By John Kahl

Special to the Salisbury Post

Wishing something to be doesn’t make it reality no matter how enticing that idea might be. I realize that this sword cuts both ways in a debate regarding evolution and Christianity. Evolution stems not from facts, but rather data as interpreted by one guiding principle — that there is no God. But that assumption is rather a foolish one; one that cannot be proven. To prove that there is no God, one would have to be omnipresent throughout the universe of which we have an extremely hard time leaving our own solar system. This is complicated by the existence of a God that is spiritual and therefore impossible to be detected, investigated, or analyzed by any scientific method. A universal negative (such as God does not exist) is practically impossible to prove. It is much easier to prove that God does exist. The question becomes, what evidence would one accept as reasonable proof?

Suppose that an atheist is right and I am wrong. How would that person ever know for certain of that truth? They assume that the moment death strikes, rationality ceases to exist. Therefore it is impossible for an atheist to know definitively that their worldview is correct or for me to be aware that I am wrong. Now suppose that I am right and the atheist is wrong. The moment we each die, God’s existence will be evident. The atheist will instantly be aware of their error and I will know that I am right. Playing the odds isn’t a saving faith but I have nothing to lose and an atheist has nothing to gain by maintaining our beliefs.

I regret that Sunday School teachers sometimes cannot give reasonable answers but neither can every science teacher satisfactorily answer every question that a student might ask. The Bible never claims that the church would be inerrant. The claim is that God’s Word is. In the history of the church there have been numerous, and occasionally, glaring errors, but the same is true of scientific development. But this isn’t an argument of science vs. religion, nor of fact vs. faith. Both sides use facts and both sides stand on faith (that which cannot be proven by the scientific method). Evolutionists rely on faith for their theory because there is no definitive evidence to support it. Deductive reasoning rests on two basic principles: the premises are true and the reasoning is valid. The starting point with evolutionary theory is that God doesn’t exist, so how did all this get here? I maintain that the premise is faulty and the reasoning inconsistent. Therefore the theory remains just that – a theory.

So, what about a 95% DNA similarity with chimps? Evolutionists have proposed similarities exceeding 99%. The human genome was fully mapped in 2001. The chimpanzee genome is still incomplete. The similarities exist between similar structures and profound differences remain. Realize that we share a 50% DNA similarity with a banana. Regardless of a similarity of 1, 5 or 10 percent, an evolutionist will claim this is proof of common descent when it could also just as well be explained by a common Creator.

Paul spoke more truth in the first chapter of Romans than evolutionists do in volumes, “Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man…. For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator.” (Rom 1:22-23, 25) Many people suppose truth can be determined by their mere opinions or by popular vote. Truth is much more eternal than that.

The Rev. John Kahl is pastor of New Life Lutheran Church and principal of Christ the King Christian Academy in New London.

‘My Turn’ submissions should be 500-700 words. Send to editor@salisburypost.com with ‘My Turn’ in the subject line. Include name, address, phone number and a digital photo of yourself if possible.