Students from FAU Invade the Creation Discovery Museum!
The Creation Studies Institute (CSI) is not stranger to controversy. We don’t go looking for opportunities to present the evidence for special creation in a confrontational manner. However, light and darkness never mix. Darkness must always retreat in the presence of light. That brings us to the visit by Florida Atlantic University students in what was purported to be a student-led class of Jewish students (or that’s what we were told).
Evidently, this was an anthropology class, and some of the students were indeed Jewish, but it turned out that this was organized by their anthropology professor and their intent was not exactly kosher. Because God is always gracious to His children, this particular class was attended by a believer who gave us the inside story prior to the appearance of these approx. 30 students.
It seems that they were intending to come and ridicule those silly Bible believing creationists. They came convinced that they would easily refute our creationist beliefs by simply waving the magic wand of evolution over the meeting and, presto-chango (kind of like the theory of evolution itself), our position would crumple under the weight of their evolutionary arguments.
The afternoon began on a friendly note. Tom DeRosa introduced himself along with a Harvard-trained paleontologist who came to lend support. There were several other friends of CSI that were also in attendance. Tom explained to these students that we actually look at the scientific data. He explained that creationists and evolutionists are viewing the exact same evidence through their own particular lens. He admitted that we each bring our own presuppositions, e.g. our own bias, to the subject matter being examined. For this reason, we come to far different conclusions, however, Tom was clear about the fact that our views are supported by what we see happening all around us. He further noted that evolution is based upon a naturalistic/materialistic worldview and that we do not see these types of changes in nature nor do we see evidence of these changes in the fossil record.
Andy Dent began by taking this group on a tour of the Creation Discovery Center (CDC). As the tour progressed, it became evident that our museum was presenting the facts of nature through the lens of the Bible. This was enough to bring one student to tears. Evidently, when your entire worldview is challenged, and you begin hearing truth that has been previously suppressed, it can have a very dramatic effect on you.
After the students finished their tour of the CDC, we piled pack into the classroom for a question and answer period. This is where it got really interesting. It became clear that most of the students (except our one believer in this class) were thoroughly brainwashed in the “molecules to men” or “goo to you by the way of the zoo” version of what passes for Darwinian evolution.
It was difficult for these students to grasp the obvious, i.e. there are limitations within biblical kinds that cannot be violated. The Bible teaches that the biblical ‘kinds’ are fixed. All living things are genetically preprogrammed to “reproduce according to their own kind,” Gen.1:11-12, 21, 24-25. While evolutionary scientists are fond of stating that Darwinian Theory did away with the doctrine of the immutability of species, the facts tell us something quite different. When the subject of Darwin’s observation of the Gallipolis finches came up, it was explained to them that variations within kind (or speciation) was not really sufficient to infer the upwardly complex and dramatic changes that would turn amphibians into reptiles or reptiles into mammals. In point of fact, Darwin’s finches all remained finches, albeit with slightly different beaks.
When one of these students used the hammerhead shark as an example of a beneficial mutation, it was pointed out to her that sharks have continued to remain sharks, and that the so-called beneficial mutation could not have been entirely beneficial given the present variety in the 354 species of the shark population.
Tom explained the view that common descent can be just as easily explained as common design. The example of the different types of wheeled vehicles, i.e. the tricycle, the bicycle, the unicycle the motorcycle, the jeep, the tractor trailer, were all examples of a common design used to serve a common purpose. This illustrates a serious flaw in evolutionary thinking, e.g. common design = common descent from the ever-illusive common ancestor or missing link. They are looking at the same evidence, however, when creationists see common design, we see it as evidence of a common Designer, the ultimate Designer, the Creator of the universe!
Darwinian evolution uses a very old deceptive technique called the “bait and switch.” It is a tactic of evolutionary science that gives us examples of adaptation or adaptability (already pre-programmed into the DNA of all living things) or microevolution and calls them examples of Darwinian Evolution or macroevolution. In reality, Chihuahuas and Great Danes are both dogs, members of the dog “kind.” Yes there is great variety within the canine family; however, they are all still dogs! It was also noted, that when you breed these so-called pure breeds, you are placing a strain on the gene pool and the results are hip dysplasia among German Shepherds and Golden Retrievers, hearing problems among Dalmatians (you didn’t think they became Fire Department mascots because of their good hearing did you?), and the list goes on and on.
Bottom line, evolution is not about creating anything; it is about violence, death, and extinction. Whatever the textbooks having been telling these students, it is not the truth. When they are confronted with God’s truth (many of them for the first time) using a well thought out alternative explanation to evolution, they become emotional, angry, or even argumentative. The good news is that many seeds were planted and many more were watered. We are prayerfully waiting for God to give the increase.
Steven Rowitt, Th.M., Ph.D. (c)