The Message of Truth

Flying Spaghetti Monster?

You may be asking, "What is a 'Flying Spaghetti Monster'"?   The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a fictitious deity invented by a Darwinian Evolutionist in protest to the teaching of Intelligent Design in public schools and to ridicule the Christian mindset in general.  For more on the Flying Spaghetti Monster, please Click Here.

OK, having learned about the Flying Spaghetti Monster, a couple of brief definitions of Darwinian Evolution and Intelligent Design might also be helpful.

You may be wondering what the difference is between the theory of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Intelligent Design.  Actually, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a form (albeit, a parody) of Intelligent Design.  The scientist who created the Flying Spaghetti Monster (Bobby Henderson) did so in order to ridicule the view of many Intelligent Design adherents that the Christian God created the Universe.  But since Intelligent Design doesn't actually identify who the Intelligent Designer is, Henderson does nothing to dispel the concept of Intelligent Design at all.  His problem with Intelligent Design is based on his prejudice against Christianity rather than on the means one uses to conclude the possibility/probability of purposeful design in the Universe.

The fact is, Darwinian Evolution does not provide an adequate explanation for the origin and complexity of life.  Evolution only offers a possible solution to how species evolved only after the first life forms appeared.  This explanation is often termed, "survival of the fittest".  The most fit among a species became so as a result of acquiring advantageous features through mutations in their DNA.  Evolutionists suggest that that among living beings, only those species which have acquired features that allow them to survive in a hostile environment are assured of not going extinct.  While this view gives a seemingly plausible reason for why inferior life forms go extinct, it doesn’t offer a mechanism for how the stronger life forms are able to survive and successfully replicate. Darwinian Evolution can be more correctly described as the “death of the least fit”, since it leaves the means of the "survival of the fittest" unanswered.

Darwinian Evolutionists would disagree, saying that DNA clearly is the means by which only those species with the most advantageous features survive.  As I said, their explanation doesn't answer how higher life forms are able to replicate, but it also begs the question, "Where did the first creature with DNA come from?" That is a big problem for believers of "survival of the fittest".  A more fit being had to have evolved from something, but from where did the first creature with DNA evolve? You see, DNA is not merely a molecule which could have been the result of random chemical reactions (which is what evolutionists believe). DNA is by definition a molecular strand which contains specific information about how a living being is to carry out all the functions of living and reproduction.  Evolutionists have no problem believing that the information in the first strand of DNA was the result of random, undirected chemical reactions.  But can true information ever result from random chance events?

Let’s say you have a Scrabble game and dump the pieces onto the floor. We might find a word here and there in the jumbled mess, but nobody would expect to find a meaningful phrase like, “I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster”. Yet that is precisely the kind of information we find in a strand of DNA: intelligible information. However, DNA doesn’t just simply contain a complex, intelligible phrase, but a complete volume of instructions on how a creature is to grow, carry out all the functions of living, and reproduce itself! Darwinian Evolution cannot explain how such order results from randomness. Just as a person discovering Mount Rushmore for the first time would know that the faces of four presidents didn’t appear in the rock by the weather or earthquakes, the most uneducated observer can recognize that the complex features of the most simple of living creatures cannot be the result of mere random chance.  The question that evolutionists cannot answer is how this detailed and specific information got into the very first living being from which all life supposedly evolved.  And what makes them procreate with such little variance from one generation to the next?  How did such order result from random chaos?  Darwinian Evolution doesn't have an answer.  All they can offer are reasons why some species go extinct but they can't explain the mechansim by which others don't.

So why would anyone choose to believe something that seems so unlikely? The most direct answer is that much of mankind wants to believe that everything in the Universe can be explained by purely natural and materialist means. Darwinian Evolution is the best (really the only) solution to the origin and continuation of life without having to acknowledge a supreme being, or God. That is it. Darwinian Evolution isn't based on more evidence than Intelligent Design. In fact, evolution isn't the result of objectively analyzing evidence at all. Right from the start, Darwinian Evolution excludes possible conclusions which suggest an Intelligent Designer of the Universe.  Their best defense for their view and against Intelligent Design is not the use of facts, but in trying to silence the opposition by trying to keep it out of the public arena starting in the public schools.  Why?  The answer can be found in Romans 1:18-32.

If you would like to discuss this more, feel free to email me at JohnK63@comcast.net.

John Kennah