Skip to content

Today's Creation Moment

Not a Fish Lizard
Genesis 1:20
“And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.”
Like so many children over the last century, I was given a book about dinosaurs when I was a small boy. This book contained references to a number of extinct creatures other than dinosaurs, and one...

Movie Review: Evolution vs. God

The new film – Evolution vs. God, directed by Ray Comfort and available from Creation Moments – is a series of interviews with college students and professors who all claim to believe in evolution. Comfort asks direct questions starting with, “Do you believe in evolution?” and “Can you give me one example of Darwinian evolution of one kind of animal changing to another kind of animal?

All those interviewed said that they definitely believe in evolution. When asked why they believe, several students said that this is what they were told or learned in class and that they believed their instructor or the science community in general. But when pressed to give an example of true Darwinian evolution, none could.

When the same question was asked of the professors, their example was bacteria acquiring a new metabolic pathway in response to some stimulus (still as bacteria), or a stickleback fish slightly changing its morphology (still a stickleback fish), or the Galapagos finches with different beak sizes and shapes but still a finch. No examples of one kind of animal changing into another (macroevolution) could be given.

Often the reason given for lack of evidence is that there just isn’t enough time to observe such major changes. When Comfort suggests that their belief in evolution is just that – a belief – they are finally faced with the fact that it really is a belief. Comfort then explains that within each of us, we know that there is a Creator by the evidence that we see all around us and that we are not just another animal but are different and special. When presented with this fact, the students begin to listen.

The Gospel message is then clearly presented, and you can see the impact it has on those interviewed. Some will never be the same. In the film, Comfort has done a masterful job of logically pointing out how evolution is a belief as well as how many students and professors have accepted it on blind faith simply because they were told that it is true. He challenges those he interviews to think critically about what they have been told and presents an alternative to evolution in a very respectful way.

This film should have a great impact on our college students. I highly recommend it to everyone. At 38 minutes, it is time well spent. Even believers in biblical creation can pick up some pointers to help in their discussions with their evolution-believing friends.

This review was written by Dr. Donald Clark, vice-chairman of the board of Creation Moments. Permission is granted to use this review, provided it is properly attributed.

Order Evolution vs. God at our website and get it for a limited time for a donation of any amount (suggested: $10 or more).


The title is interesting. In "Evolution vs. God," we are comparing two irreconcilable things ... the natural versus the supernatural. I think this is the blind that catches most of us, at least in the beginning. In it, we try to calculate God, the supernatural being, and to calculate the exact separation of God and natural process, on the basis of "natural" science and experiment.

Can't be done. The separation is complete.

Many years ago, my father made this distinction (between natural and supernatural) and some essence of his words have always stuck with me. I think he perceived the thought slightly differently than I, but it's a note to make, and it avoids useless conjecture.

A theistic evolutionist would say that the supernatual can affect the natural, but not vice-versa. So, God COULD make evolution into a slow motion creation, couldn't he? And his supernatural power would influence our natural perception ... but never the twain shall meet.

- Regards,

Theistic evolutionists say a lot of things about what COULD have happened, but the Bible describes what DID happen. I've talked with dozens of theistic evolutionists and not one of them believes that the historical narrative chapters in the book of Genesis tell a true history. All of them interpret Genesis in light of what they've been taught by atheistic (for the most part) scientists. In short, theistic evolutionists hold science in higher regard than the Bible. Theistic evolutionists pick and choose what seems reasonable to them as being true and discard the rest.

Let me give you one example. They believe that the miracles recorded in the Old Testament are to be interpreted as allegorical and yet agree that the virgin birth of Jesus and His resurrection are literally true. Christians need to accept the WHOLE Bible as true, interpreting the historical narrative passages as true history regardless of the current teachings of science. The Bible doesn't change and doesn't need to. Science textbooks, on the other hand, need to be revised every few years, showing that last year's textbooks were not reliable.

I hope you will be the rare exception and believe what the Bible says rather than what you've been taught by evolutionary scientists. Yes, it's an "either-or" decision and most definitely not a "both-and" decision because the Bible and evolutionary science are frequently at odds with one another.

