I’m sure if I were to discuss reality with an atheist, the topic of origins would come up. It has to. Your world-view must answer the fundamental question, ‘How did we come to exist?’ And if you don’t believe in a supernatural creator, like the God of the Bible, then by default you need to believe in naturalistic evolution. You can’t leave the space blank. If not God then who or what? The universe is real and something caused it. Evolution is regarded by our society as being more ‘scientific’. But is it really? It’s time we put evolution on the stand, place its hand on good science and make it tell the truth, the whole truth.
My first question is this: how can something come from nothing? Explain how there was nothing and then it exploded (the big bang). And if there was something, who put it there?
As long as common sense is required, naturalistic evolution will never produce a coherent answer to these fundamental questions. The established laws of physics and of nature are totally against its first premise. Something (which includes ’singularity’), will never come from nothing unless, of course, the supernatural is a part of the equation. But this is precisely what evolution is trying to deny, supernatural origin. Having said all that, I’m not suggesting ‘evolution’ does not occur. For example, the fact is I evolved from a single cell in my mother’s womb. This type of evolution is obvious and everywhere. But that kind of evolution can only occur from information - it needs a program to drive it.
The core issue is information, and information evolution has never occurred. Think of a standard calculator. You can push the buttons for a million years but it will it never perform scientific functions. It cannot produce more than it has been programmed to do. When I discover new functions on my word processor (which I do constantly) I don’t get all excited and think my computer is evolving. I’ve simply discovered an aspect of the programmed information that’s been there all along, it just wasn’t being used. It’s all about information/software, and a law of information science states that there must be a sender. Information always comes from an intelligent place of origin. Software doesn’t just appear spontaneously; someone has to write it, it must be created. If software must have a creator, an intelligent place of origin, how much more is it true for life? Life is infinitely more complex than anything Microsoft has ever come up with.
Does the whole vast structure of modern naturalism depend not on positive evidence but simply on a priori metaphysical prejudice? Was it devised not to get in facts but to keep out God? — C.S. Lewis, Is Theology Poetry?
Life cannot exist without information/software and for us it comes in the form of DNA. A fertilised human egg contains information equivalent to about six billion ‘chemical letters’. This information would fill a thousand, five-hundred page books with print so small you would need a microscope to read it. If all the chemical letters in the human body were printed, someone has estimated the books would fill the Grand Canyon fifty times!
Darwin made a fundamental mistake when he assumed that cells were simple things. Science has since proven that the cell is most complex. That single cell in my mother’s womb contained every bit of information necessary to make me. Nothing has happened outside of that software. When discussing creation/evolution it is important that the ‘evidence’ used is solid and not speculative. Scientists have a solid understanding of flagellum cells and DNA but have to speculate about the age of the earth and the ‘continental drift’ as the evidence is far from complete. Science is like a jig-saw puzzle with millions of pieces. In some areas the picture is quite clear as many pieces have been found but elsewhere all science can do is speculate. We may never find all the pieces, which can be expected as science cannot explain everything about life. But in the areas where the picture is clear, what does it tell us? Just from cell research and DNA alone it forms a picture of a supernatural, intelligent designer. And that’s the truth. So compelling is this ‘designer’ evidence many scientists are now on a mad hunt for ‘the laws of creativity’ while others are seriously questioning the whole theory (evolution).
As science has ‘evolved’ and discovered more about physical reality the truth uncovered is smashing its way through evolutionary theory. Some scientists are starting to face the facts such as Dr. Michael J. Behe. He is a professor of biochemistry and authored a book entitled ‘Darwin’s Black Box’. In it he introduces a concept called ‘irreducible complexity’. This means all of a structure’s parts must initially be present in a suitably functioning manner. For example, it is impossible for something like a flagellum cell to evolve. All parts must be present at one time in order for it to function or exist at all.
As a believer in the creator God of the Bible, I have been accused of ‘blind faith’. But as I look at this debate it becomes clear that the ‘Blind Faith Award’ truly goes to the naturalistic evolutionist. It takes a lot of blind faith to believe that the highly complex structure of DNA with its billions of chemical letters came from a non-intelligent origin, and even more blind faith to believe it all came from nothing.
