Do Naturalists Consider Chance the Singular Cause of Evolution?

This article is from Hank Hanegraaff, The Creation Answer Book (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2012)
Get the Book

In a word—no! The more sophisticated naturalists readily admit that the chance-alone hypothesis is at best far-fetched. Thus, they posit that natural selection* or some other unintelligent nonrandom mechanism is involved in the process. This, however, hardly limits the liabilities of the evolutionary hypothesis.

First, it should be noted that there is no evidence for the suggestion that information in the genetic code can be increased through natural selection. Nor are there any known physical laws that can be invoked to account for the information-rich content of genetic material.

Furthermore, it is misleading to suggest that an accumulation of beneficial changes will produce an improved overall design. In other words, a bunch of little changes will not necessarily add up to a glorified final product.

Finally, those capable of scaling the evolutionary language barrier* immediately realize what’s going on. Evolutionists speak of “natural selection” all the while pouring the meaning of intelligent design* into the words.

How long will you love delusions and seek false gods?Psalm 4:2


For further study, see Nancy R. Pearcey, “DNA: The Message in the Message,” First Things (June/July 1996): 13–14, online at (accessed April 4, 2011).

More Bible Answers with Hank

Will the Created Cosmos Be Resurrected or Annihilated?

How Can the Eternal Son of God Be the “Firstborn over All Creation”?

Will Adam and Eve Receive Brand-New Bodies in Eternity?

Do Naturalists Consider Chance the Singular Cause of Evolution?

Why Did Heliocentrism Triumph over Geocentrism?