January 18, 2009 am
A
STUDY OF GOD (2)
THE CASE FOR GOD (2)
Today we continue an
ongoing study throughout this year in which we will strive to deepen our
understanding of our God.
Last week we began examining the first element of this study in which we
intend to establish that God DOES exist.
Unless this can be proved, the remainder of this study is
meaningless. Today we
continue to prove our case for God.
In our previous lesson we noted some laws of science that point
toward the existence of a divine creator.
·
We noted
that science cannot prove that matter is eternal.
In fact, laws of science point toward the opposite, suggesting
that there had to be a beginning.
·
A case
in point is that the universe is expanding which points to the fact that
at some point in time past, there had to be a point from which the
expansion began (unless this
universe was CREATED with the process already in effect).
Science refers to this as “the big bang theory.”
And then the evolutionist
needs to prove there was something BEFORE expansion began.
And if he proves that, what was BEFORE that? The point is matter
is NOT eternal.
·
Laws of
energy serve as another example.
There are 3 laws of thermodynamics.
The first states, that energy cannot be created or destroyed.
It can change form or states (i.e. solid to liquid to gas to
plasma & back), but the quantity is constant.
The 2nd law of thermodynamics is also called the law of
increased entropy (disorder).
In essence it says that while energy is never destroyed, the
quality of it deteriorates over time from usable energy to unusable
energy. As a result, the
amount of usable energy in the universe is being slowly used up.
This leads to the question:
If matter/energy are eternal, why
has it not yet been used up?
NOTE: The 3rd law of thermodynamics establishes that
as temperature approaches absolute zero (-273.15 degree Celsius), the
entropy of a system approaches a constant minimum (just short of
stopping). This law also
states that we can never reach absolute zero.
My question in these laws:
If matter &/or energy are eternal,
why have we not yet reached the state of near absolute zero?
LAWS of energy point to a beginning of all matter.
·
The
first cause argument.
Based on examples like
these two laws of science just mentioned, there has to have been a force
(outside of the material realm) that started it all.
As we read in Genesis 1:1, “In
the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”
By faith we accept that statement (Heb. 11:3), but NOT without
proof (Rom. 1:20).
·
The
design of the universe.
Design demands a designer.
Also known as “the teleological argument.”
We all understand this concept
in EVERY other aspect of life.
Where there is design, the has to be a designer behind it.
When you see a wristwatch, you know that it was made by someone.
And even if you were to take all the parts and place them in a
bag and shake it up, the probability of them coming out as a working
watch are so astronomical that it would be impossible.
And you STILL have to consider
where the parts came from.
When you consider the complexity of the universe, this earth, the human
body and other organism you cannot help but see design, and thus a
designer. The alternative,
is illogical.
And as we noted last week, the laws of science themselves show design.
The study of science is only
possible because of the order and consistency of natural laws.
·
How do
you explain the origin of life from inorganic matter?
In spite of tremendous advancements in science, one thing it is
not even close to doing is creating life from an inorganic source.
With advancements in the study of DNA, micro-biology, chemistry
and other subjects, science can accurately determine the chemical and
biological structure of just about anything.
They might even be able to assemble together the various elements
– but even if they did – they would STILL NOT have that spark of life
which they cannot create, either in plant form OR animals.
As noted last week, in the
evolutionary process, even for the elements of a simple life form to
happen by chance (that is the necessary elements to form a living
organism to be assembled together in a usable state) are so astronomical
that they are impossible.
In our lesson today
we want to continue our study by examining some logical arguments and
time permitting note some of the arguments made by atheists against a
divine creator.
a.
There are
also many logical arguments better answered by acknowledging God rather
than denying Him. Consider
these:
b.
What is the meaning and purpose of life?
Why am I here?
1 Cor. 15:19 says, “If in this
life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most pitiable.”
We know that this speaks of the hope of the resurrection and
existence beyond this life, but the same conclusion would be true IF
there is no God.
Why are we here? If there is
nothing beyond this life then our purpose is meaningless.
Not only that, life itself is temporary.
In the above arguments dealing with nature we have mentioned that
the universe is expanding.
One of the consequences of this is that things are growing farther apart
and energy is being used up, which means that in time life will cease to
exist on earth (and elsewhere?) as we approach absolute zero (3rd
law of Thermodynamics).
So what meaning is there to life and doing good?
When you die it is all for nothing.
