• Site Resources • Main Site Index • What is Atheism? • Religion & Theism • Skepticism & Logic • Arguments for / against Gods • Evolution vs. Creationism • Religious Timelines • Hate Mail • Glossary • Book Reviews

• Chat Room Join others in the Agnosticism/Atheism chat!

Published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, the book Life: How did it get here? By evolution or by creation? is not only the standard reference work on evolution and creationism for Jehovah's Witnesses, but it appears to enjoy some measure of popularity among other religious conservatives. What does it say? How reliable is it?

Unfortunately, it isn't nearly as reliable or credible as it might otherwise appear on first glance. Our first clue that something fishy is going on is the title itself. The main question which must preoccupy the authors is the origin of life on our planet - how life itself got here. However, that isn't a question which concerns evolution. Despite this obvious fact, an entire chapter of the book, plus sections of other chapters, are devoted to this issue.

Balanced Presentation?

Does this book present a balanced view of the debate between creationism and evolution? Some might think so, since the book appears to present the case for evolution, but this is not genuinely the case. In the final chapter, entitled "What Choice Will You Make," they attempt to sway readers in the direction of choosing creationism over evolution. In doing so, they most clearly reveal their biases. They call evolution a lie, and the proceed to claim that this is a lie created by Satan:

We need to face the fact that the theory of evolution serves the purposes of Satan. He wants people to imitate his course, and that of Adam and Eve, in rebelling against God. [...] Thus, believing in evolution would mean promoting his interests and blinding oneself to the wonderful purposes of the Creator.

Considering the how Satan is regarded in Christian theology, it is safe to say that any idea created by Satan would be seen as lower than just about anything else in the universe. This being the case, it is also safe to say such an idea could not possibly get a "fair hearing" from such Christian opponents. The authors are very clear that people should feel a strong indignation towards evolution because it is a tool of Satan to "defraud us of eternal life." The entire purpose of the book then cannot be said to fairly present both sides of the issue for reasonable consideration. Clearly the intent is to convince people that evolution is evil, and to do so at all costs.

Attitudes towards Evolution

This attitude toward the nature of evolution shines through clearly in their presentation of evolution and evolutionists. Anyone reading this book without the benefit of some background knowledge will be left with the seriously mistaken impression that the theory of evolution is in serious trouble in the scientific community. This idea is supported with a great number of quotes which are deliberately taken out of context.

One sad example appears on page 143 when zoologist Richard Lewontin is quoted as saying that organisms "appear to have been carefully and artfully designed" and that this is "the chief evidence of a Supreme Designer." But Lewontin himself vigorously complained about this out-of-context quotation, explaining that the phrases were lifted from an article which was explaining that such "perfections" of design are often illusory and mistaken.

Other times the authors quote creation-scientists without ever noting that they do not hold to evolution. This leaves the reader with the impression that a reputable scientists who had accepted evolution is now calling it into question, when that isn't even the case. A prime example of this occurs on page 36 when geologist Wallace Pratt is quoted as supporting the notion that the Genesis account of the origin of the universe and of life is historically accurate in terms of order and nature. Although they call him a "well-known geologist," he was in fact a young-earth creationist in 1928, and that's it. Such information might allow a reader to create a different evaluation of Pratt's arguments than the authors of Life would like - which is probably why they withhold it.

Sometimes their choices of sources is itself an indication that the authors are motivated more by ideology rather than honesty or science. On page 96, they quote a "scientific journal" on the alleged problems with radiocarbon dating. That journal, interestingly enough, is Popular Science - not a scientific journal, and that's probably why they didn't bother to identify the name in the text. At other points in the book, they quote the 1976 edition of the Encyclopedia Brtiannica, even though the most recent edition at the time the book was written (1985) was the 1983-84 edition. The reason, it would appear, is that the earlier edition relied on older information and gave the authors what they wanted to hear. The newer encyclopedia, based on newer information, didn't say what they liked. Is this honesty?

Conclusions

There are enough other errors in this book to fill many, many pages of corrections. In one chapter, the authors argue that all mutations which occur in nature are harmful and that none can be helpful over the millions of years which are required for evolution. In another chapter, the authors argue vociferously against the current evidence of transitional fossils, but all it amounts to is "we don't understand how it happened, so it couldn't have happened." This connects in closely with their arguments for the existence of their god, which are all basically the standards arguments to design.

Suffice it to say that there are indeed some very interesting books by creationists and arguing for the idea that our universe and planet were created by an intelligent designer - but this volume is not one of them. Even setting aside the numerous examples of dishonest reporting and quoting, the arguments themselves are very simplistic and aimed more at an audience of children rather than adults.