Chapter 5 - Science and The BibleHarmony or Discord?

Introduction: As mentioned at the close of chapter 4, and as the title of this chapter implies, there is widespread impression that there is somehow a conflict between science and the Bible – that modern science has somehow explained the origin of life and of the universe itself without God. At the outset of this chapter, it is important to note that not everyone who believes this does so because they desire to deny God's existence. Many people come about this belief because it is all they have ever been taught. The willingness of many in this group to believe in an explanation for the origin of life without God is only due to their lack of exposure to the scientific support for creation and the insurmountable problems with the theory of evolution. As mentioned, however, there are also those who have chosen to believe this theory entirely because of their desire to deny the existence of God. The Bible warns of the terrible consequences of allowing oneself to become a part of this latter group and especially of being guilty of leading others to follow the same path...

The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world, God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and Divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.

Romans 1:18-21 (NIV)

As noted previously, those who are sincerely open to the Truth will not be disappointed. If you have believed in evolution up until now, but are open to allow the evidence to lead you where it may, you will find the following information vital to removing this obstacle in your life to having a clear understanding of Who God is and how you can have the relationship with Him you were created to have, both now and for all eternity.

I. Evolution: Man's Attempt to Make God "Unnecessary" In Chapters 3&4, we saw how the sinful nature of man often leads him to ignore God, to invent his own religions through which to approach Him, or, to deny His existence altogether. In the mid 1800's, the last option became more popular than ever following the introduction of the theory of evolution byCharles Darwin. In his writings, Darwin suggested that all life on earth came from a common single-celled life form. In the first edition of his book, no clear explanation was given as to how life first arose out of lifeless molecules. Life is said to have been “breathed” into the first living being(s).

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved. - Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection: The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life (1st Edition - London: John Murray, 1859).

Possibly to appease his wife, who did believe in God, and to soften the obvious implications of his theory with regard to the existence of God, Darwin gave God “credit” for the creation of this first life in the final paragraph of editions 2 through 6 of his book...

“There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone circling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning, endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.” - Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection: The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, (6th Edition - London: John Murray, 1859). (emphasis added)

Wikipedia Commons

Since Darwin's day, the theory of evolution has been altered into numerous forms by others, but the most widely accepted version states that the universe is simply the product of a vast, unexplained explosion (the "Big Bang") billions of years ago. Based on data that some scientists believe suggests that our universe is expanding, it is theorized that, at one time, all matter, space, and time were compressed down into one infinitely small point - far smaller than the period at the end of this sentence. This point, this so-called "cosmic egg", is said to have exploded; and all of the galaxies, our solar system, and the countless complex forms of life that we see on earth are said to merely be the result of the random mixing of atoms that has taken place since this explosion. We will study briefly a few of the weak points of Darwin's theory in this chapter, but the idea that a living, reproducing creature could form by chance from randomly mixing atoms is certainly one of the weakest. With the aid of modern microscopes and other technology, man's ability to understand the complexity of life has increased steadily along with his ability to magnify it's intricate design. Scientists have found that the smallest life forms that exist, the single-celled variety, are by no means “simple” as Darwin thought, but are more complex than a modern city. So complex, in fact, that, the more we are able to magnify their incredible structures, the more scientists realize just how much we don't understand about their internal workings. What we do understand leaves us in awe, for the cell accomplishes many complex chemical, mechanical, and electronic operations that we cannot reproduce even in our finest factories and laboratories. Evolutionist W. H. Thorpe, acknowledges that... "The most elementary type of cell constitutes a 'mechanism' unimaginably more complex than any machine yet thought up, let alone constructed, by man." W. R. Bird, The Origin of Species Revisited, Thomas Nelson Co., Nashville, 1991, pp. 298-99.

For excellent video presentations of the complexity of the cell and how this complexity points toward a Designer, see the videos A Question of Origins by American Portrait Films (www.amport.com) and Unlocking The Mystery of Life by Illustra Media (www.illustramedia.com).

As mentioned at the beginning of the chapter... it is important to note that not everyone who believes in evolution does so out of a desire to deny God's existence. Many people come about their belief in evolution honestly, for it is all they have ever been taught. The willingness of many to believe this explanation of the origin of life is only due to their lack of exposure to the scientific support for creation and the serious problems with the theory of evolution. This has situation has, unfortunately, become commonplace since teaching about the scientific support for creation and the scientific problems with evolution has largely been prohibited in the public schools of The United States. In the video, Unlocking the Mysteries of Life, Dr. Michael Behe, related his own experience... “It’s really interesting to notice that, the more we know about life, and the more we know about biology, the more problems Darwinism has and the more Design becomes apparent. For the longest time, I believed that Darwinian evolution explained what we saw in biology - not because I saw how it could actually explain it, but because I was told that it did explain it. In schools I was taught Darwinian biology, and through college and graduate school I was in an atmosphere which just assumed that Darwinian evolution explained biology, and again, I didn’t have any reason to doubt it. It wasn’t until about 10 years or more ago that I read a book called Evolution, A Theory in Crisis by a geneticist by the name of Michael Denton, an Australian; and he put forward a lot of scientific arguments

image from www.nmsu.edu

against Darwinian theory that I had never heard before - and the arguments seemed pretty convincing. At that point, I started to get a bit angry, because I thought I was being led down the “primrose path”... here were a number of very good arguments (against evolution), and I had gone through a doctoral program in biochemistry and had never even heard of these things.” - Dr. Michael Behe, Professor of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University, Pennsylvania; in the Video, Unlocking the Mystery of Life, Illustra Media, 2002. There are others who hold to the theory of evolution, but their motive for doing so is simply because they prefer to deny God's existence so they can live as if there were no moral restraint on their lives. For them, evolution is an attempt to "get rid of God". This is freely admitted by Aldous Huxley, grandson of Thomas Huxley, the biologist who was largely responsible for putting Darwin's theory in the public spotlight.

