In recent decades, some Christians try to make creationism easier to accept by creating an alternate theory called “Intelligent Design” [ID] Theory. Atheists accuse this theory as a disguise to creationism.
Atheists’ irrational behaviour of defending an indefensible evolution hypothesis is difficult to understand. However, the Bible gives a short and clear explanation: atheists are described as fools with darkened hearts (Ro 1:21-22).
What is the Intelligent Design Theory?
This theory holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by intelligent causes, not an undirected random process. There are 3 main arguments:
 Irreducible complexity: Many biological features have interrelated parts that rely on each other in order to be useful. It can only work when all its parts are present and functioning at the same time.
 Specified complexity: Random process can never produced specified complex patterns.
 Anthropic principle: The world and universe are “fine-tuned” to allow for life on earth. If the conditions were altered slightly, many species would not exist. This can never occur by chance.
How are evidences being used to support the evolution hypothesis not credible?
 Argument from microevolution:
Evolutionists use breeding experiments as evidence. Dog breeders have developed new breeds of dog. However breeding involved working with pre-existing genetic information, not new information.
A species is normally endowed with a rich, diverse gene pool. Existing changes are confined to the limits of its gene pool. These changes are called “microevolution”. There is not a single evidence of any macroevolution [large-scale changes that would produce new organs or a new species].
 Argument from similarity: Similarities between species can derive from biological ancestry. But they can also result from the necessities of intelligent design of a common designer, just like a painter will paint different pictures with the same style. All living things have the same 20 amino acids. Yet, in reality, their differences are greater than their similarities.
 Argument from fossils: Fossil record is said to display increasing complexity of life from bottom to top of the geologic column. However, there are large gaps in the fossils and no transitional forms. The way to determine age of the rocks and fossils is also based on circular logic.
 Argument from anatomy:
Evolutionists asserted that the human is loaded with vestigial (meaning trace) organs—relics from our animal past no longer serving any significant purpose. Recent research proves that all these organs have some functions; the list of 180 vestigial structures is practically down to zero.
Can Christians accept a divinely guided evolution?
Some Christians proposed that living organisms came about by evolution but God guided that process so that the result was just what He wanted to be. This is called “theistic evolution”.
Objections:  God’s work of creation is incompatible with the randomness in evolutionary.  The Bible pictures God’s creative word as bringing immediate response.  The Bible tells us that God created many different types, not by large scale mutations in macro-evolution.  The special creation of Adam and Eve from God is a strong reason to doubt theistic evolution.
If the evolution hypothesis is not supported by scientific evidence, why then are all these scientists still supporting it?
 Two types of evidences have been used by evolutionists: [a] tangible evidences and [b] theoretical arguments. All tangible evidences have been discredited. Theoretical arguments rest on assumptions, not observations. Evolution is better characterized as a religion than as a science.
 It is common to hear it asserted that “all scientists believe in evolution.” In reality, a large number of scientists have publicly rejected it.
 It is true that a lot of scientists accept evolution. There are 3 possible reasons: [a] Evolution is all some scientists have ever been taught. [b] Scientists who have weigh it and know it to be unsupportable could not bear the social pressure of being ridiculed and therefore pay lip-service to the hypothesis. [c] Atheistic scientists have no alternative but to support the hypothesis because it is a way to deny the existence of God.
Why are the evolutionists so desperate in defending the theory of evolution?
Most of the evolutionist scientists are atheists or agnostics. Evolution is the “creation theory” for the “religion” of atheism. Evolution is therefore effectively an enabler of atheism.
When the theory of evolution collapses, the whole secularist belief system will start to collapse.
The battle about the validity of evolution is a spiritual battle. Evolutionary theory stands at the base of moral relativism and the rejection of traditional morality. With evolution, human life has no inherent dignity, and morality has no objective basis.
What are the common strategies used by evolutionists in defending evolution?
Evolutionists rely on irrational ways:  name calling and exaggerations,  circular logic, unsubstantiated missing links,  unwilling to accept any contradictory evidences.
What are the destructive influences of evolutionary theory in modern thought?
 If we are merely the product of matter plus time plus chance, then it is useless to think that we have any eternal importance.
 If there is no God, there is no Supreme Judge to hold us morally accountable. There are no moral absolutes in life. People’s moral ideas are only subjective preferences. Then one cannot say that anything is absolutely right or absolutely wrong.
 If natural selection can bring about improvement in life forms. We should encourage survival of the fittest by not caring for the weak and allowing them to die without reproducing.
 If human beings have animals as their ancestors, animals deserve our respect. This leads to animal rights. Christians need to treat animals humanely but animals do not have rights.
† Evolutionists have no credible alternative and insist on evolution not because of the evidence, but despite the evidence.
† Secularists will use falsehood to argue from both sides of their mouths. On one hand, they insist that only human reasoning is accepted in the study of origins. They try to shut down any reference to Intelligence Design arguing that it is not science. On the other hand, they would not accept any presentation of scientific facts that may prove the impossibility of the evolution hypothesis. In fact, secularists want to establish evolution as an unchallenged orthodoxy. We need to discern this illogical strategies and insist on the use of facts in arguments.