Reality calls the shots, it always has. And the truth about the world around us is this; it all points to an intelligent, supernatural creator/designer. It’s not being unscientific to draw such a conclusion, it is common sense.
(Part II is a response to ‘Origins’ followed by a reply)
I very much liked what you wrote, but before I write any thing else, let me say that I am not an atheist. I do believe in God. The main difference I can see between us, is not a belief in god but rather a belief in the part that god plays in our lives. I will only touch on a couple of points tonight and would love to correspond with you more.
To start with, let me state some points that I believe in, upon which I will elaborate.
1. I believe in God
2. I do not believe in the bible in a literal sense
3. I believe in evolution
4. I do believe in Destiny
Point 1. I believe in God
To look at the universe, one can only marvel at its design. Scientists for centuries have pondered its existence and the laws that bind it. From Aristotle to Einstein, from Newton to Hawking, people have pondered many laws of nature, Laws of motion, laws of thermodynamic and laws of quantum mechanics.
One thing that intrigued me with Stephen Hawking (after reading “A Brief history of time”) is his belief in the determining the unified law of the universe (one law to govern them all). It was not his acquiesce position in stating that the above can be achieved via quantum mechanical theories, but rather in further articles were he stated, “to find such an answer would be the ultimate triumph for the human race - for then we would know the mind of God”. You see Stephen Hawking believes that the marvel that is the universe and ultimately the laws that govern it are not the act of random but must have been guided by divine influence.
To quote Einstein, “According to the general theory of relativity, there must have been a state of infinite density in the past, the big bang, which would have been an effective beginning of time. Similarly, if the whole universe re-collapsed, there must be another state of infinite density in the future, the big crunch, which would be an end of time. Even if the whole universe did not re-collapse, there would be singularities in any localized regions that collapsed to form black holes. These singularities would be an end of time for anyone who fell into the black hole. At the big bang and other singularities, all the laws would have broken down, so God would have complete freedom to choose what happened and how the universe began. Again, the belief is that God is a guiding factor in the design on the universe.
You see, I do not believe that the world was made in 7 days. I believe that the world was made via the “Big Bang theory” 14-15 billion years ago as a result of an imploding singularity. 10 billion years later, our earth was made. 3.5 billion years after the creation of the world, dinosaurs roamed the earth and eventually died to be replaced later by mammals. Thousands of years later, man walked the earth and now here we are. I believe in the laws of physics and science but for such a complex series of laws to exist the way they do, there must be some divine influence, God.
Point 2. I do not believe in the bible in a literal sense
To me, the bible is an amazing book full with wisdom and insight. It lays the foundations for our moral judgements and is the building blocks for our laws. I do not believe in it in the literal sense. The writing itself is a testimony to the time it was written, when the world was thought to be flat and the sun revolved around the earth. I want to ask you the following: (please note as far as personal opinion is concerned, there are no right or wrong answers, only what we believe at that time)
• Do you believe in Genesis?
• Do you believe in Adam and Eve?
• How does Homo erectus fit into the bible?
• Do animals have souls and are able to partake in the eternal gift of life from god?
• Why are dinosaurs and the developing stages of the world left out of the bible?
I mean no disrespect from these questions, I simply want to gain an insight into your belief to better equip myself to fully understand. I do not believe in Genesis or Adam and Eve. I believe that the Homo erectus man and dinosaurs were left out of the bible due to lack of scientific understanding of the time and the need of belief and that of god. By the way, I do believe in Jesus and in the crucifixion. I don’t know if I’m making my point but the reason I don’t believe in the bible in a literal sense is because of various shortcomings in it’s explanations of the world as we see it now, 2000 years on with science as our guide and not our beliefs.
