How Scientific and Open-minded Are Darwinists?

Darwin’s followers claim to be scientific and the only ones who really are. They base evolution upon fact, reason, evidence and truth. They oppose falsehood, superstition, and ignorance. They claim the scientific method of controlled experiment and observation is the only sure way to gain knowledge. They claim to gather data and follow it wherever it leads. So science destroys belief in creation and in a Creator.

Is evolution the conclusion reached by honest, unbiased, factual investigation? It's claimed science proves creation wrong and no God exists. So religious believers should make their peace with it, admit its established scientific fact, and stop being obstinate. It's said that people who oppose evolution are superstitious, ignorant, closed-minded, prejudiced, imperialistic, outmoded, unscientific, stupid, dangerous--period.

But all that being true, as evolutionists claim, what is the problem with honest questioning and investigation? Isn’t that what science is supposed to be about? Aren’t scientists supposed to consider alternative theories? If all the facts are in and evolution confirmed, wouldn’t honest scrutiny further establish evolution? Everything must point to man having evolved by chance from molecules. There can be no fear of arguments dumb believers in God and creation might offer. So why try to suppress their free speech; exclude their arguments from science textbooks? Their ignorance and falsehoods can only confirm the truth.

Now let’s consider some of the ignorant questions of these dumb religious people.

Is the Scientific Method the Way to Discover God?

It’s a good method to learn about nature and its laws. It utilizes our senses of seeing, hearing, feeling, touching, and tasting. It gives knowledge of material observable objects. But some things in life are not observable and experimental. For example, human thoughts, our past experiences, historical events, ethics, human dignity, beauty, logic. Does that mean they don’t exist? Certainly, we live as though they exist. So scientific method is inadequate to know about even many immaterial but real and crucial things.

Now what experiment demonstrates molecules can arrange themselves into men? None! Furthermore, empirical method depends upon prior unproved factors such as logic, accuracy, strict control, and honesty of the experimenter. It’s difficult for me to see how scientific method can demonstrate evolution. But isn’t that what’s supposed to demonstrate fact in science?

Evolutionists claim that molecules by chance and over time arranged themselves into men. In order to show this scientifically they would have to produce undeniable specimens or fossils of each successful step in the process. That would be conclusive and put all doubts and objections to rest. Yes, we know many varieties of worms, dogs, birds exist, but we don’t know that one kind of life form can change into another kind. Microevolution is fact; macroevolution is not.

Evolutionists know some things to be fact but their dogmatic philosophy that nature is everything won’t allow them to admit that the facts point to creation and a Creator. They know life doesn’t spontaneously pop into existence from nonlife. They know life forms have genetic limitations. They know acquired characteristics and mutations are not methods sufficient to achieve macroevolution. They know unconscious molecules have no mind to arrange themselves into man. They know randomness results in chaos not order. They know living cells are enormously complex and compact, a literal city of machines demonstrating intelligent design worthy only of God and creation. Yet they have been deceiving people about such things for decades.

I recommend the book The Case For A Creator by Lee Strobel. Lee is a journalist and former atheist who interviewed today’s leading authorities in the scientific fields of cosmology, physics, astronomy, biochemistry, biological information, and consciousness asking the tough questions and getting definitive answers. He turned up mountains of detailed evidence to show chance evolution is simply not good factual science. No science disproves God and even Darwin spoke of creation many times. 

How Could We Know If A Creator God Exists?     

Now people reserve the word God to mean something much more than man or nature. If God is just nature itself, we can learn its laws and patterns, and try to benefit from them. But God generally means a Creator and Sustainer of the material universe. So we couldn’t experiment with God in a test tube, examine him under a microscope, or observe him through a telescope. Its unlikely God would obey our commands, cater to our whims, and tailor his actions for our convenience. Moreover, if there’s a Creator we could do some unexpected and supernatural things.

Are we correct to assume no Creator exists? Is this a genuine scientific attitude or a closed-mind prejudice? You can draw a huge circle representing universal knowledge. Let’s be honest--a microscopic dot would represent our part of that knowledge. Our severe limitations forbid us to assume that no God exists, nature tied his hands, or God doesn’t care for man, or can’t act in recognizable ways in his world. Isn’t human ignorance arrogant to assume any such things?