"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently I assumed that it had none... Most ignorance is vincible ignorance" (that which can be corrected or overcome) "We don't know because we don't want to know. It is our will that decides how and upon what subjects we shall use our intelligence. Those who detect no meaning in the world generally do so because, for one reason or another, it suits their books that the world should be meaningless.”

Having admitted that some of those who choose not to acknowledge God's existence do so, not based on scientific evidence, but for personal reasons, Huxley reveals his own reason for denying God's existence and authority...

www.wikipedia.org

“For myself, as, no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneously liberation from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality... We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom... (Aldous Huxley, Ends and Means, London: Chatto & Windus, 1946, pp. 270 & 273).

Another example of someone who is unafraid to candidly share all of his reasons for denying God in more recent times is Christopher Hitchens, an atheist who condemns belief in God as passionately as he promotes the “benefits” of denying God's existence...

“Very importantly, the divorce between the sexual life and fear, and the sexual life and disease, and the sexual life and tyranny, can now at last be attempted, on the sole condition that we banish all religions from the discourse. And all this and more is, for the first time in our history, within the reach if not the grasp of everyone". Christopher Hitchens, God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (New York: Twelve Books, 2007) p. 283.

II. Evolution: "Order by Accident"

The alleged change from lifeless atoms to a living cell is the greatest transition in Darwin's "evolutionary tree", and the impossibility of this occurring apart from the hand of God should be evident to anyone who is willing to study the evidence and allow it to take them where it leads.

For an example of just how impossible it is for even a relatively small amount of order to come about by accident, the sentence above contains approximately 280 characters and spaces. The probability of this sentence being formed by chance, for instance, by placing a computer keyboard in a cage full of mice, is so small it is essentially impossible. Even if we only gave

the mice access to the 60 keys in the “typewriter” portion of the keyboard, the number of times the mice would have to type 280 keystrokes at random before producing the sentence at the beginning of this section would be calculated by multiplying 60 (possible # of keys per stroke) x 60 x 60 etc. 280 times! This would be written 60280, and the result of the calculation would written out as 7.62 x 10495 or 7.62 with 495 zeros after it! Our finite minds can't comprehend numbers much past the thousands, let alone a number like this. Just to give some indication of how large this number is, there would only be 435,196,800,000,000,000 or 4x1017 seconds in the 13.8 billion years said by some to have elapsed since the supposed “Big Bang” (according to Wikipedia, January, 2015). The typing mice illustration, of course, is not a fair comparison to the speculated formation of a living cell out in the vast expanse of the ocean. Some claim that the incredible number of interactions between atoms that occur every second out in the oceans of the world make it possible for the chemicals of life to “fall into place” by chance. When one looks at the actual numbers, however, it is evident that this is not the case. To remove any doubt as to the impossibility of even something as simple as our sentence occurring by chance, lets make our “ocean” even a bit bigger... Consider that scientists estimate there are 1080 electrons in the known universe. This is yet another number far beyond our ability to grasp, but, for the sake of the illustration, suppose that these 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 electrons were arranged in groups of 60 and each group of 60 was labeled with the letters/symbols of the typewriter keyboard. Then, let each one of these “typewriters” churn away, producing a random “sentence” of 280 characters and spaces a million times a second and you will find that there is still not enough time since the alleged Big Bang for them to produce our little sentence, let alone the vast volumes of precise information contained in the genetic material of a single cell! Let's “do the math” as they say...1080 electrons in the universe divided by 60 X 1,000,000 (trials per second) X total number of seconds since “big bang” = total number of trials. (1080/60 X 1,000,000) X 435,196,800,000,000,000 = 7.25 x 10 101 ) This represents the number of trials possible since the “big bang” if it occurred

13.8 billion years ago. This is a small fraction of the 7.62 x 10 495 trials it would take on average to “type” our 280 character sentence by chance! Remember, for every number added to the exponent, our number gets 10 times bigger (7.25 x 10102 is 10 times bigger than 7.25 x 10101) so you can only imagine (actually, you can't!) how much bigger 7.62 x 10495 is than 7.25 x 10101! An honest look at these numbers reveals that the scientific field of mathematics concludes that the emergence of a complex sentence by random typing to be impossible (and this at a very generous rate of a million copies per second per typewriter and a whole universe of typewriters!). The chance formation of items of much greater levels of complexity,then, are certainly also impossible. The human DNA molecule has 3 billion base pairs in it's double helix structure. With the numbers we came up with determining the probability of something comprised of 280 parts coming about by chance, imagine doing the math for that volume of precise information being assembled without the hand of a Creator!

Having seen this undeniable evidence that demands a Creator to explain the order that fills our universe, we are once again reminded of the Message of Romans 1:20...

For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities - His eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Romans 1:20 (NIV)

With what we have seen in our illustration, the impossibility of the chance formation of the complex protein molecules which can be comprised of hundreds, even thousands of atoms is most definite, and exponentially more so the chance formation of the information that exists in the design of all the various systems of a living cell. In spite of all of this undeniable, concrete, scientific evidence against the theory, the evolutionary explanation remains that a living, reproducing, organism; far more complex than the most advanced invention created by man, somehow came about by chance and produced offspring that, over millions of years, gradually continued to gain more and more genetic information through accidental random changes in it's

DNA resulting in the many different and more advanced forms of life we see today. There is no plausible explanation given for the source of the immense amount of order and precise information required to assemble even one of the innumerable complex molecules which construct a cell let alone all of the far more complex organelles and systems of the cell. Nor is there an explanation for the even greater amount of additional information that would be necessary for the cell to have the ability to divide, completely reproducing itself in a matter of hours! If it were possible for a cell to fall together by chance (and it is not), and if there were an explanation as to how it could become “alive” (and there is not) how many countless billions of times would this impossible event have to occur before a living cell would fall together complete with the ability to reproduce after it's kind? How many times would life have to come into being, only to vanish away again because it didn't happen to arrive with the ability to reproduce? Even if it were possible, what are the chances that it would happen on the only known planet that would support this “accidental life? Again, any honest statistician will tell you that their very exacting branch of science declares evolution to be impossible.

