         |
|
 An online correspondence course Is there a God? If so, what is he like? Does he care about us? Our answers to these questions will determine our philosophy of life. No man can afford to pass over them as being of little importance. IS THERE A GOD? The Bible does not attempt to prove the existence of God. It assumes it and declares, "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." (Psalm 14:1)* This lack of scriptural proof strikes us as strange since the entire Bible is based on the premise that there is a God. Two possible explanations may be advanced for this lack of proof. (1) In biblical times the idea of God was universal and proof was not needed. (2) The evidence in the world around us in favor of God's existence is so strong that only a fool would deny it. The Bible was not written for fools. However, in an age of skepticism it has become necessary to demonstrate to doubers and atheists (those who do not believe in God) that there is a supreme being. Consider three reasons for believing in God. FIRST CAUSE. Whether we have ever thought about it or not, we are aware that for every effect there must be a cause. The waving of a tree leaf was set in motion by a bird or animal or the blowing of the wind. An automobile moving down the highway has to be propelled by some kind of energy. Everywhere around us we see "effects," and while we may be totally unaware of the causes, our human experience tells us that behind every effect there has to be a cause. The universe with all of its complexities presents to us millions of "effects." How did all of this come to be? Human reason allows only two possible explanations. Either, (1) something has always existed, or (2) there was a time when there was absolutely nothing. To accept the second alternative is to acknowledge that something has come out of nothing, a concept that requires that we believe that there was no cause for the world as it now is. Centuries before Jesus, Aristotle first proposed what is now called the cosmological argument for a supreme being. He reasoned that in ordinary happenings there is an endless chain of cause-effect patterns. He traced this chain back to an uncaused First Cause. There has to be a start somewhere. Since something cannot come from nothing, the First Cause must be eternal. While it is difficult to understand how something has always been, there really is no acceptable alternative. Christians believe that this eternal First Cause is a mind, which we identify as the God of the Bible. Scientific support for this argument is found in the "second law of thermodynamics" or entropy. In popular language this means that the universe is running down after having been at one time wound up like a clock. The principle of entropy argues for both the beginning of the universe and the end. For a beginning there must have been a First Cause. THE MORAL ARGUMENT. Human beings differ from other creatures in that they possess a moral sense, or as some term it, a "sense of ought." Animals cannot distinguish between right and wrong as does man. This moral sense should not be confused with any set of moral principles that have been learned or the cultural upbringing of any people. It is not something acquired, but that with which we are all born. Even the most primitive savage possesses it. This inner sense is found in the conscience which tells us what we should not do and prods us into doing what we ought to do. The conscience is educated by teaching, and the demands of conscience vary according to leargning, but the conscience itself directs us to act according to what we believe is right and punishes us when we ignore it. This moral sense of human beings demands a moral God. Only a creator who is himself moral could instill such a characteristic in us. "Blind, irrational matter and force cannot have these characteristics. They cannot give rise to them." (Braden, The Problem of Problems, p. 281.) Only a God who is himself good could impart such a nature to his creation. SUPREME INTELLIGENCE. "For every house is builded by some man; but he that built all things is God." (Heb. 3:4) When we see a house, we know there was an architect. When we see a painting, we know there was an artist. When we see a newspaper, we know there was a printer. We draw these conclusions because we know that behind every design there must be a designer. We cannot conceive of a watch, with its hundreds of parts working in perfect precision, "just happening." There had to be a maker. For the same reason we can believe that there is a Creator. This is called the teleological argument. The workings of the universe bear unmistakable evidence of intelligence of Mind. When the heavenly bodies move with such precision that astronomers can predict hundreds of years in advance where a given celestial body will be at a given time, we know that there is a supreme intelligence that has orchestrated it all. When we consider the perfect balance of nature that continues from generation to generation until disturbed by man, we know that mere chance cannot provide a satisfactory explanation. When we consider the marvels of the human body - the hand, the eye, the ear, the heart, the blood - we know that there had to be a supreme designer. Every newborn babe is a testimony to his wisdom. Consider for a moment the human brain. It is said that a crude model of it made by man "would require one thousand billion billion vacuum tubes and an equally fantastic amount of wiring, a huge warehouse and one million kilowatts of power. Yet the human brain fits snugly into a skull and runs on a modest 25 watts of power." Someone has written, "If the word 'God' were written upon every blowing leaf, emobossed on every passing cloud, engraved on every granite rock, the inductive evidence that God is in the world would be no stronger than it is. When the human intellect thinks in terms of finality with the world as its premise, the 'therefore' of every syllogism will be 'God'. The universe is a big advertising poster spelling'God'." WHAT ABOUT EVOLUTION? Organic evolution