Evolutionists know some things to be fact but their dogmatic philosophy that nature is everything won’t allow them to admit that the facts point to creation and a Creator. They know life doesn’t spontaneously pop into existence from nonlife. They know life forms have genetic limitations. They know acquired characteristics and mutations are not methods sufficient to achieve evolution. They know unconscious molecules have no mind to arrange themselves into man. They know randomness results in chaos not order. They know living cells are enormously complex and compact, a literal city of machines demonstrating intelligent design worthy only of God and creation. All this shows design that point to God. Yet they claim science disproves God even though the sciences point to God. They assume naturalism-of-the-gaps. And they have been deceiving people about all this for decades.

But is there any visual objective evidence of a Creator? Wouldn’t a Creator have to do things outside the normal patterns of nature to get our attention? Suppose someone told us, ‘I’m an angel or a prophet of God the Creator.’ His word would mean nothing—anybody could say that. We would demand some kind of credentials or evidence its true. But suppose someone told us unimaginable detailed events impossible for men to know or guess that occurred centuries later. Wouldn’t that be real evidence an all-knowing God existed as the Bible claims? This is exactly what Christian’s claim Old Testament prophets predicted of their messiah and fulfilled in Jesus.  

“For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” Isaiah 9:6. 739-686 B.C. John 5:18; 10:30-33; 19:7.

“Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel. Isa. 7:14;

 Matt. 1:21-23.

“But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of you shall come forth to Me the One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.” Micah 5:2. 750-731 B.C. Matt. 2:1-6; Luke 2:4-7.

“The eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then the lame shall leap like a deer, and the tongue of the dumb sing. Isa. 35:5-6; John 3:2, 21:24-25.

“My righteous Servant shall justify many; For He shall bear their iniquities.” Isa. 53:11; 2 Cor. 5:21; Luke 19:10; 1 Pet. 3:24.

“For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.” Ps. 16:10; 1000-975 B.C. Acts 2:31; Mark 16:6.

Evolutionist’s claim the paleontologist’s scattered bones demonstrate evolution. But Jesus’ miracles more closely meet scientific criteria. They were scrupulously observed, performed hundreds of times and rationally explained as evidence Jesus is our God, Creator, Savior and Judge. Jesus is no hoax but reasonable fact.

Here are specific unimaginable predictions Jewish prophets made of their future Messiah centuries before Christ. They predict Messiah as Mighty God, virgin born, God with us, in Bethlehem, would perform miracles, die to justify sinners, and arise from the dead. Such century’s earlier specific predictions would be impossible for limited man to guess or artificially fulfill. Jesus’ life depicted in the Gospels demonstrates he fulfillment all of them. No other religious literature contains fulfilled predictions. That’s objective evidence that shows people God is real. For only an all-knowing, God can tell us future details (Isa. 44:10).

Jesus gave visual objective evidence in his miracles. While the Gospels mention only 35, Jesus performed miracles to individuals and groups everywhere he went for more than three years. They were spontaneous upon request, in open daylight, and before hostile critics who couldn’t deny them even when he challenged them to do so. Jesus miracles demonstrated he is Lord over nature, demons, diseases and death. Believing nature’s set patterns as we do today, his disciples were always skeptical, astonished and often rebuked for lack of faith. Yet, his disciples became willing to experience horrible deaths because they knew Jesus was their Messiah and their risen God and Creator.
.
 No other religion can show such miracles. It’s not lack of evidence keeping us from trusting the Savior, it’s a sinful life and a rebellious will. Will you say: Lord, I’m a sinner deserving Hell, but I trust you now and forever as my Lord, Savior, and Guide? I know repentance is humbling but it's God's way we receive the Savior and eternal life. God loves us enough to tell us the truth.

.

Ape-man or God-man?

.

Two opposing worldviews compete for the lives and souls of men. One is naturalistic science. Evolutionists claim man is purely a product of nature, claimed up from the clime, is dispensable, and will become food for worms. The other is biblical Christianity. Bible believers affirm Jesus is the God-man who taught God created us and we’re responsible to choose eternal life with God.     