Multi-Celled Life Forms The huge chasm between atoms and a living cell is followed by another giant leap in complexity as one looks at the next step up the supposed ladder of evolution which involves an explosion of life forms that are themselves made up of billions of specialized cells, all working together to make up intricate systems of respiration, digestion, locomotion, camouflage, stimulus response, reproduction, and much more...

As mentioned, the process that the theory of evolution claims is responsible for the further steps up Darwin's evolutionary ladder, the change from one kind of animal to another, involves mutations. Mutations are changes in the DNA of a cell - that incredibly complex molecule in the nucleus of every cell that contains the “blueprint” for reproducing the entire organism. Changes in this blueprint are serious, as they not only cause changes in the organism to which they belong, but, if they happen to occur in an egg or sperm cell, these changes, which are nearly always harmful, can be passed on

to their offspring. Mutations can be caused by "mistakes" that occasionally occur during the immensely complex process of cell reproduction. The DNA can also be altered by radiation or damage by foreign chemical substances. Even though mutations are rare, and the ones we do see are almost if not always harmful or deadly to the organism that experiences them, Darwin thought that, perhaps, there could be a mutation from time to time that, by sheer chance, could improve an animal's ability to survive. He then went even further and imagined that, given enough time, these random changes could produce any type of animal on the planet, all due to occasional "helpful mutations" and the increased chance for survival the organism would enjoy that had experienced one of these "lucky breaks" Again, any scientist who is willing to honestly look at the evidence from any field of science, be it mathematics, biology, physics, chemistry, etc., will tell you that such a theory is flawed from it's very core. Imagine again the illustration of the typewriter. Imagine someone typing over and over again the relatively simple step-by-step instructions on how to make a paper airplane. From the outset, we have to account for the existence of the typist and the typewriter, which, in this case, represents some sort of organism that can reproduce the “instructions” (DNA) to reproduce itself.Our illustration will also include a person that follows the instructions and builds the paper airplanes. This represents an organism that, not only can reproduce something as complex as DNA, but can also follow this encoded information, assemble the needed raw materials, and build a duplicate organism! Discussions about evolution are often started with these systems already in place, which is not scientific. The information contained in our set of directions also must be accounted for; and, based on the mathematical conclusions we have already seen, it could never come about by chance. Ignoring these impossibilities, let us continue on with the illustration... Imagine that, every so often, as the typist produces copy after copy of these simple instructions, one of our mice climbs up on the desk and runs across the keyboard, randomly striking several keys as he goes (representing a “mutation”). Nearly if not always, these random keystrokes would obviously be “harmful” to our set of instructions on how to fold a paper airplane. In fact, if the mice kept this up, these random keystrokes would build up over time, making the instructions more and more difficult to read. The paper

airplanes produced by those following these instructions, if built only according to the readable portions of the instructions, would begin to deteriorate in quality and usability, until, finally, the instructions would be worthless, as would the airplanes! As the theory of evolution goes, however, these random letters would, albeit rarely, actually make an improvement in the instructions and result in a better paper airplane being built from time to time. In fact, over time, the copies of the instructions that were ruined by the random addition of letters would be thrown away, and the ones which were “accidentally improved” would be kept, resulting in an increasingly more complex and higher quality airplane. In fact, over the course of several billion years, such a theory would suggest that this process could result in a modern jumbo jet, complete with all of the complex computer and communications equipment, radar, heating and cooling, navigational systems, engines, landing gear, seats, windows, flaps, ailerons, rudders, cockpit controls, drop-down oxygen masks, kitchen, etc. - all by accident. This illustration may sound too far-fetched to even consider, and it is, but the evolutionary premise of how the first living cell came to be from atoms is a far more unlikely proposition. Consider that, by evolutionary terms, our illustration would also have to produce something that is not only far more complex than a fully-equipped 747, but would also have to possess the ability to assemble the materials and reproduce itself in a matter of hours! And... if it could not, it would be the one and only being of it's kind, for, after it's short life was over, there would not be another to take it's place! Then, we have to wait for countless billions of years again for the impossible to take place... again... (which it never would) with the hope that the next one would assemble itself by chance with the ability to reproduce! Not a very scientific explanation for life one must admit.

III. Evolution: The Willingness to Believe the Impossible? Two samples of Darwin's observations further illustrate the way in which he looked past the scientific impossibilities of his theory as if they didn't even exist.

“In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale.” - Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (1859 edition), p. 184 (Darwin removed this bear story from later editions at the advice of friends). If one studies the vast differences in the structure and considers the complex systems that are unique to a bear and a whale, it can be seen that a bear swimming in the water to catch floating insects provides no scientific explanation of how a bear could evolve into a whale, no matter how much time was allowed. As for an explanation as to how an antelope-like creature could change into a giraffe, Darwin speculated...

“So under nature with the nascent giraffe, the individuals which were the highest browsers, and were able during dearths to reach even an inch or two above the others, will often have been preserved... By this process long-continued... combined no doubt in a most important manner with the inherited effects of increased use of parts, it seems to me almost certain that any ordinary hoofed quadruped might be converted into a giraffe.”

Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species (1859), p. 202.

What Darwin didn't realize or mention is that any changes in the body that could occur due to “increased use” don't get passed on to the next generation. Although this was once believed to be true, biologists now know that, even if a giraffe's neck could grow even a fraction of an inch longer by constant stretching, the offspring of that giraffe would not be affected. Also, Darwin stated that giraffes that had "even an inch or two" advantage over their competitors would be the survivors. It is important to note that male giraffes are considerably taller than female giraffes - which would lead to an obvious problem if only the males survived (!)

“Evolutionists cannot explain why the giraffe is the only four-legged creature with a really long neck and yet everything else in the world [without that long neck] survived. Many short-necked animals of course existed side-by-side in the same locale as the giraffe. Darwin even mentioned this possible criticism in The Origin, but tried to explain it away and ignore it." “Furthermore it is not possible for evolutionists to make up a plausible scenario for the origination of either the giraffe’s long neck or its complicated blood pressure regulating system. This amazing feature generates extremely high pressure to pump the blood up to the 20-foot-high brain and then quickly reduces the pressure to prevent brain damage when the animal bends down to take a drink. (It also has a provision for extra blood to be stored in a reservoir to keep the giraffe from fainting when lifting it's head back up 20 feet after taking a drink!) After over a century of the most intensive exploration for fossils, the world’s museums cannot display a single intermediate form that would connect the giraffe with any other creature.”—Luther D. Sunderland,Darwin’s Enigma (1988), pp. 83-84.

Thousands of examples of how the facts of science support creation could be given, and every one would make it all the more amazing that this idea of evolution has been effectively spread around the world. If the true findings of science would be taught in our schools regarding this subject, evolution would have been ranked a very unlikely explanation for the origin of life or of species a long time ago. As we will see over and over again, the popularity of the evolutionary theory rests not in scientific evidence, but due to the fact that those supporting it do so either because they been wrongfully convinced that it is an established fact or because they like it's claim of having an explanation for the universe without a Creator to Whom they are accountable.

IV. Entropy - The World is Winding Down, Not Up! A scientific law is an observation about how things work in the universe that is testable and repeatable. As mentioned in Chapter One, The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a scientific law that states that the entire universe is running down, and that, apart from intervention by an intelligent being, all things naturally proceed toward a state of chaos and decay. This goes directly against the theory of evolution which states that, from the chaos of an alleged, unexplained explosion, all of the order we see in the universe has gradually come about by sheer accident. The Bible, on the other hand, is in full agreement with this law of science as It teaches that this observed tendency for all things to deteriorate, sicken, and die is the direct result of the entrance of sin into the world.

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics will be reversed when God restores the universe to the condition it was in when He first created it; and, in this new universe, it is promised that... The creation... itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God.

Romans 8:18-21 (NIV)

...God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away. - Revelation 21:4 (KJV)

Until that wonderful day, the terrible reality of the effects of this law stand as an ever-present testimony to the impossibility of evolution and to the truthfulness of the Bible with regard to It's explanation of the origin of our universe and the reason for the terrible state that it is currently in.

IV. Life: Perhaps The Most Convincing Evidence for Creation The very existence and complexity of living beings demands both an infinitely wise Designer as well as a living Creator that can give life to His creation. As we have already mentioned, the inner workings of even single-celled life forms are so complex, today's scientists will agree that we have only begun to understand a small amount of what occurs within the cell. It is mathematically impossible for a cell, with all of it's complex systems, to "fall together" by chance, but, even if we imagine that one did, no one can explain what makes a cell, or any other living being, "alive". For example, if, in the "primordial soup" of an ancient ocean, the impossible happened, and all of the countless precise parts of a cell were, in fact, somehow assembled by chance as it is said to have happened by the evolutionary theory, this amazing structure would still not be alive - for science has no explanation as to what gives life. Just as the billions of parts had drifted together by chance, they would drift apart, and revert to the chaos predicted by the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The Bible tells us that God is the Source of all life (Genesis 2:7, Ecclesiastes 12:7, Acts 17:25-27). For there to be life in the universe, there has to be a Life-Giver Who is, Himself, alive.

V. The Fossil Record: A Window To The Past

The very existence of a vast world-wide deposit of fossils, nearly all having been formed by rock layers rapidly laid down by water, agrees perfectly with the Biblical account of a universal flood. These sedimentary rock layers are, in places, thousands of feet thick and stretch across

all the continents. Some deposits contain incredible mixtures of fossilized sea life, plants, and all imaginable types of land animals. These facts can only be explained by a violent, worldwide flood as described in Genesis 6:5 - 9:29. Thick deposits of fine layers found in such rock were once thought to take millions of years to form. The geologists of the world got an amazing demonstration otherwise in 1980 when Mount St. Helens erupted and created a 1/40th scale model of the Grand Canyon in a matter of days - complete with finely-layered rock walls.

“Spilling from the crater, Loowit Falls reshapes the north slope of the volcano. 'You’d expect a hardrock canyon to be thousands, even hundreds of thousands of years old,’ says Peter Frenzen, monument scientist, ‘but this was cut in less than a decade'." (National Geographic, May 2000, p. 121).