poses a major challenge to the concept of God because it denies the existence of a creator. Evolution is the doctrine that all forms of life came from one or a few original forms by a connected series of changes in nature in which a supreme being played no part. It assumes that millions of years ago the first amoeba came into being, perhaps as a result of chemical action. From this beginning the various plants and animals in the world have evolved by chance. Evolutionists substantiate their theory by the study of fossils (remains of plants and animals preserved in rock, etc.) and the similarity among different species. Space allows only a glance at this doctrine, but the student should be aware of major difficulties in the theory. Evolution has not been proved in the scientific sense and cannot be until these and other problems are resolved. Consider these problems: (1) Spontaneous generation. Science affirms that life comes only from other life. Scientists can make a kernel of corn with the same chemical properties and appearance as a real kernel, but they cannot give it the germ of life. Organic evolution requires that by pure chance life came from inanimate matter. Some evolutionists contend that evolution is a science of development rather than of origins and that they are not required to explain how life began. This will not suffice. A house is no stronger than its foundation. The house of the organic evolutionist who denies the first cause, God, is built upon the sand and must fall. Some resolve the problem by granting the existence of God as the creator of the first life, but from this point on they accept the general pattern of evolutionary thought. This is theistic evolution. While solving the problem of origins, it really denies the inspiration of the Bible by calling the Genesis account of creation a myth. Other objections to be raise apply equally to organic and theistic evolution. In reality, theistic evolution is as antibiblical as other evolutionary theories. (2) Lack of mechanism. By mechanism is meant the means by which evolution is accomplished. In the 19th century Charles Darwin suggested it was brought about by natural selection and survival of the fittest. Later Lamarck proposed the now discredited theory that acquired characteristics (like learning how to paint) could be transmitted to future generations by evolution. These theories are now denied or minimized by scientists as explanations of the "how" of evolution. Current evolutionary thought proposes genetic mutations as the primary mechanism of evolution. Mutations do occur rarely in plant and animal life. They are often injurious and only occasionally improve the quality of the plant or animal. There is no evidence of their ever causing the major changes required by evolutionary theory. Neither mutations nor any other explanation is satisfactory in accounting for the "how" of evolution. (3) Absence of major changes. Changes in biological organisms do occur as illustrated by the similarity and differences between related birds and animals. What is lacking (and what is required by evolutionary theory) is evidence of changes amonth the major groupings of organisms. The Bible claims that God created different "kinds" (Genesis 1:21, 24, 25). Vertebrate and invertebrate animals would certainly be different "kinds," but two species of sparrows might be related to one another. Organic evolution, to be proved, requires changes in major groupings. For this there is no biological evidence. To establish a relationship between two members of the cat family is not the same as proving a relationship between a cat and a bird. (4) Human missing links. Students are familiar with textbook drawings of the so-called missing links between man and the primate family. What they may not realize is that these illustrations have been drawn from a few bones to which has been added a lot of imagination. The Java Man was put together from a cranial cap, a thigh bone, and some teeth scattered in a Java river bed. The original Peking Man consisted of one tooth. While the remains of most "missing links" are more extensive, this illustrates the deception perpetrated by some drawings and models. There is fossil evidence that early men may have had a different appearance than modern men, even as modern human beings differ in physical structure from one another. But the fossil finds which some say bridge the gap between man and ape can be clearly classified as either primate or Homo sapiens (man). There just is no clear evidence of the past existence of createures at an intermdeiate stage. The similarity of biological structure among plants and animals, which the evolutionist cites in support of his theory, can be as readily explained on the basis of a common designer as by his hypothesis. As two similar paintings denote a common artist, so two similar creatures may indicate a common maker. Both creation and evolution require faith. The Christian "by faith...understands that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." (Heb. 11:3) The Christian has but one thing to believe - "In the beginning, God..." The evolutionist, on the other hand, must accept by faith the various unproved assumptions discussed in this lesson. In fleeing from an eternal God he has become lost in a maze of unscientific difficulties which are harder to accept than that God has always existed. In our next lesson we will discuss the nature of this eternal God. * Scripture quotations from the King James Version True or false:
Three arguments which support the existence of God are (1) First Cause; (2) The Moral Argument; and (3) Supreme Intelligence. In each blank write the argument which is best demonstrated by that statement:
List four problems organic evolutionists face in connection with their theory: 1. 2. 3. 4. Check your answers > > > Back to the Table of Contents |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Home
Members | About Us | Worship and Classes | Staff and Leadership
Ministries | Missions | Online Resources | Intranet | Youth | Contact Us
Back To Top