Darwin’s followers, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, believed God a hindrance and man only a more evolved animal. They murdered their countrymen and millions of others they claimed inferior or who disagreed with them. Their ‘survival of the fittest mentality’ justified their actions.   

Evolutionists destroy everything Christians uphold. Evolutionists kill human dignity and human rights saying we’re just dispensable animals. Evolutionists deny the world has meaning and life ultimate purpose. Evolutionists disaffirm absolute truth and ethics. Evolutionists bury hope of life beyond the grave. Secular humanist countries demonstrate this: “those who hate him (God), love death”. Proverbs 8:36.

Christians uphold Creation and Christ as our loving Lord and Savior. This inspires us to found great universities, create great literature and art, established science on an experimental basis, build hospitals, and establish humane organizations. Believing the world created by a rational God who loves us, we’re assured it’s a rational world to be nurtured and developed. The Christian church is imperfect, yet provides the basis for everything good evolution destroys.

To decide which worldview is the truth two questions require our utmost attention. One, is Darwin right that we evolved from the apes or something lower? The other question, could Jesus be the God-man and only hope of the world?  

First, Question: Is Man Just an Animal Ascended from Slime?      

 Consider these three lines of argument. First, in science observable, repeatable experiments are what establish a theory as fact. And it’s believed that given enough time unconscious nature can arrange mindless molecules into men.

Evolutionists made this experiment with fruit flies. Since they have a short lifespan, many generations can be examined. Radiation experiments conducted on multiple generations showed they can develop long or short legs or wings and various deformities. As England became industrialized, black smoke covered the trees. People noticed black moths replaced white moths birds could see to eat. Darwin observed birds called Finches had longer beaks in the dry season.

Now fruit flies were the only experiment and it clearly showed they don’t evolve into anything else. The moths and Finches were observations, but not experiments. And they proved only that creatures can adapt to their environments. No experiments establish evolution.

 We know various kinds of dogs, horses, monkeys, and men exist. But we don’t know that dogs can change into horses or monkeys evolve into men. That’s theory, not fact. Furthermore, we know animals and plants have a genetically programmed limit that they cannot pass. The fossil record confirms the Bible that plants and animals reproduce only their own kind (Gen.1:21-25). And God made man in his image--a rational, moral, immortal person like Himself (Gen. 1:27; Ps. 8:5; Eph. 4:23-24).

Second, evolutionists argue transitional forms or bones called fossils can demonstrate evolution to be fact. Fossils showing transitional steps from ameba to Adam would without doubt show evolution is fact. Museums overflow with fossils. Some show unusual characteristics of animals that died out such as the duckbilled platypus. But no bones discovered show one animal evolved into another.

Paleontologists dig up bones and announce to the world they have found the missing link. So we’ve told about the missing link called Piltdown Man, Java Man, Peking Man, Lucy and Nebraska Man. All supposed extinct races of people that turn out to be hoaxes, just lies. Neanderthal Man was a real robust person who may have had a much longer lifespan than people today.

The famous Tennessee Scopes trial convinced America science discovered the missing link, Nebraska Man. Science proved man evolved from the monkey. Science then is fact, religion mere faith. Textbooks should teach science, not religion. Scientists are learned authorities, Christian’s ignorant dummies. Nebraska Man, however, turned out to be an extinct pig’s tooth. Don’t believe the sensational artist’s drawings, journalist’s articles and cave man models shown in newspapers and science textbooks. All are reconstructions not based upon proof but upon evolutionist bias.

Third, evolutionists argue that similarities between man and animals prove evolution. Both man and animals have similar limb structure, organs, bodily fluids, and DNA. They classify animal complexity in an ascending order then say this confirms man and the animals evolved from a common ancestor.

But there’s no rule God has to make life forms of entirely different patterns. Life and mobility require similar legs, arms, organs, fluids, DNA. The differences are more significant. Besides, creatures can’t live with partially developed digestive or reproductive systems or heart, eyes, ears, legs, arms. Built-in genetic limitations allow varieties within kinds but not change to a different kind of creature. Similarities don’t prove a common ancestor—more likely, they show a Common Designer.