Laying aside the fact that the very existence of the fossil record supports the Biblical account of history, predictions can be made as to what the fossil record will show depending on which theory is true, creation or evolution. If evolution were true, and the fossil record was laid down gradually over millions of years, there, first of all, would likely be very few, if any, fossils - for something must be buried quickly in order to become fossilized. Even discounting this important detail, the fact remains that there are countless fossils found all over the globe, from pole to pole. This agrees completely with the Biblical account of a worldwide flood, which would have resulted in vast, global layers of rapidly-deposited sediment and, as a result, countless fossils. Another prediction that can be made if evolution is true is that any fossils found should show overwhelming evidence of gradual change from very few, "simple" forms of life to more and more kinds of larger and increasingly complex forms. The number of fossils of these transitional forms from one animal to another should far outnumber all the fossils of the specific "kinds" of

animals. And, far outnumbering either of those should be a vast array of the "unsuccessful" mutations that deformed the animals and made them less fit for survival. Since virtually all mutations deform or kill the organism that is inflicted by them, there should be countless examples of these "mistakes" that would find their way into the fossil record. The Bible, however, tells us that God created all the basic "kinds" of animals during the creation week, and that each animal would reproduce after it's "kind" (Genesis 1:20-25). So, if the Biblical account of creation is true, we should find fossils of distinct kinds of animals of an even greater variety than we have today since the flood would have left us a "snapshot" of the plants and animals that existed at the time of the flood, and, since that time, many kinds of animals have become extinct, leaving us with far less variety today. We would expect to find some differences within these "kinds" due to the built-in variability that is possible within the genes of each kind. An example often used to illustrate this fact is the man's use of genetic variability in the selective breeding of dogs to isolate desired characteristics. No "evolution" has gone on to produce the great variety of dogs, from the Chihuahua to the St. Bernard; for these different breeds are merely an illustration of the extremes of variability that exists within the genetics of the canine "kind". If the creation theory is correct, no "transitional" forms should be found between the basic kinds of animals. This subject is covered in much greater detail in

Evolution or Creation? What are the Scientists Saying? The following represents just of few of the many quotes that can be found in the preceding link from scientists starting with Darwin's day all the way up to the present which reveal that what we find in the fossil record clearly matches the predictions that would be made by the Biblical model of creation. All the basic animal types appear suddenly and fully-intact in the fossil record, leaving no trace of having gradually formed from another “lower” kind of animal. This was already apparent in the fossil collections of Darwin’s day, a fact which he lamented in his book... "Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious

objection which can be urged against the theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record." Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, Chapter IX "On the imperfection of the geological record," London: John Murray, Albemarle Street, 1859 (Full Title: The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. (www.literature.org)

Darwin assumed more evidence for his theory would be found as more fossils were unearthed, but 70 years after Darwin made this statement, Austin Clark in the Quarterly Review of Biology, said,

"Thus so far as concerns the major groups of animals, the creationists seem to have the better of the argument. There is not the slightest evidence that any of the major groups arose from any other." Dr. Austin Clark, "Animal Evolution," Quarterly Review of Biology, 523, December, 1928.

This fact has become even more evident in recent times as more and more fossil forms are unearthed - that all of the basic types of animals appear suddenly and fully-formed in the fossil record with no connection to evolutionary “ancestors”. This leads to a diagram much different than the gradually branching “tree” that Darwin envisioned, where one “simple” form of life gradually gave rise to the variety we see today. This is especially true in the layer supposedly deposited in what is referred to as the “Cambrian” era when many different complex animal types appear with no gradual evolution from “simpler forms”. This abrupt appearance of a wide variety of life in these rocks that are said to be very ancient is sometimes referred to as the “Cambrian Explosion”.

Clearly, the Cambrian fossil record explosion is not what one would expect from Darwin’s theory. Since higher levels of the biological hierarchy appear first, one could even say that the Cambrian explosion stands Darwin’s tree of life on its head. If any botanical analogy were appropriate, it would be a lawn rather than a tree. Nevertheless, evolutionary biologists have

been reluctant to abandon Darwin's theory. Many of them discount the Cambrian fossil evidence instead.

Dr. Jonathan Wells, Icons of Evolution, (Washington D.C.: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2002) p. 42.

The fossil evidence, instead of revealing the tree-like record of species gradually increasing in number and complexity, reveals all of the major animal types appearing suddenly with no evidence of any evolutionary past. This is Dr. Well's reason for comparing the fossil record to a “lawn” rather than a tree. In fact, he also compares the fossil record to an upside down tree in that the number and complexity of life forms is seen to be gradually decreasing over time as various species go extinct. This is exactly what would be expected as the Law of Entropy gradually does it's destructive work on God's once-perfect creation.

The Keepers of The Fossils Dr. Austin Clark, quoted on the previous page, was the curator of paleontology at the Smithsonian Institution and certainly had a good knowledge of the best available fossil evidence of his day. Several more decades have passed since Darwin and then Clark expressed their doubts - so what do all the millions of fossils which have been collected since then tell us? Men like Dr. Clark, who are in charge of the museums that house the world’s largest and most valuable collections of fossils have earned these prestigious positions by being leaders in their field. These men, if anyone, should know which theory the fossils best support. Three other men who were more recently involved in the care and management of three of the finest fossil collections in the world had this to say...

"Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin... and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn’t changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin’s time. By this I mean that some of the classic cases of Darwinian change in the fossil record, such as the evolution of the horse in North America, have had to be discarded or modified as a result of more detailed information - what appeared to be a nice simple progression when relatively few data were available - now appears to be much more complex and much less gradualistic. So Darwin’s problem has not been alleviated in the last 120 years, and we still have a record which does show change but one that can hardly be looked upon as the most reasonable consequence of natural selection. Dr. David M. Raup (Curator of Geology, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago), "Conflicts between Darwin andpaleontology". "Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin," vol. 50(1), January 1979, p. 25.

"Darwin’s theory of natural selection has always been closely linked toevidence from fossils, and probably most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument that is made in favor of darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true." Ibid, p. 22

Dr. Niles Eldredge, chairman and curator of invertebrates at the American Museum of Natural History in New York City had this observation... “Darwin also holds out the hope that some of the gaps would be filled as the result of subsequent collecting. But most of the gaps were still there a century later and some paleontologists were no longer willing to explain them away geologically. - Niles Eldredge and I. Tattersall, The Myths of Human Evolution, (Columbia University Press, 1984) pp. 45-46.

