World Wide Wolfmueller

Law and Gospel in Joyful Clarity

Six Questions for An Evolutionist

I reject Evolutionist Cosmology for two chief reasons. First, I believe the Bible. Second, I’m against violence, especially when it is exalted to the source and mean of life.

But, I also think there are some practical, historical, and moral problems with Evolutionism. So I’ll get to it, I have six questions for the Evolutionist. I invite your answers in the comments.

  1. Where are the fossils of the transitional forms?
  2. How does the eye evolve? 
  3. Are there examples of increasing genetic complexity?
  4. How did we get from no life to life?
  5. Where did stuff come from?
  6. What is good?

I suppose there are answers to these questions. I’m interested to see if they hold up. Each question points to what I perceive as a problem of Evolutionism. So, a few brief comments.

You’ll notice the questions move from historical to philosophical to ethical.

Where are the fossils of the transitional forms? (The historical problem) If the Evolutionist’s story of millions of years of gradual transition from one form to another is true, the evidence of these transitions ought to be everywhere. To my knowing, they are not.

How does the eye evolve? (The problem of irreducible complexity) The viability of so many biological systems completely depends on other systems. A fully formed eye does not good if there is no optic nerve. The optic nerve is no help if the brain cannot sort out the signals. If one of a hundred things go wrong the entire system is a detriment to life.

Are there examples of increasing genetic complexity? (The genetic problem) I have never seen an example of mutation resulting in increased genetic complexity. Each example my Biology books gave of mutation was a manifestation of traits already contained in the genetic code. I’m particularly interested to see if there is something to read on this question.

How did we get from no life to life?  (The gap problem) Some things are not in a continuity. You can slowly progress from one thing to another. There is nothing between life and not life. It’s a gap. A jump. How did we make the jump? There are other gaps as well: One-cell to two-cells (which is non-reproducing to reproducing), un-conscience to conscience.

Where did stuff come from? (The materialist problem) Is there a source of stuff (matter, energy), or is there no source (and therefore eternal)? And if eternal, why are things not completely uniform (according to the apparent laws of thermodynamics)? Is there a first cause? Can we know?

What is good? (The moral question) This is the question that all the atheists I’ve talked to are obsessed over. Every essay contest is “How to Be Good without God.” I still haven’t seen a convincing argument, and, in fact, I have a growing conviction that Evolutionism is, in fact, not only amoral but immoral. I’m glad we don’t consistently apply the maxims of the survival of the fittest.

Anyhow, send all your Evolutionist friends over here to post up answers in the comments.



19.28.13.jpg">19.28.13.jpg" alt="" width="4032" height="3024" srcset=" 4032w, 300w, 768w, 1024w, 676w, 1352w, 2028w" sizes="(max-width: 676px) 100vw, 676px" />


Here’s an interesting story that doesn’t really matter. I thought of these six questions years ago. I wrote them on a scrap of paper on my way to Bible Class. I taught them, and then I lost the paper. I always remembered “The Six Questions,” but I couldn’t remember what they were. And I couldn’t reproduce them.

Anyhow, last night I was teaching on the First Article of the Creed (“I believe in God the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth.”) and we were talking about Creation vs Evolutionism.  I said something like, “I used to have six questions to ask the Evolutionist, but I lost my list…” and Cindi, reviewing the class, says, “I remember that list. I might have it.” Low and behold, the list!

So, I’m now posting it up here so that it won’t be lost again.


  1. The first and second laws of thermodynamics also get in the way.

  2. I hope you are vegan if you are against violence. I also hope you don’t use any products that require strip mining or deforestation, causing the displacement of wildlife.

  3. I find a disturbing element in this article: the assumption that an ‘Evolutionist’ (undefined) is also an atheist. Some (very vocal) atheists have argued that evolutionary theory ‘proves’ the absence of a god, but a great many (often silent) people are quite willing to accept evolutionary theory as explanatory and descriptive of the physical world without ditching God. And yes, several of your questions are not addressed by evolutionary theory, and in fact fall outside the proper scope of science itself.

    • I’ve spoken with many Christians who try to go with that line of thought and then I walk them through some basic logic and they’re lost again for answers:

      1. If God used evolution, then that means death and decay were inherent in creation from the beginning. Death was happening for “millions of years” before humanity.
      2. If death and decay were inherent from the beginning, then sin has always been and was part of God’s design
      3. If sin has always been and is inherent in creation, then Christ’s death doesn’t redeem us and restore…there was no fall.
      4. If Christ’s death doesn’t restore us, then he was a liar.

      Then, people tell me that they believe the story of Adam and Eve is allegory, which leads to this:

      1. Jesus affirmed Adam and Eve being at the beginning of creation in Mark 10:6. This means Jesus believed the Genesis account that humanity existed at the beginning of creation.
      2. If the Genesis account is simply allegory, yet Jesus seems to affirm it as historical and teaches it to be so, then He couldn’t be God’s son, sent from Heaven. He’s just another man.

    • The Bible and macro-evolution cannot coexist. They simply cannot both be right.

      Among other issues, here’s the biggest kicker:
      • The question of could God have used evolution as His means of creating the world (called theistic evolution) is a resounding no. There are numerous issues that make them incompatible, but death is the primary one. In God’s creation, there is no death until after the fall. We were perfect, and we fell from that perfection. We are now in a state of continual sin, death, and decay, and the only thing that can stop that, rectify that, redeem that, is Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. Evolution posits exactly the opposite. We were broken from the beginning, not perfect, things died off as they spawned new and better beings, and we are gradually working our own way toward perfection. In this, death is natural, not a punishment/consequence of our sins. And if death is natural, there is no need for a Savior, it’s just the way things are.

  4. Another camp are the so-called theistic evolutionists. From my experience any short-comings in evolutionary theory as you have noted above are covered by “God.” The statistical near-impossibilities that other authors have pointed out are manipulated by God. He is involved in creation and uses the evolutionary process to accomplish his goals. Of course, there are all sorts of theological problems that this position doesn’t address.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Show Buttons
Hide Buttons