But couldn’t the Bible account of man’s creation be myth or fable to allow for evolution as naturalistic science claims?

No! The text is clear that God created animals to reproduce after their own kinds. But God made man directly from the ground in his image and dominant over animals. With no suitable helpmate among animals, God made Eve (mother of all living) from Adam. These first people had intelligent speech, named the animals, kept sheep, farmed the ground, make offerings to God, and build cities.

 Further, the Bible always assumes the creation account is literal history. Jesus affirmed God made man beginning at creation (Mark 10:6). Paul said God made man’s flesh different from animals, that Adam  was made direct from dirt and formed before Eve (1 Cor. 15:39, 48; 1Tim. 2:13). All this precludes both naturalistic evolution and theistic evolution as God’s means of creation. Moreover, unless the Fall is literal, the Bible becomes nonsense and there’s no need of a Savior (Gen. 3; John 3:16; Rom. 5:12-21). It all boils down to belief or unbelief in the Bible’s God.

The sacred writer’s intent was not an imaginative entertaining story but a historical account to show our origin in God’s image. Moreover, because archaeologists have no collaborative data and aren’t likely to find any doesn’t mean it can’t be true. Critics are wrong multiple times.

Second question: Could Jesus be the God-man and Only Way to Heaven?

Do we know God is required to have many ways to Heaven? Could there be something about God or about us that we haven’t considered? Do we know God must follow our thinking and we can’t be wrong? How can we even know there is a heaven or what it’s like?  

Would the mere word of Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster, Hindus, Mohammad, or Jesus prove their religion to be true? Don’t crazy persons claim to be God or talk with God? How can we know God is more than just a thought in their head, their imagination, invention, or philosophy? What would demonstrate their God is real and acts in our material world?

As we mentioned, true science confirms or discredits their theories by repeated empirical tests and observations. So which of the just mentioned religions exceeds mere words with repeatable public proofs?

Consider this. I announce that this year the snow will melt off Mt Everest and the volcano in Yellowstone National Park will erupt and it occurred. Wouldn’t that get attention and suggest I have super human knowledge? And what if I could do incredible things like walk on water, heal open sores immediately, and ascend into the sky? Wouldn’t that suggest I have greater knowledge than men ordinarily have?  

Well, Jewish prophets made hundreds of specific predictions about their Messiah that only Jesus Christ could fulfill such as be God, virgin born, in Bethlehem, live without sin, fulfill prophecies, perform miracles, die for people’s sins and rise from the dead. Also, over three years before astonished disciples and hostile critics in open daylight wherever he went, Jesus performed miracles, probably hundreds. Moreover, Jesus’ life doesn’t need repeating for every generation since greater historical evidence exists for Jesus than for Aristotle or Tiberius Caesar. Check it out--The Historical Jesus by Gary R. Habermas.

What can we conclude with regard to world religions? Jesus gave us repeated, public, eyewitness, evidences confirming his claims to be God. Founders of non-Christian religions give only teachings, no objective visible evidence of God. Can’t we then conclude, based upon good evidence, that Jesus is God?

What can we conclude with regard to the naturalist’s claim that mindless molecules arranged themselves into men? No experiment has shown this. A Common Designer explains arguments of similarities better than a common ancestor does. Bones showing each transitional step would conclusively demonstrate evolution. But all we have are a few supposed missing links exposed as hoaxes. Can’t we also conclude that the repeated, eyewitness evidence Jesus gave to show he is God is far more scientific than all the missing links and hoaxes that fail to demonstrate evolution? Aren’t we wise to trust Jesus to save us sinners when our eternal well-being is at stake?

A naturalist assumption may send us to the eternal darkness, torment and weeping of Hell. It’s too late to repent and believe then. “It is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment.” Hebrews 9:27 God may be speaking to you now to trust in the Lord Jesus as your eternal Savior. Won't U say, Lord Jesus, I trust you now as my Savior, Lord, and Guide throughout life until I see You in death or You come for me? 

.

