Blind Chance

04 Apr

There are 2 quotes we would like to share with you. They both come from the book, Show Me God by Fred Heeren.

#1.A. Skeptic’s Questions:

The more we discover about the universe’s laws, the more we learn that there are simple natural explanations for the way things work in nature. So why do you insist that science points to a Grand Designer? (pg. 199)

This is the secular world’s fallback position- natural explanations. But there is a problem with those natural explanations. There is no way to verify if they are correct or not.Heeren points out something about these ‘natural laws which all believers should think about if they have not already. What he points out is found in quote #2.

#2. Many who take the ‘blind chance’ position argue that any seemingly purposed or order we observe in the universe can always be explained in terms of natural laws. To those who hold this view we can first point out that the idea of appealing to natural laws only begs the question: Where did the natural laws that bring design come from? Unless the blind chance advocate can come up with a natural explanation for natural laws, he can give no reason for anyone to believe that the order we observe in the universe could have been brought about by chance. (pg.200)

The secular scientist cannot provide one non-divine source for the natural laws they find in the universe. To say that natural laws just appeared on the scene and developed order throughout the centuries is not only absurd but appealing to the same magic that the unbelieving world accuses the Christian of believing in when they say that God spoke and it was.

We can call it absurd because no matter what anyone does, order does not come from Chaos. Laws do not come from anarchy so it is absurd for the supposedly intelligent secular scientist to think that science is something that is different from the rest of the world. If order cannot come from chaos in society then it cannot come from the scientific world. No scientific experiment has ever shown that order could come from chaos so for the secular scientist to propose that for origins it did, even though natural law says it can’t be done, then you have the reason why we can say their thinking is absurd.

We have to ask- what makes origins different from anything else in the world? The answer is that it isn’t different. What is different is that the secular scientist does not want to acknowledge God or admit that he exists. That is the crux of the issue. Science shows that God exists and it is the human factor not the field of research who says differently.

So far no scientific experiment or discovery, including archaeology and other scientific research fields, has ever proven the Bible incorrect.


One response to “Blind Chance

  1. jbcowgill

    April 5, 2016 at 12:41 am

    Reblogged this on John Cowgill's Literature Site.

%d bloggers like this: