TwitterFacebookYouTubeEmailRSS

Tag Archives: is there a god?

Atheism and The Testimony of Creation (Part 2)

Posted on by

Ultraviolet Landing Strips

As the pilot maneuvers the plane to begin its decent onto the landing strip he will usually look first for the landing light patterns on the ground to guide him into a safe and smooth landing that will show him exactly where he needs to go. Without these landing strip lights a pilot would risk serious damage to the plane and even death to himself and all passengers; they are indeed essential to his successful landing.

As people we cannot see things in ultraviolet light; however pollinating insects do see UV light. At first it was thought that this would make it difficult for insects to land on flowers and locate the pollen. However, it is this ability to see UV light that not only provides a safe landing on flowers and a food source for insects, but a pollinating mechanism for flowers as well.

 

Most flowers contain a particular pigmented pattern on there petals that is not visible in regular light. This pattern is like a bull’s-eye or landing strip for insects; it allows for a safe landing and it directs them right to the pollen so they won’t miss it. Like a flashing neon sign pointing to the restaurant these UV landing strip patterns point pollinating insects right to the food source. As a result, insects can utilize the pollen as food and the flowers can pollinate and reproduce.

All over creation is the thumb print of a Creator. It is obvious that complexity strongly indicates an intelligent designer. As William Paley, British Christian apologist, philosopher, and utilitarian once said,

“The watch must have a watch maker; that there must have existed, at some time and at some place or other, an artificer or artificers, who formed it for the purpose which we find it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction, and designed its use.”

In the words of Paley, the watch requires a watchmaker. Design demands a designer. Creation is covered with the Creator’s signature. All that creation reveals is not enough for salvation, but it is enough to rendered without an excuse for failure to acknowledge him in our hearts, minds, and actions.

Hitchens’ responds to this line of reasoning by arguing that a Designer cannot exist because of how “bad” everything works. The “poor” design of the universe, Hitchens argues, shows that a perfect God could not have made everything. Apart from even an elementary understanding of sin, such would seem to be the case. However, Hitchens is looking at a world in its post-fallen state. When he looks at the world he does not see it as it was originally made, but as it has become as a result of sin.

Moreover, Hitchens’ reasoning in this area is flawed and self contradictory. After stating that God cannot exist because of how “badly” everything in the universe works, he states that evolution is in fact the true creator. In other words, Hitchens himself does not disagree with the logic of the Intelligent Design movement. He understands that design demands a Designer and creation demands a Creator. He simply has supplanted God with evolution. Hitchens does not disagree with the reasoning, only the conclusion. Unfortunately, science rushes to the aid of the Theists on this point. Centuries of scientific data conclusively states, natural selection cannot produce or create; it can only manage what already exists. Science preaches this truth loud and clear; evolution creates nothing. Francesco Redi proved this as early as the mid seventeenth century. Spontaneous generation cannot occur. We know this from everyday life as well. We see intelligent beings design and create things. We never see nothing (or evolution) design or create from nothing. In the case of origins, science likes Theism.

Atheism and The Testimony of Creation (Part 1)

Posted on by

Even the most casual Bible readers are familiar with Romans 1:20. Here we find the apostle Paul in the midst of arguing for the existence of God as declared and testified to by creation. But Paul argues that more than God’s existence is known through creation, his eternal power and divine attributes are as well. God’s glory is declared through what he has made (Psalms 19:1). If this is true, if creation presupposes a Creator, there ought to be evidence of it in creation.

The Skin We’re In

Psalm 139:13 says, “You formed my inward parts; you knit me together in my mother’s womb.” The phrase “knit me together” in the original Hebrew can also be read as “covered me.” Interestingly enough, Human skin is scientifically termed “epithelium” that is to say it is a tissue that “covers or lines”. In undergraduate anatomy classes the skin (integument) is often described as the “human fabric.” There are very good reasons why such compliments are paid to our skin. Our skin has 3 layers to it, is approximately 3000 sq in, and makes up roughly 7% of our body weight. One square centimeter of skin contains:

  • 6,000,000 cells
  • 100 sweat glands
  • 15 sebaceous glands (they lubricate and waterproof you hair!)
  • 5000 sensory corpuscles (so you can feel!)
  • 200 pain points (they tell you the stove is hot!)
  • 25 pressure points
  • 12 cold-sensitive points
  • 2 heat-sensitive points

As the largest organ in the body, human skin functions to protect the body against UV light, and bacteria, it is in charge of hydroregulation (regulates conservation of water in the body), thermoregulation (regulates body temperature), synthesizes vitamin D from the light of the sun, houses sensory receptors so you can feel the edge of the pages of this book to turn them, and is active in it’s roles in facial expression, odor emission, and waste secretion. Suddenly the skin is more than just something we try to tan!