Nature Could Never Design Man

Scientists tell us a living cell has enough genetic information to fill a set of encyclopedias—it’s a virtual city of compact complex machines working in harmony. And molecules would have a number of impossibly difficult hurtles to even form a cell. But we don’t have to take the scientists word for it. Just perceptive observation can show how utterly impossible this is for unconscious mindless nature to create man in any amount of time. Take the human body as an example.

Consider the external design shown only in a person’s head. Eyes in the head on top of the body give maximum distance of vision—why aren’t they at the waist or feet? Eyes are recessed and proper distance apart for depth of vision and protection with eyebrows to obstruct drips, eyelashes to retard dust, tears to clarify vision. Ears located on sides of the head for expanded range of sound and shaped to trap sound. Nose juts out with double nostrils to insure breathing if a nostril is clogged. Mouth is in the head for food intake designed to take food downward and out of the body. It has biting teeth in front where needed to bite and  teeth behind to crush what’s bit, a tongue to move food around and internal acids to digest food. Can we suppose blind nature knew how to fix things this way even in billions of years?

Eyes, ears, nose, mouth all have many essential functioning parts to carry messages to the brain. Man’s brain is encased in a hard protective shell surrounded by hair to keep in warmth. The human brain is so compact and so complex with connections sending chemical and electrical messages in a split second and it would take a large library to match the information it can contain. Further, it’s believed we use only a small part of our brain capacity. Doesn’t all this suggest fiat creation rather than evolutionary process?

Science knows nothing can’t produce something and life doesn’t come from nonlife--that suggests an eternal self-existing living cause, namely God. Further, life forms show specified complexity not found in nature—compare arrowheads with creek stones, sand castles with sand dunes, the four known presidents faces of Mount Rushmore with natural mountains. Further, life forms are irreducibly complete and functional at the outset—no partially developed heart or reproductive system can survive.

Evolutionists make counter claims. They say human embryos go through animal stages such as a worm and fish, and the fetus’ backbone looks like an animal’s tail—they even base abortion on it. But life forms are programmed at the outset. They say bodily appendages such as tonsils, appendix and thymus gland are useless evolutionary carryovers. Over a hundred such vestigial organs were once claimed, but uses are now known for all but a disputed few. It’s said both animal and human genetic material are composed of four letters and 99% identical. But it’s not identical material but different arrangement that counts.

Could evolutionist arguments be based upon ignorance or just blind prejudice? Does true investigative science have to exempt God at the outset? Do we know so much as to say no God exists? Aren’t we supposed to follow the evidence wherever it leads? Doesn’t experimental science have its limits? Could the “gaps” in our knowledge be filled in by a naturalistic bias? Weren’t modern experimental scientists’ believers in God, creation and many even Christians? Aren’t many scientists’ Christian believers even today? And isn’t it the rational order of the Christian worldview that is the very basis for experimental science? All these questions deserve honest answers from honest open-minded people.

Inherited adaptability to environment does occur such as the changing length of the finches’ beak. But mutations are usually destructive, not passed on, and millions are required in conjunction to make a significant change—it’s not a sufficient mechanism to change one life form into another. The universe is running down, not building up as evolution suggests. A genetic plan must come from an informer, a mind. Randomness never arranges itself into order—red, white and blue confetti dropped from an airplane doesn’t form itself into the American flag on the ground. Life forms look designed simply because they really are designed by their great Designer.

The probably of this all coming together by unconscious mindless nature in an evolution of time and chance is infinitely improbable, not even in 15 billion years. Consult a textbook explaining the complexity, intricacy and compatibility of the human body. Surely, common sense compels us to admit all this marvelous design cannot be due to a common ancestor but attributed only to a common intelligent self-existing Designer or God. A love-trust relationship with our Maker may be the plan and purpose of life. We won’t know until we sinners trust in the loving Savior who died to pay for our sins.

Maybe it’s Darwinists’ and not the Bible that’s in denial—see Psalms 14:1; 19:1-2; 139:14; Romans 1:20-21. Rose Publishing puts out pamphlets with much good easy to understand information. For college students the 5 Minute Apologist, by Dr. Rick Cornish gives maximum answers in minimum time. It’s covers most subjects at a reasonably price. See book list below.

.

Ape-man or God-man?