Dr. Colin Patterson, as senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, wrote a book in which he showcased many of the thousands of fossils which are held by this fine museum. A reader of his

book later wrote to him and asked him why, of all the fossils pictured in the book, not one transitional fossil was pictured. Dr. Patterson’s reply to this letter included the following..."... I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. You suggest that an artist should be used to visualize such transformations, but where would he get the information from? I could not, honestly, provide it, and if I were to leave it to artistic license, would that not mislead the reader?... I wrote the text of my book four years ago. If I were to write it now, I think the book would be rather different. Gradualism is a concept I believe in, not just because of Darwin’s authority, but because my understanding of genetics seems to demand it. Yet Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils. As a paleontologist myself, I am much occupied with the philosophical problems of identifying ancestral forms in the fossil record. You say that I should at least ‘show a photo of the fossil from which each type of organism was derived.’ I will lay it on the line - there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument." Personal letter (written 10 April 1979) from Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London, to Luther D. Sunderland; as quoted in Darwin’s Enigma by Luther D. Sunderland, Master Books, San Diego, USA, 1984, p. 89. Although he still held to the theory of evolution, at least at the time he wrote this letter, it is commendable that Dr. Patterson is willing to report the facts as he sees them with regard to the fossils which he studies. While honest scientists such as Dr. Patterson are admitting that the fossil record does not support evolution, others have also pointed out that the fossil record is the only place where conclusive evidence for evolution could be found if it indeed occurred... "... fossils provide the only historical, documentary evidence that life has evolved from simpler to more and more complex forms." Carl O. Dunbar, Ph.D. Geology Professor Emeritus of Paleontology and Stratigraphy, Yale University, and formerly Assistant Editor, American Journal of Science) in "Historical Geology," John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1960, p. 47.

Since no such evidence exists, Dr. Patterson, in the same letter quoted earlier, went so far as to state that this theory of how things evolved cannot truly be described as scientific...

"It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and to find reasons why the stages should be favored by natural selection. But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test" (This quote also came from the letter written by Patterson quoted previously and was also found on page 89 of Darwin's Enigma by Sunderland). Another telling quote from Dr. Patterson was recorded at a gathering of scientists at The American Museum of Natural History in New York City... "Question is: Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing, any one thing that is true? I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, 'I do know one thing - it ought not to be taught in high school.'" -Dr. Colin Patterson (Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, leading cladistic taxonomist), in an address at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, November 5, 1981. As more and more fossils are uncovered and studied, it is more evident than ever that the fossil record offers no support for evolution, but precisely matches the predictions made by the creation model. This has become so evident that new theories of evolution are being invented, some even claiming that the first life was deposited on earth by meteorites or aliens, or that evolution happens in quick “bursts” which accounts for it leaving no trace in the fossil record! Claiming that life came to earth from somewhere else gives no explanation, of course, for the origin of life from inanimate matter, but simply moves the insurmountable problem to another location. With regard to the theory that evolution happens “too quickly to leave a trace in the fossil record”, one example can be found in the book, “Sudden Origins” by Jeffrey H. Schwartz (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1999) who, in his remarks inside the front cover of the book admits that

nothing has changed with regard to the evidence for evolution from the fossil record...

“The greatest riddle of evolution has been the following puzzle: while Darwin argued that new species emerge through a slow, gradual accumulation of tiny mutations, the fossil record reveals a very different scenario - the sudden emergence of whole new species, with no apparent immediate ancestors. This discrepancy has fueled heated debate among evolutionary theorists and has provided unfortunate fodder to creationists, who see it as proof that evolution doesn’t happen at all.” To anyone who honestly looks at the data and allows it to take them to a logical, scientific conclusion, this evidence would only be considered “unfortunate” if it is pointing to a conclusion that is different than what they want to believe! Such findings should instead be allowed to lead one to wherever it takes them, which, in this case, is to the existence of God. The fact that so many still deny the growing scientific evidence for the existence of God shouldn’t surprise us, however, for the Bible tells us what Aldous Huxley freely admitted; that men are “willingly ignorant” of what they don’t want to believe, no matter how much scientific evidence there is for it.

II Peter chapter 3 specifically tells us that there will be those who will be willingly ignorant of the Truth and will deny God's creation of the universe and the Biblical account of the flood. It also tells us that these same people will ridicule the promised return of Christ to this earth to judge mankind and restore Creation to it's original perfect state...

...knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming?... For this they willfully forget: that by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same Word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not

slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

II Peter 3:3-9 (NKJV)

Every day, an increasing number of scientists who formerly held to an atheistic, evolutionary explanation for the origin of the universe and life on earth are concluding that the incredible design and complexity they see in the findings of their various fields of science could never have occurred by chance. As stated in Romans 1:18-21, which is quoted at the beginning of this chapter, God gives us so much evidence all around us, that it leaves us “without excuse” for not acknowledging His existence. Although many try to give the impression that the Bible has been made obsolete by the discoveries of modern science, there have been top scientists in every field, including some of the leading pioneers of modern science, who have looked at the facts with an open mind have acknowledged that the belief in the existence of God is inescapable. One such pioneer of modern science is Louis Pasteur... "The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator.” - Louis Pasteur J. H. Tiner, Louis Pasteur-Founder of Modern Medicine, Mott Media, (Milford, MI, USA, 1990) p.75