Point 3. I believe in evolution
I believe evolution is about adapting. When hunted, animals in groups are only as good or successful as the slowest animal. When the old or weak are killed off, the group are better off. Turtles and other animals lay large amount of eggs due to the fact that so many are killed and if they didn’t, their species would be killed off. Nature is in a delicate balance and has no pity for the weak. The strong survive and the weak adapt to learn to survive. Fossils of animals thousands of years ago can show how birds were once different and how they have evolved with time as have many other creatures. With fossils to demonstrate how birds, fish and reptiles have changed over chronological spans, why do people argue over the complexing issues such as why “simple chemicals become progressively more complicated, to evolve upwards”? One last question, how does Homo erectus fit into the greater scheme of things? Is he not proof of change in man’s physical capabilities and mental prowess? I bet we could both talk for some time on that topic.
Point 4. I believe in Destiny
I mentioned before that I believe in a god aspect governing the fabric of the multiverse and the laws upon which is has been created. For me, individuals are born with an amount of talent and skill, to be used as we see fit for an ultimate purpose that only god knows in the end. Some have better opportunities than others some have more skill and luck. Some are gifted, some are not. All of us are equal and all of us have the ability to ameliorate our own lives and those that we touch.
Wez, I could write for hours about each of these topics but tonight, time does not permit it. Please write back as I would like to correspond more and to share ideas. As I said in the beginning, I do believe in God so no need to preach to the converted from that aspect, it is only my beliefs in regards to the both the physical and spiritual applications of the God that differ. Christianity and other religions have set a moral guideline for humans to behave by. Evolving societies with their individual autonomy have both changed and adapted to the 20th century in regards to laws and moral acceptances. To act in way that is in accordance with both your neighbour, sovereign law and own acceptance of what is right or wrong, to me can only be said to be doing the “right” thing in the eyes of the lord.
This is the reason I believe that a young boy who hypothetically lives in Africa, who has never heard of the Christian lord God, lives his life well, both caring for his parents, neighbours and touching everyone’s life in a positive way will when he dies, surely go to Heaven.
Hope to hear from you soon.
Regards
Thanks for your brilliant response! I really appreciated the tenor and attitude of your letter. Your response has assured us of an informative, enjoyable discussion, one I’m sure to learn something from.
I’m glad you outlined your beliefs at the beginning as it has helped me understand where you are coming from and how you interpret the reality of this amazing universe we live in. Having said that, I am surprised at the combination of what you believe. The fact you believe in evolution and God has created a merry-go-round that neither of us can get off. Every time the impossible or unexplainable comes up the answer is simply, ‘Divine influence’, and who can argue with that!
The reason I’m so surprised at what you believe is people who usually believe in big bang/evolution do so because they don’t want to believe in God or ‘divine influence’. I have read many things about evolution and I have about 20 or more nature videos, which I have watched a number of times (I love docos). But not once, and I mean not once, has there been any suggestion of ‘divine influence’. David Attenborough seems to make it his mission to deny ‘the God factor’ by directing all praise for the incredible world he exposes to his beloved evolution. Admitting divine influence is a big deal and a threat to many people. Think about it. If divine influence is what caused the universe to be, then right now there is in existence an immensely powerful, eternal, supernatural being, one to whom we would be responsible.
You asked about Homo erectus. ‘Erectus’ reminds me of all the other ‘Homos’ that have come along like Ramapithecus - once widely regarded as the ancestor of humans, it has now been realised that it is merely an extinct type of orang-utan. Eoanthropus (Piltdown man) - a hoax based on a human skull cap and an orang-utan’s jaw. It was widely publicised as the missing link for 40 years. Hesperopithecus (Nebraska man) - based on a single tooth of a type of pig now only living in Paraguay.
There is no fossil evidence that man is the product of evolution. The missing links are still missing because they do not exist. The renowned evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould sums it up nicely, ‘The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problems for gradualistic accounts of evolution.’
As far dinosaurs go, the Bible does not exclude them. For a start the word ‘dinosaur’ only came into use around 1841. Before that time they were most likely referred to as ‘dragons’ and the Hebrew word for ‘dragon’ is used a number of times in the Old Testament. The book of Job makes reference to a great creature called ‘behemoth’ who moved his tail like a cedar tree. Name a creature today that has a tail like a cedar tree! It fits more with the description of the sauropod dinosaur.