The Bible is true and accurate history; however, you cannot merely go by what people say about it. People will often throw in their own beliefs based on their own agenda (such as a desire to avoid repentance and a refusal to obey the Lord). That's why you need to go to the Lord. Merely reading the Bible is not enough. As for those who don't even read the Bible, good luck ever being educated. And not knowing the Lord -- that's an education no one can afford to miss.

You are correct in stating that there is an "irreconcilable difference" between supernatural and natural, but not for the reasons you think. The differences you stated are based on philosophy/faith that there is no God or other being of such creative power that could beget our universe and everything in it. Evolution is predicated on this philosophy and faith, so of course it is "irreconcilable", it has to be.

An error lies within the use of these 2 words: natural and supernatural. This is a dead giveaway to the philosophies behind it. Humans/earth/universe/et al, the natural, are central and "super" natural is separate from. Very humanocentric based and not theological, or philosophically, sound. IF we (I include all created beings; flora, fauna, strata, i.e. cosmos) were created as scripture indicates (and as science is showing, by the way), then we also must place ourselves within that hierarchy: God is the natural and the creation is the sub-natural; God as primary and the created as secondary.

If we follow this logic with Christian/Jewish theology, The Fall of humanity caused us to be sub-natural because we broke the natural order of things, we caused the damage to the Primary's created order of things.

Science is the study or the order of the cosmos, yes? It has followed the logic and philosophy of a created order for millennia. Only in our century has science taken a back seat to religion, but it is not the religion most think of at first. It is the religion of Faith in Evolution. Science is taking a back seat to a determined ideal that there is no God.

You are being incredibly generous with your review. The editing was atrocious and dishonest, and all Ray did was demonstrate his complete lack of knowledge regarding both science and evolution. If evolution had no evidence, why would the vastly overwhelming majority of scientists around the world accept it as fact? Not that an argument from popularity proves something, but in the intellectually ruthless world of science, false and flawed theories are quickly destroyed.

Mega, if evolution had evidence then why would they still be trying to prove it? Wouldn't we have entire wings of museums dedicated to transitional forms? I would also point you to the so-called evolution charts and ask that if evolution were fact then why are there so many question marks and dashed lines where there are no proof of any transitional forms. If evolution were true we would be finding transitional forms everywhere, we wouldn't be able to "swing a dead cat" without hitting one (I like cats, it's just a phrase). What the charts do show when you remove those question marks and dashed lines is that cats have always produced cats and dogs have always produced dogs. The old lady in the Wendy's commercials says it best regarding evolution, "Where's the beef?"

You are aware that you just put yourself precisely where those interviewed stood BEFORE the interview took place. If evolution had any evidence, the 'experts' would have been able to pull something out that demonstrated a lot more of what evolution is than what they had. What has happened is these experts have lost sight of what science is. They know what the scientific method is, but they complete fail to see how Evolution actually does not come from studies through the scientific method. If you were actually honest, with the question Comfort asked, you'd be in the exact same boat as many of the students asked. You also demonstrate a lack of understanding of how the peer-review process works. You know the ideal, but that ideal has long been lost. Peer-review today is actually an elitist club where majority rule is applied. I know of many works and scientists that had their work rejected for the sole reason of putting Evolution into question. It is ruthless but not against false and flawed theories. If it was, Evolution would have been out the door many years ago.

The bottom line is evolution CANNOT BE PROVEN! and pride has darkened the hearts of atheists who refuse to acknowledge God. If there is no God, then you can excuse yourself from Moral accountability.
The evidence is all around for a creator. The DNA alone shows how complex and amazing we are created.

Ray Comfort has done a great job showing how brainwashed students have become in the educational system and that students will believe whatever man, textbook or professor says. How gullible! The Bible says to test all things - including science. So if you have no observable evidence, it's not provable, and it's not science. It's blind faith.

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
Romans 1:20

To answer your question, "If evolution had no evidence, why would the vastly overwhelming majority of scientists around the world accept it as fact?" obviously it's not about the evidence at all: it's about a belief. That is, a belief that God does not exist. Perhaps I should put that another way, that it is actually a rebellion against God in spite of (as God says) everyone really does know in their heart that God exists.

I have witnessed this bias in evolutionists myself, where I and others have presented clear disproofs of evolution, and that is dismissed and the evolutionist carries on. They carry on in spite of their position being disproven; in spite of the evidence against it. There is no other possible conclusion: they hold their position on the basis of a philosophical bias before examining the evidence. The bias is often dressed up to appear to be scientific, but you have given an example of this not being scientific yourself here. Science can never claim something has been absolutely proven true, that is, known to be "fact". Science can only absolutely disprove something. To claim something is proven fact goes beyond the realm of science.