Solomon figured that out in the book of Ecclesiastes.
That is why he reached his conclusion, “Let
us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep His
commandments, for this is man’s all.
For God will bring every work into judgment, including every
secret thing, whether good or evil.” (12:13-14)
c.
Our
ability to reason as we do
– what sets us apart from the rest of creation?
We have mentioned the probability of the creation of a simple organism
as being astronomically impossible.
What about a complex organism like the human being?
And then how did we rise to the top and develop the ability to
reason as we do.
The biological evolutionary process does not explain the highly
developed intelligence of man.
It does not explain the development of our ability to carry on
intelligible conversations with one another, to debate subjects such as
this, to build things with intricate detail (like cars & houses, etc.).
It does not explain the conscience, emotions, our ability to solve
problems, etc. All
evolutionary science can say is, “It happened over time.”
I get a kick out of scientists describing intelligent animals, (i.e.
dolphins, chimpanzees, etc.), especially animal rights activists.
One goal of humanism has been to equalize us with all other
living things. But the
fact is that even in their most developed “intelligence” of EVERY other
species is primitive at best.
The “intelligence” of an animal consists of survival, primitive
behviors and trained responses.
Yes some animals are able to be trained to do complex tasks and
even choose the right alternative if given certain choices but only
to the degree that they have been trained and usually based upon a
sense of reward, etc.
But there is no, “Duke” (of baked bean fame), “Planet of the
Apes” or “Mr. Ed” or any of a number of fictitious animals we find in
Hollywood and books. And you
still don’t have the conscience, detailed reasoning, etc. that science
cannot explain.
The Bible answers the question in Genesis 1:26, “Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;…”
d.
The
fact of morality –
Exact standards of morality differ throughout the world, but there are
certain general moral principles that EVERY civilized society
understands, such as you cannot indiscriminately kill other humans just
for kicks and a need to respect certain boundaries for others.
So WHO determined what is moral and not moral?
There is a standard inherent within us.
Some have called it, “a sense of ought”.
That is there are things we naturally know we ought to do and
ought not to do. How did we
get that sense? Morality is
not explained by the evolutionary process.
What is interesting is that such reasoning is not existent in other
forms of life. Animals
may respect territories and such, but it is purely natural and based
upon their survival. They
don’t have a conscience of right and wrong.
But where did our developed morality come from?
IF we are just creatures of chance, then how can there be any moral
standards? Even humanists,
who say there is no absolute morality (they deny the existence of God,
etc.) set standards of decency in dealing with others.
Humanism says you should not do things that interfere with the
personal rights of others. I
ask, WHY? If there is
nothing beyond this life, why not live totally for yourself?
Their reasoning on morality is hypocritical.
They deny absolute morality, but what would they do if their
child is killed by a drunk driver (whose moral standard permits him to
drink and drive) or someone steals their possessions.
What made the holocaust wrong - IF there is no absolute morality?
Why was Hitler so bad? What is the big deal about Muslim
extremists who believe they should kill anyone who will not submit? Why
should we condemn the warlords in Africa who are engaged in genocide?
If this world is nothing but a part of the natural process of
evolution (here only for a few billion years) why not live for
ourselves?
One might say, so that we can live
in peace. But why?
Who gives us the right to make that decision?
Furthermore, why would man be willing to give himself for another – if
there were not something within him that transcends selfishness?
Evolution is about survival of the fittest, each one out for itself.
That is contrary to morality.
IF there is no divine being to whom we must give an account, why
do anything for anyone else?
The Bible often speaks of morality (cf. Matt. 7:12, 25:34-46, etc).
Why? It is the
message from our Creator.
Morality makes sense if we are here for a purpose and there is someone
to whom we must answer beyond us.
e.
“Pascal’s Wager” –
Blaise Pascal was a 15th century apologist and mathematician.
He is referred to by some as “the father of probability” (all
those numbers mentioned above).
As to the existence of God, he presented a premise known as “Paschal’s
Wager.” In it he set out a
premise that even though the existence of God cannot be proved through
reason (i.e. it requires a certain amount of faith) he noted that when
the odds that God exists are even with those that He does not, the
prudent will wager that God DOES exist.”
He then noted that placing a wager is unavoidable since we already
exist.
The reasoning: If God exists and
one believes in Him, he has hope of eternal life.
