To be candid, it was discouraging.
Why? I'll try a brief explanation.
As a Christan I beleive the entire universe to be a Creation, that is,
something that has been given its 'being' by the Creator-God of whom the
Scriptures attest. The 'being' of the Creation consists not only in having
existence and having various properties, but also in having a rich
diversity of capabilities for action. Whatever atoms, or molecules, or
cells, or organisms are capable of doing is, in this Christian
'creationist' perspective, to be celebrated as a gift from God--a symbol of
God's incomprehensible creativity (in first conceptualizing these
remarkable gifts) and unlimited generosity (in the giving of all of these
capabilities).
Against this theological background, I am both puzzled and discouraged by
the prevalence of anti-evolutionary arguments in this list of the following
genre:
Evolution could not have occurred because atoms do not have the
capabilities to accomplish X, or because molecules do not have the
capabilities to do Y, or cells do not have the capabilities to do Z.
Why are Christians inclined to hold such a low view of the Creation's gifts
for accomplishing the Creator's intentions for the formational history of
the Creation? Was the Creator unableor unwilling to so gift it? Did He lack
the creativity to conceptualize the requisite creaturely capabilities? Was
He able to do so, but not sufficiently generous? Did he purposely withhold
a few key gifts so that the Creation would not have the requisite
capabilities to actualize certain novel forms of life in the course of its
formational history?
Does anyone think about the theological implications of this concept of the
character of the Creation's capabilities? Why would Christians expect the
Creation to have vacancies in its menu of formational capabilities?
Howard van Till