Arguably the man responsible for saving the most lives in the history of mankind, Louis Pasteur was a great scientist whose discoveries have earned him a place in the list of "The Most Influential People in History" (The Big One Hundred, Michael Hart, Citadel Press, 1992, pp. 60-61). Mr. Pasteur is, of course, noted for his invention of the process named after him, Pasteurization, which greatly lengthens the time food will stay fresh in storage and shipment. The ability to store food away for times when it is not available or to keep it from spoiling while transporting it to places where it is

www.gallery.hd.org

needed is something we all take for granted, but is vital for our survival. Another area in which Pasteur made great scientific advances is in the area of vaccination and immunization. Although serious epidemics can, and still do occur, their frequency has been incredibly lessened by Pasteur's discoveries in this field. Illnesses can still spread and cause great devastation, but the understanding of how the body's immune system works and how it can be aided to fight serious illness through immunization gives us an important weapon with which to fight deadly epidemics. Some terrible diseases have been virtually removed from the face of the earth through immunization; diseases which left doctors helpless in the past. Pasteur's inventions, discoveries, and character earned him a place amongst the greatest names in science, and yet, the more Mr. Pasteur learned about God's creation in his scientific experiments, the more he stood in humble amazement at the power and wisdom of his Creator. Even Darwin himself had to admit, when considering the amazing complexity and design of the human eye, that to think that such an intricate instrument could come about by chance seems (and is) foolish... "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree." (Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species, J.M. Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971, p. 167).

Sadly, if one continues to read beyond this quote, one will see that Darwin follows it with a number of “but if's” and continues to talk himself into believing his own theory. Immediately after making the above statement in his book, he went on to imagine ways in which an eye, which "appears" to be so perfectly designed, could come about by pure chance. This loyalty to his theory was certainly not due to scientific evidence for it, of which there is none, but likely because of man's intense desire to "get rid of God". Man in his pride does not want to have to answer to anyone.

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every

one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

John 3:19-20 (KJV)

All men are exposed to the "light" that is spoken of in these verses. It shines first of all in the evidence of God's infinite power and wisdom that is all around us in the universe which He has created. The Bible tells us that man is without excuse for not acknowledging His existence in view of this ever-present evidence. Also, as we saw in Chapter 3, God's "light" comes to all men in the form of His working in our hearts, convicting each of us of His existence, of our sinfulness before Him, and of our need to find the truth concerning how we can be reconciled with Him.

“...He will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment...” John 16:8

It is this Truth which is the central theme of the Bible telling us of our need to accept God's offer of forgiveness through faith in His Son, Jesus Christ. Simply ignoring the "light" of God's existence in creation, His working in our hearts, and the clear teaching of the Bible as Huxley and millions of others have chosen to do, does not free us to live however we wish; for it does not change the fact that God does exist and that He will one day have to pass judgment on those who refuse to turn from their sin and accept His offer of forgiveness. Those who choose to deny His existence and refuse Jesus' sacrifice on the cross for their sins also choose to pay the eternal penalty of their sin themselves.

...how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him...?

Hebrews 2:3 (NKJV)

German-born engineer, Dr. Wernher von Braun (1912-77), was the father of our space program with NASA and, among many other projects,

supervised the Saturn V rocket program. It was this rocket which was used in the Apollo missions to send our astronauts to the moon. The following quote contains excerpts of a letter which Dr. von Braun had written to the California State Board of Education on September 14, 1972 in response to an inquiry he had received from them as to what his views were regarding matters relating to the origin of the universe.

"One cannot be exposed to the law and order of the universe without concluding that there must be design

and purpose behind it all... The better we understand the intricacies of the universe and all it harbors, the more reason we have found to marvel at the inherent design upon which it is based... To be forced to believe only one conclusion, that everything in the universe happened by chance, - would violate the very objectivity of science itself... What random process could produce the brains of a man or the system of the human eye?... They (evolutionists) challenge science to prove the existence of God. But must we really light a candle to see the sun?" (as quoted in Unlocking the Mysteries of Creation, Creation Resource Foundation, 1990, p.63).

In another instance, von Braun stated, "Manned space flight is an amazing achievement, but it has opened for mankind thus far only a tiny door for viewing the awesome reaches of space. An outlook through this peephole at the vast mysteries of the universe should only confirm our beliefin the certainly of it's Creator.("My Faith, A space-age scientist tells why he must believe in God", American Weekly, Feb. 10, 1963).

Albert Einstein is another famous scientist who marveled at the order and complexity of the universe, and who often acknowledged

that this wondrous order and complexity seemed to point toward great intelligence for it's cause rather than blind chance. ...every one who is seriously involved in the pursuit

of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe - a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of which we with our modest powers must feel humble. In this way the pursuit of science leads to a religious feeling of a

special sort, which is indeed quite different from the religiosity of someone more naive. - Albert Einstein (Albert Einstein - The Human Side, Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press, 1979. pp. 32-33). Although Einstein readily acknowledged that all of the evidence points toward an intelligent Designer and Creator, he refused to believe in a personal God with Whom man can and must humbly seek out a relationship. He said, “belief… in a superior mind that reveals itself in the world of experience, represents my conception of God. In common parlance this may be described as ‘pantheistic’" (Ideas and Opinions by Albert Einstein, Crown Publishers, New York, NY, USA, pp. 261-2, 1954). In other words, he acknowledged that there was a "superior mind" out there behind the complexity and design of the universe, but not a God to Whom we are responsible. We certainly hope he changed his beliefs on this issue before his time on this earth was over. For more quotes of leading scientists past and present who acknowledge the existence of God, please see the link: " Evolution or Creation? What are the Scientists Saying?" There are many excellent sources of information regarding how the facts of modern science support the Bible. The Institute for Creation Research is one such organization that produces excellent books, magazines, and DVD's that deal with this important issue...