.
#Science   #Naturalism   #God-man

Two opposing worldviews compete for the lives and souls of men. One is naturalistic science. Evolutionists claim man is purely a product of nature, claimed up from the clime, is dispensable, and will become food for worms. The other is biblical Christianity. Bible believers affirm Jesus is the God-man who taught God created us and we’re responsible to choose eternal life with God.     

Darwin’s followers, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, believed God a hindrance and man only a more evolved animal. They murdered their countrymen and millions of others they claimed inferior or who disagreed with them. Their ‘survival of the fittest mentality’ justified their actions.   

Evolutionists destroy everything Christians uphold. Evolutionists kill human dignity and human rights saying we’re just dispensable animals. Evolutionists deny the world has meaning and life ultimate purpose. Evolutionists disaffirm absolute truth and ethics. Evolutionists bury hope of life beyond the grave. Secular humanist countries demonstrate this: “those who hate him (God), love death”. Proverbs 8:36.

Christians uphold Creation and Christ as our loving Lord and Savior. This inspires us to found great universities, create great literature and art, established science on an experimental basis, build hospitals, and establish humane organizations. Believing the world created by a rational God who loves us, we’re assured it’s a rational world to be nurtured and developed. The Christian church is imperfect, yet provides the basis for everything good evolution destroys.

To decide which worldview is the truth two questions require our utmost attention. One, is Darwin right that we evolved from the apes or something lower? The other question, could Jesus be the God-man and only hope of the world?  

First, Question: Is Man Just an Animal Ascended from Slime?      

 Consider these three lines of argument. First, in science observable, repeatable experiments are what establish a theory as fact. And it’s believed that given enough time unconscious nature can arrange mindless molecules into men.

Evolutionists made this experiment with fruit flies. Since they have a short lifespan, many generations can be examined. Radiation experiments conducted on multiple generations showed they can develop long or short legs or wings and various deformities. As England became industrialized, black smoke covered the trees. People noticed black moths replaced white moths birds could see to eat. Darwin observed birds called Finches had longer beaks in the dry season.
. 
Now fruit flies were the only experiment and it clearly showed they don’t evolve into anything else. The moths and Finches were observations, but not experiments. And they proved only that creatures can adapt to their environments. No experiments establish evolution.

 We know various kinds of dogs, horses, monkeys, and men exist. But we don’t know that dogs can change into horses or monkeys evolve into men. That’s theory, not fact. Furthermore, we know animals and plants have a genetically programmed limit that they cannot pass. The fossil record confirms the Bible that plants and animals reproduce only their own kind (Gen.1:21-25). And God made man in his image--a rational, moral, immortal person like himself (Gen. 1:27; Psalm 8:5; Ephesians 4:23-24).

Second, evolutionists argue transitional forms or bones called fossils can demonstrate evolution to be fact. Fossils showing transitional steps from ameba to Adam would without doubt show evolution is fact. Museums overflow with fossils. Some show unusual characteristics of animals that died out such as the duckbilled platypus. But no bones discovered show one animal evolved into another.

Paleontologists dig up bones and announce to the world they have found the missing link. So we’ve told about the missing link called Piltdown Man, Java Man, Peking Man, Lucy and Nebraska Man.  Neanderthal Man was a real robust person who may have had a much longer lifespan than people today. All supposed extinct races of people that turn out to be hoaxes, just lies.

The famous Tennessee Scopes trial convinced America science discovered the missing link, Nebraska Man. Science proved man evolved from the monkey. Science then is fact, religion mere faith. Textbooks should teach science, not religion. Scientists are learned authorities, Christian’s ignorant dummies. Nebraska Man, however, turned out to be an extinct pig’s tooth. Who then is the real dummies?
. 
Don’t believe the sensational artist’s drawings, journalist’s articles and cave man models shown in newspapers and science textbooks. All are reconstructions not based upon proof but upon evolutionist bias.
.
Third, evolutionists argue that similarities between man and animals prove evolution. Both man and animals have similar limb structure, organs, bodily fluids, and DNA. They classify animal complexity in an ascending order then say this confirms man and the animals evolved from a common ancestor.
.
But there’s no rule God has to make life forms of entirely different patterns. Life and mobility require similar legs, arms, organs, fluids, DNA. The differences are more significant. Besides, creatures can’t live with partially developed digestive or reproductive systems or heart, eyes, ears, legs, arms. Built-in genetic limitations allow varieties within kinds but not change to a different kind of creature. Similarities don’t prove a common ancestor—more likely, they show a Common Designer. But couldn’t the Bible account of man’s creation be myth or fable to allow for evolution as naturalistic science claims?
.
No! The text is clear that God created animals to reproduce after their own kinds. But God made man directly from the ground in his image and dominant over animals. With no suitable helpmate among animals, God made Eve (mother of all living) from Adam. These first people had intelligent speech, named the animals, kept sheep, farmed the ground, make offerings to God, and build cities.

