RSS

Blind Chance – 2

04 Apr

In today’s post we are going to try to look at some more quotes that have been recorded n Fred Heeren’s book Show Me God. Don’t get us wrong, just because we like the book doesn’t mean we are not aware that Fred Heeren is not a complete biblical creationist. He does make good points and records good points even though he pursues a progressive alternative.

#1. I grant you that the universe has the appearance of being designed, but I’ve heard that there are some perfectly natural explanations for it. It’s not as if the Creator in Genesis is the only explanation. or are you trying to say that the evidence from design is so impressive that it compels belief in him? (page 233)

First, there are not any perfect natural explanations for design and any theory that is offered is sans verification. They are all modern ideas with no hope of any support from any other source than the person who presents the hypothesis. The idea of the Creator has both modern and ancient support as we have modern discoveries to show that the universe has been designed but also ancient verification via the Bible. No other theory enjoys this testimony.

Second, if there were alternatives to God as the only Creator, then where are the followers of those alternatives and where is their verifiable proof? Why do we not see their theories in action or why do we not hear from their gods and see them in action today? These alternatives lack longevity and a trackable record. We may have a story or two but beyond that the adherents as well as the gods mentioned seem to be absent and we do not see them proving their existence or their achievements.

With God we see him in action today via answered prayer and miracles, we have a trackable record to see his existence and power, plus his followers still promote him to this day. The others are scrambling to try to find evidence that solely supports their views and they cannot do that.

#2. How do scientists explain the precise selections of the last chapter? Many simply do not, recognizing either that science has no answers at present or that answers involving such explanations will always lie outside the realm of science. (page 234)

This is the problem for those who reject the truth.They will not find the answers they seek for they are looking in the wrong direction going down the wrong paths and looking in the wrong places for the wrong answers. We must question the sanity and intelligence of those who, after being given the answer by the person who did the act, say ‘no that is not it’ and then try to replace the answer with their own ideas.

Science has never been given the authority to discover our origins. It has been given other duties to fulfill in order to help mankind but those duties have been ignored as too many scientists rush to work on theories about how everything came to be. Science could achieve and contribute much more if its resources were not being wasted by being redundant (searching for our origins even though we know where we came from) but put to use funding its actual purpose.

#3. By taking a position that comes under the WAP category, he avoids both the embarrassment of having to explain design and the larger embarrassment of having to resort to any of the wild science fiction-like explanations… (pg. 234)

This is the key. If secular science can’t explain it, then they avoid it which is what happened in the theory of evolution and its problem of explaining where life came from. Instead of demonstrating where life actually came from, if the evolutionist is correct, they simply ignored it and made it a part of a different field of science which had nothing to do with their theory.

If they can’t solve the problem, they ignore it and say it is not their problem.One of those wild science fiction-like explanations is the string theory. If secular scientists cannot explain how 1 universe got here how can they expect to explain the source/existence for an unlimited number of universes? Such theories are an embarrassment to the scientific community as are so many others.

#4. As physicist Richard Morris states, ‘The real intriguing question may very well not be, ‘is there other intelligent life in the universe?’ but rather ‘Why is the universe so hospitable to life in the first place.’ (pg 240)

Evolutionists and big bang supporters need to answer the second question first before presenting their alternative theories. There is no reason for the universe to be hospitable to life without a caring, compassionate Creator who designed it to be hospitable. There can be no other answer. The fact that the universe allows life at all points to a Creator not blind chance.

#5. In their 1986 classic, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, astronomer John Barrow and mathematician Frank Tipler tried to calculate how long it might take for the critical conditions we observe in the universe to come together by nontheistic explanations. After examining ten conditions for life, they found that all the tie in the world did not give them what they needed to explain the development of human beings by natural means. Even when they gave nature all the lucky breaks  they could, their calculations showed that by the time any one of these ten precise conditions might be met by natural means, the sun would cease to be a main sequence star, turning into a red giant and burning u the Earth. (pages 243-4)

This is a fact ignored by evolutionists and big bang adherents. There is no time for their natural explanations to work as they want them to. This then begs the question, with this information why do people still not repent and believe God? When people ask this question they forget that the Bible tells us the answers. First, people are deceived by evil and until they admit this fact and that evil exist, they will remain deceived and blind to the truth. Second, men love darkness rather than light. They do not want the truth but their own ideas.

Third, many researchers have employment and reputations at stake thus they do not want to change their belief sin fear of losing both. These are but only three valid reasons why so many people choose to reject the truth of our origins and reject God and Jesus. There are others but these will suffice.Natural explanations cannot and do not work.

We leave you with one final quote made up by the words of Sir James Jeans and found on page 258:

The universe begins to look more like a great thought like a great machine. Mind no longer appears as an accidental intruder into the realm of matter; we are beginning to suspect that we ought rather to hail it as the creator and the governor of the realm of matter… We discover that the universe shows evidence of a designing or controlling power that has something in common with our individual minds…

The evidence points to God and the validity of Genesis 1 not to natural explanations.

 

Advertisements
 
Comments Off on Blind Chance – 2

Posted by on April 4, 2016 in academics, astronomy, Bible, church, creation, education, faith, history, leadership, science, theology

 

Comments are closed.

 
%d bloggers like this: