• By John Hicks

Evolution or Creation...Which equivocation sounds more logical?

Can we even entertain such a question?

Let us give it a try.

Equivocation number one:

"We know Evolution is true because we see evolution occurring every day."

Equivocation number two:

“We know Creation is true because we are created in the image of God and we see creative work from ourselves every day."


Perhaps the second example is not equivocating after all. The first one definitely is.

Equivocate (Webster’s 1828), verb intransitive To use words of a doubtful signification; to express one's opinions in terms which admit of different senses; to use ambiguous expressions. To equivocate is the dishonorable work of duplicity. The upright man will not equivocate in his intercourse with his fellow men.

In the first statement it is saying that the paradigm called “Evolution”, dictates that all living things that exist “evolved” from lower and less complex life forms and that this is the same evolution that we see occurring today.

These are actually two completely different forms of evolution and are not related to each other at all.

Therein lies the equivocation. One word is being used to represent two different concepts with the intent to lead the reader to believe that they are one and the same.

The first use of ‘evolution’ in the statement refers to the paradigm of Evolution which is macroevolution.

Macroevolution is the belief in major changes of current living things from less complex and different taxonomies to what they are today. This requires the breaching of genetic barriers that are known to exist.

The second use of ‘evolution’ refers to microevolution.

Microevolution refers to changes within a living thing. These changes occur within the genetic code are often the result of changes or input from the living thing's environment. These changes do not lead to any living thing transitioning to a different taxonomy rather they occur within the living thing’s taxonomy.

Creation however is the belief that a supreme being or God created all things.

Biblical Creation teaches that man was created in the image of God. Part of this image is the desire to create things.

Mankind definitely has the desire to create things from material inventions to crazy ideas such as “evolution”. I say ‘crazy’ as from my perspective that is how I see but others may say I am guilty of using emotive language…

It could be argued that the second statement is equivocating in that Biblical Creation believes that God created everything from nothing and that man cannot. While this may hold some water towards that end, it is, at the same time, ironic that creating things from nothing is a core problem that “Evolution” cannot explain or its scientists cannot perform in any meaningful way.

In 1952 Harold Urey and Stanley Miller set out to create life from inorganic material. The problem with this in regards to any attempt to prove Evolutionary origins is that they used existing elements in their experiments verses actually creating them.

In a since, they started with elements whereas Biblical Creation claims God created these from nothing. This may not sound meaningful to an Evolutionist but this is due to the limits imposed on them by their own presuppositions.

From a purely logical standpoint a supreme Creator does provide a meaningful explanation to all of creation.

Without getting too entrenched in the details of Urey and Miller’s experiments, the end results were trace amounts of amino acids amongst a tarry substance not suitable at all for life itself.

It is interesting to note that these experiments were designed by intelligent men who used their presuppositions in order to guess as to what had to be the existing environment at the time just prior to life emerging. Do not be fooled into thinking that this is somehow legitimate scientific inference and not what it truly is and that is faith.

Also, it is Interesting that it takes intelligent designer and design in order to even attempt to prove evolution.

What this proves essentially is that evolutionists need to steal from Biblical Creationists in order for them to even attempt to test their own wildly flung theories. Sad that they cannot see the illogical aspects of their futile thinking.

In other words, Evolutionists must steal from Creationists in order to even work in the realm of science.

Stanley Miller said “It’s a series of little tricks. Once you learn the trick it’s very easy. The problem is learning the trick.”

God’s Word states “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”

1 view0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Question, do you worship the day? I guess the follow up qualifying question would be, are you a humanist who worships yourself? Seems that these are odd and hard hitting questions to self-professing C

People today are so blinded and misled by a false interpretation and application of Romans 13:1-2 that they roll over and say nothing as sin erupts unchallenged all around them. The mistake they make