A Short Argument Against Evolution

Edward Cannon, June 2012

Evolution, the idea that every living thing is descended from lesser beings, and ultimately from nonliving chemicals is false. This theory, although supported by some evidence is not in harmony with revealed truths or logical conclusions.

A brief summary of evolutionary claims

The generally accepted evolutionary story is this: About 3 billion years ago, molecules combined in such a way that they formed a stable, self perpetuating system that could use energy and react to the environment around it: life. This self perpetuating system or systems became more sophisticated over time, as random variation created versions more likely to survive and thus pass on improvements to the next generation, while less desirable variations were less likely to be passed on and gradually disappeared. More recently (the last few million years) a primate began to evolve greater intelligence, hands suited for tool use and gradually became Man, the dominant species on the planet.

A more correct version

At some time in the past, God held a council, in which he and Jesus Christ presented a plan for the perfecting of His spirit children. As a result of that plan, the earth, (and presumably the rest of the observable universe) was made (organized) in a preexisting area with preexisting materials. (“...We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell'” Abraham 3:24). In six creative stages the earth was formed, filled with life and Man.

Further detail

According to the scriptural account, plants came first, then fish and birds, then earth dwelling animals. Finally Man was organized. Man's organization is described in the most detail “And the Gods formed man from the dust of the ground, and took his spirit (that is, the man's spirit), and put it into him; and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” (Abraham 5:7) This describes a very specific action, perhaps even an ordinance. Before Adam had a spirit only, after he had a spirit inside a body, he was alive in the temporal sense. Shortly thereafter Eve is formed from a rib, and then they commence living in the Garden of Eden. After some period of time, they are tempted, eat the fruit, are cast out of the garden and have children. Their children marry and people the earth. Eventually they die.

A number of faithful individuals have attempted to reconcile the above two versions, with, in my mind, little success. There are a number of issues with this.

one

The evolutionary version of creation indicates that all life started out very simple, and gained complexity slowly, arriving at man only relatively recently. This has major problems. Our recent ancestors, the last few thousand years, are clearly man, the spirit children of our heavenly parents. A simple unicellular organism is clearly not. When exactly did that change occur? This is problematic. Also, if man and chimps have a common ancestor, why are chimps not also spirit children of our heavenly parents? (Claims that they are but we don't know about it seem pretty thin, surely some prophet somewhere would have mentioned that, if for no other reason than so we would treat them like other men and not like animals, i.e. hunting them would be murder.) This common ancestor must not be a child of God, but the same argument from above applies. A much more logical answer is the one given in the scriptures, that man was created at one specific time.

Critics of creation state that making man out of dust doesn't seem very logical either, but it is no less logical than life appearing randomly. There is also some indirect evidence for this, Christ was (and is) able to do a number of things that are not currently explained by scientific theories, such as turning water into wine, feeding thousands with a few loves and fishes, walking on water, healing the sick, raising the dead. Given this record, forming a body out of the dust of the earth seems just a plausible as any other method.

Another claim is that there would not be so much evidence for evolution if it were not true. The idea behind this is that God does not lie, and would not leave so much evidence that would cause people to think something that was not true. God does not lie, but despite concerted efforts on the part of prophets, teachers, etc. for centuries people have believed that some groups of people are inferior and some are superior. In fact, this is still a widely held belief, despite being totally false. The people with these beliefs clearly have lots of evidence, and many even think that God approves of the beliefs. This claim is not good evidence that evolution is true.

Living organisms can change over time. This is shown by the domestication and selective breeding of many useful animals. The changes are relatively small, but well documented. Some use this as support of evolution. Unfortunately this may explain how life has changed once it got here, but still does not explain the great beginning, where no life became life. Rocks, dirt, even mud have not spontaneously created life while being observed.

It is possible that animal and plant life has evolved, but man was not. This seems unlikely, as animals also have spirits, and if God could make man in a definite event, he certainly could make animals in the same way. The wording in the scriptures is different however, so is is possible.