If millions of consumers believe that smoking isn't bad for them, does that change facts? You can have a zillion people, all of them denying God, and it's not going to change the fact that they are merely human and He is God. You, by the way, with your worship of what you consider human intellect, will be unfit to see His face again. Get a little humility. Then you'll realize how small is man and how great is our God.

Not all theories are quickly destroyed, even if the calculations and experimental data point only in favor of one theory. Take the idea of the quanta of light. Back when Max Planck came up with the idea, physicists believed energy could be divided up into an infinite amount of pieces. Light doesn't behave that way, but it took almost 30 years before the majority of physicists were convinced.

How do creationists explain continental drift? It is measurable and scientifically proven, so how does it fit in to the theory of Creationism which teaches that the Earth is only 6000 years old?

As Rod Carty, a member of our Creation Moments Forum group on Facebook, puts it, continental drift is only a problem for young earth creationism if one first assumes uniformitarianism, that is, a constant rate of motion for the entire history of the continents.

A belief in evolutionism is in fact a stubborn refusal to admit reality. And the reality is that God is God. Humans are not. Humans are a direct and specific creation of God, just as all of the other creatures are. In short, humans are not more special than any of the Lord's other creations, except that they continually rebel against Him and aggrandize themselves. Again, humans have used everything the Lord has given them to lift themselves up above Him. You never see the other creatures doing that. So, I have to point out here that of all creation, the humans are in need of humility and repentance.

I have heard endlessly from most Christian denominations versions of the following: (1) we are greatly loved by God, far above everyone and everything else and (2) we don't really have to obey God because He doesn't expect it. Both of those assumptions are wrong. Only those who lower themselves to the dust before the Lord are actually in a position to accept His love. And unless you obey God, you cannot expect to be with Him.

You heard me. Most humans will never see heaven again, because they are so fond of sin that they will not give it up. Well, it's entirely the responsibility of the sinner to stop loving sin and stop sinning. No amount of telling yourself you don't have to because you're only "human" is going to get you a free pass to heaven. Only those who obey the Lord go to heaven, and I do mean those who obey the Lord in all things, not just the things they feel like obeying now and then.

The Lord tells all of creation to bow before Him, and the humans say, "Humility, what humility? I'm the greatest." Well, humans aren't. They need to get over themselves and realize they're the only part of creation that has excluded itself from its heavenly home.

Where do Creationists get their information from? If the Creator does not exist, physically, how does and did he create? There isn't enough info supporting creationism that is physically based. Such a powerful entity this creator is, that he or she or it, must be somehow, sharing is plans and information with creationists? (telepathy?) I think via the left hemisphere, or whichever side is the creative side

Its extremely hard to deny, that our brains, are capable of creating things, like "religion" then somehow convincing ourselves the existence of a god(s) [pick and choose your religion] = there is only one science (though it contains study in many fields, all in an effort to prove factually, repeatedly, everything around us, both seen by the human eye, and not seen without the aid of human created tools, like the space shuttle, mars rover, Hubble telescope, etc..(god or the creator, did not give us plans on how to build these things and therefore, how to interrupt any of the findings, science has) other then human created information from the Vatican, what instruments or tools do creationists use to backup their claims? (preaching isn't a tool of proof) I would like to know what a creationists resources are/is ? who or what is providing the evidence for the claims creationism states? can i see the evidence? physically see it?

Im not trying to bash anything, im trying to learn, and by the way, who is updating the bible? men? like men, its changed many times over its initial creation->by the hands and minds of men! isnt this too, evolution? regardless, nowhere in the religious realms has the hands of god himself, picked a writing instrument and updated his bible, he relies on the minds and hands of ordinary men.

I find it funny, that today, religious goers, pick and choose what they want to believe out the many stories told in the bible, no more all or nothing! create your own tailored religious belief. I too have a burning bush in my backyard and every fall, with a beer in hand, i can sometimes believe its actually on fire- I dont understand, if true, why arent people punished anymore by god, when breaking any of the 10 commandments? they were apparently enforced alot (by god) when they where initially created-