The top most layer of skin, the “epidermis,” is composed of dead cells. As cells in the lower layers of the epidermis die, they slowly migrate to the surface where, once there, they shed off and are replaced with new dead cells. However, it isn’t as simple as that. This process occurs at a specific rate; the reproduction of new cells has to coincide with the falling off of dead ones or else the poor human would be in serious trouble! If the production of new skin cells was about 1% higher than the fall off rate of dead ones, then after only a few days the skin would accumulate so much (and eventually the skin would be so heavy) that the skin would be hard like reptile scales. The person would not be able to function and ultimately die! On the other hand, if the fall off rate of dead cells exceeded the rate of production of new cells by 1%, then the body could not produce enough skin. After a few days a person would not have any skin on and be susceptible to bacteria infection and a hasty death! Fortunately our Creator designed our skin in such a way that it operates in perfect balance; we never have to worry about looking like an alligator or catching a draft. We are truly fearfully and wonderfully made by a fearful and wonderful Creator.

 

Is There a God? (Part 2)

Posted on by

Many atheist object to a belief in God because they say we cannot actually see Him. But we do not have to see God in order to know that He exists. For example, a company like Federal Express; the CEO (Fred Smith) invented door-to-door overnight express package delivery and founded the named company. Fred Smith doesn’t deliver the packages to anyone’s door. Instead, he initially designed and “commanded.” He built an entire system of planes, trucks, hubs, warehouses, sorting facilities, customer facilities, drop boxes, information systems, and tens of thousands of employees to perform the task of picking up and delivering millions of packages each day. Fred Smith does not personally handle or deliver every package each day to keep his business going. He created a system that functions each and every day and is governed by the laws that he established.

This is like the system God has put into place, and he designed it so it would run on its own. He gave man dominion (just like Fred Smith gave authority to his management team) and man has invented things, etc. However, Fred Smith can reach into his business and make minor or major changes if he sees a certain business unit is in need of it, like firing the management team of a customer location that persistently produces a high number of customer complaints. God does the same thing as he sees the need, like destroying Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19).

But few customers have ever met Fred Smith, and certainly were not on hand as witnesses when he designed his business, so anyone could easily say Fred had nothing to do with designing anything. Yet to deny Fred the credit for designing a brilliant world-altering system that runs by itself today, would take a blind fool.

A Response to Christopher Hitchens and the New Atheism Movement

Posted on by

I have finally finished reading Christopher Hitchens’ book “God is Not Great.” I would like to offer a detailed, though not exhaustive, rebuttal of his book and the New Atheism movement as a whole. Of all the approaches one could take in developing an apologetic against New Atheism, I will argue from a presuppositional method. The main thesis I am operating from is that Hitchens’ rejection of God is not because of insufficient proof, but because of his sinful heart.

Ultimately, all men know God exists, some simply choose to be foolish and reject the knowledge they inherently know to be true. They exchange the “truth for a lie” and “the wisdom of God for the wisdom of man.” In other words, unbelief exists, not because of insufficient proof or improper reasoning, but unbelief exists because of sin; not only in the case of Hitchens, but of every individual who every lived.

Since this is the case, rational arguments will be of some help in evaluating Hitchens’ New Atheism, but ultimately they must be evaluated in light of what Scripture says. This paper ultimately seeks to argue against the presuppositions and assumptions of New Atheism, rather than its conclusions. For in so doing, the conclusions will be directly voided.

The crux of Hitchens’ (as well as others) argument for atheism, as well as his reasons for painting “religion” as poisonous, is that if God were to exist and interact in the physical world then God, visa-vise his actions and his followers, should be testable, observable, and falsifiable. For Hitchens’ science has more than enough to say to religion, especially to a God who supposedly interacts with the physical world. He thinks of science and religion as holding conflicting claims about the world. Hitchens would most likely classify himself as a New Atheist under the rubric of “anti-religion” that comes to terms with what “science” tells us about God.

The subtitle of his book is the best summarization of his point; religion is wrong because it ruins everything. It is the purpose of this paper to show the flaws in reasoning and argumentation that comes from the New Atheism movement, in particular those reasonings and argumentations as put forth by Christopher Hitchens. This series of post over the next several weeks will show that God does not only exist, but that Christianity has the best to offer the world.

CyberChimps