divide, and replicate all the DNA within them’ (Mark Lorch, The astronomical length of DNA, 2019). That means the length of DNA in one person’s lifetime is astronomical! And we haven’t even gotten into chromosomes and other aspects of how DNA works. It can boggle the mind. Here’s what I mean:
“When the DNA sequence of human chromosome 22, one of the smallest human chromosomes was completed in 1999, it became possible for the first time to see exactly how genes are arranged along an entire vertebrate chromosome. With the publication of the “first draft” of the entire human genome in 2001, the genetic landscape of all human chromosomes suddenly came into sharp focus. The sheer quantity of information provided by the Human Genome Project is unprecedented in biology; the human genome is 25 times larger than any other genome sequenced so far, and is 8 times as large as the sum of all previously sequenced genomes. At its peak, the Human Genome Project generated raw nucleotide sequences at a rate of 1000 nucleotides per second around the clock. It will be many decades before this information is fully analyzed, but it will continue to stimulate many new experiments and has already affected the content of all the chapters in this book.” Chromosomal DNA and Its Packaging in the Chromatin Fiber, National Library of Medicine, 2002
That’s impressive! It’s what I’ve continued to find as I’ve followed scientific research during the past five+ decades, and one of the reasons I haven’t changed my mind about my decision to believe in God and become a follower of Jesus Christ.
Neo-Darwinism
That isn’t to say that scientists who believe in evolution haven’t been busy. They have. Neo-Darwinism, according to Britannica:
“… represents a synthesis of Charles Darwin’s theory in terms of natural selection and modern population genetics. The term was first used after 1896 to describe the theories of August Weismann (1834–1914), who asserted that his germ-plasm theory made impossible the inheritance of acquired characteristics and supported natural selection as the only major process that would account for biological evolution.”
So, how has ‘Neo-Darwinism’ fared in the battle of the origins?
“The Modern Synthesis (or “Neo-Darwinism”), which arose out of the reconciliation of Darwin’s theory of natural selection and Mendel’s research on genetics, remains the foundation of evolutionary theory. However, since its inception, it has been a lightning rod for criticism, which has ranged from minor quibbles to complete dismissal. Among the most famous of the critics was Stephen Jay Gould, who, in 1980, proclaimed that the Modern Synthesis was “effectively dead.” Gould and others claimed that the action of natural selection on random mutations was insufficient on its own to explain patterns of macroevolutionary diversity and divergence, and that new processes were required to explain findings from the fossil record. In 1982, Charlesworth, Lande, and Slatkin published a response to this critique in Evolution, in which they argued that Neo-Darwinism was indeed sufficient to explain macroevolutionary patterns. In this Perspective for the 75th Anniversary of the Society for the Study of Evolution, we review Charlesworth et al. in its historical context and provide modern support for their arguments. We emphasize the importance of microevolutionary processes in the study of macroevolutionary patterns. Ultimately, we conclude that punctuated equilibrium did not represent a major revolution in evolutionary biology – although debate on this point stimulated significant research and furthered the field – and that Neo-Darwinism is alive and well.” National Library of Medicine:
I question whether Neo-Darwinism is ‘alive and well,’ but the ongoing scientific research and debate is important for anyone who wants to know the truth about the many theories about the origins of the universe, the Earth, and life forms living on the planet. Whichever side you find yourself, stay open to good science, logic, and reason.
Reading Recommendations
As I’ve continued to research the subject during the past 55 years, I’ve found evolution and Neo-Darwinism wanting for solid evidence to explain macroevolutionary change. You may find these books interesting to read:
- Henry Morris’s Scientific Creationism (1974)
- Michael Denton’s Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (1986)
- Stuart Kauffman’s The Origins of Order (1993)
- Norman Geisler and Frank Turek I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (2004)
- Stephen Meyer’s Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design (2014)
- Kurt Wise’s Devotional Biology (2018)
- Brian Thomas Guide to Human Origins (2025)
Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Elderdge have some interesting perspectives as well. You may also find a new film helpful. It’s called ‘The Story of Everything,’ and was adapted from Stephen Meyer’s bestseller, Return of the God Hypothesis. The film features Stephen Meyer, John Lennox, Jay Richards, James Tour, and many other scientists. The film was released earlier this year.
Proponents of a ‘Creator Designer’ point to a loss or degradation of function in the area of bacteria, rather than a gain of new information. Paul Nelson and Richard Buggs researched ‘orphan genes’ and ‘taxonomically restricted genes,’ which challenged the Neo-Darwinian ‘gradualist’ models of gene evolution. It comes down to the question of whether the universe, the earth, and life forms came about through a ‘guided’ or ‘unguided’ process.
Neo-Darwinists (N-D) are critical of scientists in the ‘Creation’ and ‘Intelligent Design’ camps. They argue that evolution can explain genomic functionality without having to invoke ‘design’ as being the cause. You can find many of the N-D arguments in journals like Nature and Science.
To Conclude
As interesting as the arguments are in those journals, plus the many books written by their authors, I remain unconvinced that what we see with our own eyes and hear with our own ears was brought about through an unguided, random physical process that occurred over millions or billions of years. God as Creator of ‘heavens and the earth’ continues to be the ‘evidence to the best explanation.’
As for the ‘age of the Universe,’ God knows. I’ve watched ‘Creationists,’ ‘Intelligent Designists,’ ‘Theistic Evolutionists,’ and ‘Atheistic Evolutionists’ argue about this for the last 55 years. I could spend the rest of this article arguing my own perspective, but I’d rather share two portions of Scripture with you to consider.
First, what God told Moses:
“The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” Deuteronomy 29:29
Second, what God told Job:
“Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone, When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy?” Job 38:4-7
The actual age of the Universe, the Earth, and life forms on the Earth may be one of those secret things that belong to God. I think He’s left us some important ‘clues’ in Scripture and those are worth investigation. However, it’s important to remember that no human being was in existence when God ‘laid the foundations of the earth.’ No scientist was a living witness when God created the Earth. The angels were in existence, but they are not human. There were no humans to sing together and shout for joy when God created the heavens and the earth.
I think it’s time for all humans, including all scientists, to humble themselves before God and admit they don’t know what they don’t know. They can theorize all they want, just like Job and his friends – but just like Job and his friends, they eventually humbled themselves before God.
Only God knows everything.
AI Statement
I’ve been writing professionally since the 1960’s — long before Artificial Intelligence was a ‘thing’ that might concern readers. However, since it has now become a ‘thing,’ let me assure you that I do not use AI to write any of my blog articles. I research material the old-fashioned way. I study the topic, confirm what I find from multiple reliable sources (usually at least 3-5 independent sources — known as ‘triangulation’ in the world of journalism), then report it while disclosing the sources and sharing quotes from some of the sources.
WordPress does offer an image service where the writer can ‘generate’ an image. I have used that on occasion when appropriate and identified the image as AI Generated. I have also found a few AI charts that I confirmed as accurate and used them as well. I also identify them as AI Generated. If I ever share a direct ‘quote’ from AI (which is rare), I will also identify the quote as AI Generated. Otherwise, what you read in blog articles is my personal way of communicating — something I’ve done for almost 60 years. Hope that helps explain how I view and use AI.
Online Resources
Institute for Creation Research
Next Time
I’ll move to another area of science in the next part of my series, Still Convinced After All These Years.
Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Faith and Self Defense © 2026