The Institute for Creation ResearchThe Museum of Creation and Earth History10946 Woodside Ave. North, Santee, CA 92071Voice: (619) 448-0900 Fax: (619) 448-3469 Website: www.icr.org In spite of the widespread teaching of evolution, surveys find that the majority of people still believe in some sort of "supreme being" or "higher power" as being ultimately responsible for the universe. God has placed a knowledge of His existence in the heart of every man and has reinforced that knowledge with the evidence of Creation and the teachings of The Bible so that we are left without excuse for not acknowledging His existence. As we have seen, however, a mere acknowledgment of God's existence is not enough. Scripture also makes it clear that it is the responsibility of every individual to admit and repent of their sinfulness before God and to personally request the forgiveness which He has provided through Christ's death and resurrection. Because of His righteousness, God must judge those who refuse to confess and turn from their sin, but, because of His love, His desire is that all would do so and be saved from the eternal penalty they will face if they do not.

The Lord is... not willing that any should perish, but that all shouldcome to repentance.

II Peter 3:9 (KJV)

REVIEWReview Having spent a good deal of time studying the issue of creation and evolution, it would be helpful at this point to regain an overall perspective in our study of Satisfaction and Peace of Mind: Man's Search and God's Solution.

In Chapter 1, we saw that man is born with an inner restlessness - a sense that he is “missing something” in life, but finds that nothing this world has to offer will satisfy him or bring any real relief to this feeling of emptiness. In Chapter 2, we saw that these feelings of emptiness and incompleteness were due to man's separation from God because of sin in his life, a problem brought about when the first man and woman, Adam and Eve, sinned against God and brought the curse of sin upon all of mankind and upon God's once-perfect creation. In Chapter 3 we read about God's wonderful solution to this terrible problem - how He made possible a way of escape from the potentially-eternal consequences of sin. He did this when He came to earth as a Man in the person of Jesus Christ, took the penalty of all of our sin upon Himself on the cross, and then rose from the dead; making forgiveness and reconciliation available to all who will come to Him, admit their sinfulness, and, with a heart that is willing to turn from their sin, place their faith in His sacrifice for them. We saw that it is God's will that no one would suffer the eternal separation from Him that we all deserve. We also looked further into God's Word and discovered that, when we experience the terrible emptiness discussed in Chapter 1, part of what we are actually sensing is God drawing us to Himself - letting us know that we are missing something, and that something is a relationship with Him. .

Although the emptiness man experiences apart from God is a miserable feeling, we found that it is due to God's love for us that He burdens our hearts in this way; for, because of man's complete sinfulness, no one would seek God on their own unless He drew them to Himself...

10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Romans 3:10-12 (KJV)Jesus said "No-one can come to Me unless the Father Who sent Me draws Him, and I will raise him up at the last day. - John 6:44

We saw that it is God's desire that all men would repent of their sin and receive His gift of forgiveness and eternal life. He knows the hearts of all men, and He goes so far as to arrange the very times and places where we live in order to be certain that those who are searching for Him with an sincere heart will find the Truth...

From one man He made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and He determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. God did this so that men would seek Him and perhaps reach out for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each of us.

Acts 17:26-27 (NIV)

And ye shall seek Me, and find Me, when ye shall search for Me with all your heart.

Jeremiah 29:13 (KJV)

In Chapter 4, we discovered that, although there is a bewildering amount of false religion in the world that can make it very confusing for one who is seeking the Truth, God has given us all we need to know in His Word (the Bible) to discern Truth from error, and has promised that those who are sincerely seeking the Truth will find it. In Chapter 5, we found that the Bible also addresses those who would deny God's existence in the name of science, clearly stating that God's existence, wisdom, and power can be clearly seen by the things that He has made; leaving man without excuse for not acknowledging God's existence and for failing to seek out a relationship with Him. If the findings of true science are viewed with an unprejudiced eye, one will find that they will support the Bible every time; and that the more science learns about the incredible universe in which we live, the more inescapable the conclusion that there is an all-powerful, all-wise Creator behind it all. In spite of the provisions God has given us to overcome the deception of religious false teaching and the claims of the atheist, we saw that, sadly, most

people will still not respond to God's attempts to draw them to Himself, but will choose to reject His wonderful offer of forgiveness and eternal life. Instead of searching for the Truth, they will usually respond in one of three ways...1. by ignoring God and seeking to find fulfillment in the pleasures and possessions of this world - often in ways they know are displeasing to Him.2. by acknowledging God’s existence, even going through the motions of worshiping Him, but attempting to do so through a man-made religion which, instead of the Truth, tells them what they want to hear and which will not interfere with their desire to live as they please.3. by denying God's existence altogether and attempting to explain the wondrous complexity, design, and order of the universe as having come about completely by chance without a Creator (i.e. the "big-bang"/ evolutionary theory). In spite of this sad fact, a small minority of people do respond to God's loving attempts to draw them to Himself and they find the Truth in the Bible,God's open letter to mankind. They humbly admit their sinfulness that is separating them from God, and, by faith, accept Christ's sacrifice for their sin, committing to live the rest of their days on earth in obedience to Him. The few who respond in this way will find that the terrible void that once plagued them will be replaced by an indescribable contentment. As they grow in their relationship to God, they will also find that the restlessness that once characterized their lives has been replaced by the wonderful peace that comes with the knowledge that their Creator loves them, is faithful to strengthen and guide them through all the trials and challenges of life, and has a home waiting for them on a new, perfect earth for all eternity when their short time on this earth is over.

Once a person has made this most important step of renewing a right relationship with God, another important step is to find a good church. This is vital to one's growth as a Christian, and, in Chapter 6, we will look at some guidelines from God's Word that will be helpful in this important search.

Back to Chapter 4 Back to Main Menu To Chapter 6