A question that has been bounced around in creationist circles for a number of years now relates to natural selection. The question is simple and is in fact, the title of this study: is natural selection enough? This question is incredibly important to determine the origin of variation within the created kinds. However, the question itself is moderately simple. All it asks is whether natural selection can account for all the variation we observe in the modern world.
This is, however, not a trivial question. It is important when formulating a creation model to ensure that the model accurately accounts for what we observe in the world today. Natural selection has traditionally been a major player in both the creationist and the evolutionary model of origins, so its function is undoubtedly important. However, there is considerable disagreement within the creationist community, and indeed within the broader scientific community at large as the exactly how much natural selection can do.
Being able to account for natural selection within a creation model is incredibly important. In recent years, there has been a rising sentiment within the creation science community that believes natural selection is not enough to account for the variety within the created kinds. Spearheaded by Dr. Todd Charles Wood, and Dr. Randy Guliuzza, this movement has attempted to either supplement or supplant natural selection as the primary architect of post-fall variation within the created kinds.
While some creation scientists have embraced this movement, others have been highly critical of it. Dr. Jason Lisle and Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson in particular have been some of the foremost defenders of the role of natural selection. Dr. Lisle in particular has been scathing in his critique of some of the more extreme proposals of the anti-natural selection camp. With so much controversy between people who accept the Biblical account of creation, it is logical to ask, who do we believe? This study will seek to answer that question.
It is important to remember that, despite me critiquing various statements by fellow creationists in this series, I do not dislike, disrespect, or denigrate them. Many of them are far more intelligent than I am. However, it is possible for everyone to be mistaken, even PhD scientists. Making the case that one of them is wrong does not means they are bad people, terrible Christians, or heretics. It simply means either they are mistaken, or we are in disagreement about a given topic. That is the only thing that should be taken from my critiques of statements made in this book which challenge fellow creationists.
While natural selection is an important topic, it is more important to focus on Christ and His redemptive work on the cross. Facts about science and natural selection are very interesting, and important to know in order to defend a biblical worldview and faith in Christ, but they cannot provide that faith. As important as the science is, a relationship with Christ is far more important. If you do not have a relationship with Christ, please stop reading and get that settled before continuing to read. Your eternity depends on it.