You also mentioned ‘the developing stages of the world’ which I presume is the ‘continental drift’. As far as this ‘development’ goes there is not enough evidence to prove or disprove it. I have two great articles about this topic written by qualified men, one ‘for’ and one ‘against’ and both are convincing. I think the real question is this, does it really matter? My car came with an owner manual. It contains all the information I need to use and maintain the vehicle. It gives me a basic outline of my car, its different components, what to do, where to find things I need to know like transmission oil, water, engine oil etc… but it doesn’t give me the information on how they developed that particular model. Why? Because it isn’t necessary! Just because the manual doesn’t contain the ‘developing stages’ doesn’t mean it’s not true or valid or ‘literal’.
The alleged Homo erectus, dinosaurs, the continental drift and are animals in heaven surely can’t be your only reasons for not believing the Bible? I can give you a thousand more reasons not to believe evolution, and my reasons ‘literally’ stand up under unbiased, scientific scrutiny. Anyway, it’s time to get off this merry-go-round, as you said we could talk about this for hours, and considering the combination of what you believe a resolution is highly unlikely.
You asked me a question that I would love to answer, ‘Do I believe in Genesis?’ The answer is of course ‘yes’. To me Genesis is the most provable book in the Bible. Why? Because the evidence is ‘literally’ right in front of my face. I don’t have to go to archaeology, historians, scholars or testimonies.
Genesis 1:1 says, ‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’. At last we have origin! Someone has explained how the elements of the universe got here, something big bang will never do. There has to be a beginning or origin for everything, including the ingredients for your big bang; logic, science, even common sense demand it. Genesis gives us a datum line to work from. Genesis answers our origin question in a most convincing manner. Understanding origin is most important if you are to correctly interpret the reality of what we see. What we believe about origin affects our presuppositions. Take a handshake for example. In some indigenous cultures a gesture such as that is an act of hostility. Why? Because their presupposition is wrong and therefore they do not interpret it correctly. For me to understand Asian traditions properly I would need to know something of their true origin. Having the right presupposition makes all the difference if you are to interpret the evidence correctly. There is so much one could say on this topic but I must move on.
Genesis also points to the beginning of time (as we know it). But not only that, the 7-day, morning/evening cycle that is clearly outlined is still in operation to this day. The programs for life (or DNA) were written and ‘booted-up’ in Genesis. And just as Genesis said, life has indeed reproduced ‘after its own kind’. Take people for example. No matter how much we vary in size, shape, colour etc… from the varying (not new) genetic information passed on to us, we will always be human beings - our own kind. To be able to create ‘the heavens’ with its endless space you yourself must be eternal and never ending. The God of Genesis fits perfectly with what I see. Everything I look at has design and points to the creative genius of the Genesis God (there’s no need for evolution). But the most convincing piece of evidence that categorically proves to me the literal account of Genesis is this, something is wrong. You and I both agree this world is an amazing place. It’s perfect in design. It has to be in order to support life, but at the same time something is desperately wrong with it. It’s wearing out, selfdestructing just as the Bible said it would. Heat death is inevitable. Creation is killing and maiming itself and none more so than mankind. What is this evil that affects us and all of creation? Where did it come from? How did it start?
Genesis, and only Genesis, effectively explains how this came to be. We have a major flaw caused by the sin of Adam and Eve. This flaw has been passed on to us (just like genetic information) and is referred to in the Bible as our sin nature. And just like Genesis, this sin nature is very literal. No one is better than anyone else, no one is ‘right’. I have the same sin problem as you. And this evil, this sin nature of mine constantly reminds me that Genesis is literal. I feel and see the evidence of it everyday. If you are unsure about the evil that is resident within every human heart, ask yourself, ‘Am I perfect?’ Anything short of perfect is defective and tainted with evil as far as God is concerned. His eternal heaven is perfect and nothing short of perfection will be accepted in it.