.
Further, the Bible always assumes the creation account is literal history. Jesus affirmed God made man beginning at creation (Mark 10:6). Paul said God made man’s flesh different from animals, that Adam  was made direct from dirt and formed before Eve (1 Cor. 15:39, 48; 1Tim. 2:13). All this precludes both naturalistic evolution and theistic evolution as God’s means of creation. Moreover, unless the Fall is literal, the Bible becomes nonsense and there’s no need of a Savior (Gen. 3; John 3:16; Rom. 5:12-21). It all boils down to belief or unbelief in the Bible’s God.
.
The sacred writer’s intent was not an imaginative entertaining story but a historical account to show our origin in God’s image. Moreover, because archaeologists have no collaborative data and aren’t likely to find any doesn’t mean it can’t be true. Critics are wrong multiple times.
.
Second question: Could Jesus be the God-man and Only Way to Heaven?
.
Do we know God is required to have many ways to heaven? Could there be something about God or about us that we haven’t considered? Do we know God must follow our thinking and we can’t be wrong? How can we even know there is a heaven or what it’s like?

Would the mere word of Buddha, Confucius, Zoroaster, Hindus, Mohammad, or Jesus prove their religion to be true? Don’t crazy persons claim to be God or talk with God? How can we know God is more than just a thought in their head, their imagination, invention, or philosophy? What would demonstrate their God is real and acts in our material world?
.
As we mentioned, true science confirms or discredits their theories by repeated empirical tests and observations. So which of the just mentioned religions exceeds mere words with repeatable public proofs?
.
Consider this. I announce that this year the snow will melt off Mt Everest and the volcano in Yellowstone National Park will erupt and it occurred. Wouldn’t that get attention and suggest I have super human knowledge? And what if I could do incredible things like walk on water, heal open sores immediately, and ascend into the sky? Wouldn’t that suggest I have greater knowledge than men ordinarily have?
.

Well, Jewish prophets made hundreds of specific predictions about their Messiah that only Jesus Christ could fulfil. Consider these: claimed  be God, virgin born, in Bethlehem, live without sin, fulfill prophecies, perform miracles, die for people’s sins and rise from the dead. Also, over three years before astonished disciples and hostile critics in open daylight wherever he went, Jesus performed miracles, probably hundreds. Moreover, Jesus’ life doesn’t need repeating for every generation since greater historical evidence exists for Jesus than for Aristotle or Julius Caesar. Check it out -The Historical Jesus by Gary R. Habermas.

What can we conclude with regard to world religions? Jesus gave us repeated, public, eyewitness, evidences confirming his claims to be God. Founders of non-Christian religions give only teachings, no objective visible evidence of God. Can’t we then conclude, based upon good evidence, that Jesus is God?
.
What can we conclude with regard to the naturalist’s claim that mindless molecules arranged themselves into men? No experiment has shown this. A Common Designer explains arguments of similarities better than a common ancestor does. Bones showing each transitional step would conclusively demonstrate evolution. But all we have are a few supposed missing links exposed as hoaxes. Can’t we also conclude that the repeated, eyewitness evidence Jesus gave to show he is God is far more scientific than all the missing links and hoaxes that fail to demonstrate evolution? Aren’t we wise to trust Jesus to save us sinners when our eternal well-being is at stake? A naturalist assumption may send us to the eternal darkness, torment and weeping of Hell.