I’m glad you believe in God. But we need to look at what you have called the ‘application’ of God. You and I both agree that there is an eternal, supremely powerful being in existence. If this is true, there can be only one (God), not many. Take the office of Prime Minister for example. We haven’t got two or three PMs. How many presidents has the USA got? The nature of power is exclusive; it’s not a shared thing. Whoever has power makes up the rules or determines the way. Absolute power belongs to one God and He has presented to the human race only one way.
Just like power, truth by definition is exclusive. The following quote is from one of my favourite authors, Ravi Zacharias. He is a native of India and was brought up under the shadow of Eastern religions (he knows them well, believe me). He is a visiting scholar at Cambridge University and debates in settings such as Princeton and Harvard. (He has written a book I’m sure you would enjoy called, ‘Can Man Live without God?’)
One of the most fallacious ideas ever spawned in Western attitudes toward truth is the oft-repeated pronouncement that exclusionary claims to truth are a Western way of thinking. The East, it is implied, accepts all religions as equally true. This is patently false. Every religion, without exception, has some foundational beliefs that are categorically nonnegotiable and exclude everything to the contrary. You see, truth by definition is exclusive. If truth were all-inclusive, nothing would be false. And if nothing were false, what would be the meaning of true? Furthermore, if nothing were false, would it be true to say that everything is false? It quickly becomes evident that nonsense would follow. Even Buddhism, which is often held up as being the example of “religious tolerance,” is not exempt from dogmatism. Buddhists forget or downplay the fact that Buddha was born a Hindu and rejected some of the fundamental precepts of Hinduism. Buddha’s own statement was that truth mattered more than conformity. What, therefore, takes place in popular thought is a reflection of the way culture has been engineered to deal with truth issues.
Jesus Christ made a claim that no other religious leader in history has made. It is found in John 14:6, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life’. Jesus addressed the very issue we humans must know - the truth. No one gets to God other than through Jesus Christ, and that’s the truth like it or not. No one can be ‘right’ apart from Jesus.
I’m glad you are concerned about that young boy in Africa who didn’t get to hear about ‘the Christian Lord’. But that scenario doesn’t provide you with the reasoning or grounds to change what God requires and who should be allowed in heaven. It’s not your call. Your opinion will not sway God’s scales of eternal justice. The issue is you, no one else. When you die, you and only you will stand before the God of the universe. The African boy, your parents or anyone else who thinks you’re a good bloke will not be there (as if their opinion would matter anyway). Will your righteousness, your ‘positive’ living be enough to qualify you to enter a place that is perfect? Can you look God in the face and say, ‘I’m right, I deserve to be in your sinless, perfect world’?
The same appointment is certain for me too, but I won’t be standing alone. You see, I’ll have someone I know well next to me: my Lord, my Saviour Jesus Christ. He is my only hope when it comes to being right. It is His righteousness that I’ll be judged on, not my own. On my own I am a sinful, depraved human being who is not ‘right in the eyes of the Lord’. The Bible is clear about it (Romans 3:23). The fate of the African boy is in God’s hands and He promises in the Bible that He is just. He won’t do the wrong thing by us. If there is a chance that boy will respond, God will get the gospel message through to him somehow.
I’m glad you believe in destiny because I do too. I believe in it to the degree I know our correspondence is no coincidence. The God of the universe has engineered circumstances in order to get this message through that He loves you and wants to get close to you. He is revealing Himself to you. The God you know as a ‘divine influence’ has an identity and His name is Jesus Christ. God’s gift of salvation is being offered to you. If you choose to reject it you cannot be saved, just like refusing treatment for an infection or gangrene will deny the salvation of your toes or fingers. This immensely powerful God has set down the way for you to know Him through Jesus, and it is non-negotiable. You are much smarter than I am and more educated. You are well read and rehearsed in good logic; BUT this is not what this life is all about. When it comes to eternal matters it gets down to faith and whether you know the one true God, Jesus Christ. The fact is - it is exclusive, but that’s always been the nature of truth.