But if God exists and one does NOT believe in Him, then when
proven wrong – his eternal fate is “infinite loss.”
On the other hand, if God does NOT exist, then he who believed in God
“suffering no infinite loss has lost nothing.”
But the atheist, though he was right has gained nothing.
Hence, the prudent choice is to believe that God exists.
It is worthy of note that Pascal did believe that one could “get a look
behind the scenes” meaning that there are many forms of evidence that
tend to prove the existence of God as being greater than that He does
not exist (i.e. miracles and prophecy). Thus
it is wiser to “wager” in favor of God.
Remember what Joshua said in Joshua 24:15, “And
if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose for yourselves this
day whom you will serve, whether the gods which your fathers served that
were on the other side of the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in
whose land you dwell, But as for me and my house, we will serve the
Lord.”
Remember also the words of Jesus, “What
profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world and loses his own
soul? Or what will a man
give in exchange for his soul?” (Matt. 16:26)
In this life you have to choose what you will believe and who you will
follow. BUT in this,
be prepared to face the consequences.
a.
Where &
when did life begin? How is matter eternal?
His failure to answer these questions leads to a life of misery and
hopelessness (i.e. no purpose).
b.
The faith
of an atheist –
There is no debate that the Christian life is based upon faith.
Our religion is based upon believing in God, believing God and
trust in Him. Heb. 11:1
states that “Faith is the
substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
Vs. 3, “Be faith we
understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that
things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.”
If you want to anger an atheist tell him he needs faith.
In fact, his faith must be as great if not GREATER than the
Christian.
o
By faith
he must deny the existence of God, even though the majority of people
believe in a divine being.
How does he explain that?
o
By faith
he must believe that matter is eternal, even though laws of science say
differently.
o
By faith
he must believe that life came from inorganic matter and then evolved in
ways that cannot be explained.
o
By faith
he must believe that man invented the concept of God because he wanted
to worship.
o
By faith
he must live life with the HOPE that there is nothing after it to which
he must answer.
There are too many questions that the atheist cannot answer to deny
the existence of God with certainty.
He too is a creature of faith – whether he wants to accept it or
not.
c.
If there
is no God, than where does that put this world? We are in a world
without any real hope.
d.
The lack
of absolute morality – if we are no better than animals, how can we
impose any standard of morality?
e.
Arguments
against creation:
i.
You
cannot prove there is a God.
With the five physical senses we cannot (sight, smell, taste,
touch & hearing). However
the consistent laws of science mentioned above point toward His
existence. Furthermore His
existence is STILL more logical than the arguments for matter being
eternal which is not consistent with laws of science.
ii.
Where
did God come from? How can
you prove He is eternal?
Again, you can’t with the physical senses.
But because God is Spirit (John 4:24 - that is of another realm)
it is something we cannot fully comprehend (just as we have difficulty
comprehending eternity). But
we know something had to exist BEFORE matter was created.
And that something had to be more powerful than matter and of
another realm. The concept
of God FITS into that category.
Eternal matter and evolution does NOT!
iii.
Why is
there evil in the world?
According to the atheist, evil implies a lack of design or
control. IF that were true,
it still doesn’t deny the existence of a creator.
It deals more with WHO is God rather than whether He exists or
not. An argument to be
addressed later.
iv.
The
theory of evolution diminishes the arguments for a creator.
Evolution claims that all things evolved over time, especially
living organisms. First of
all, this is not something that can be proved conclusively because there
simply too many gaps or “missing links” especially the transition from
inorganic (non-living) matter to organic (living) matter.
While some evolution is a valid process (e.g. the special theory)
in the development WITHIN a species, etc. conclusive evidence for the
general theory of evolution is still lacking.
But let us assume for a moment, that all things evolved according
to the general theory of evolution.
WHAT EXISTED BEFORE THAT?
Where did the matter come from?
v.
If
matter is eternal, then even the most improbable odds become not only
possible but probable.
With this argument you have still not explained the laws of
nature mentioned above (and others) that contradict this.
You haven’t explained the “spark” of life.
I find it interesting that evolution depends on a series of “cosmic
accidents” which are impossible according to natural laws.
Some refer to
Christians believe in call things similar to this “miracles” but we
acknowledge that they are not possible according to natural laws.
We attribute them to our Designer.
Matter, by its very design is not
eternal and you cannot prove it differently.
Having established the existence
of God, in future lessons we will endeavor to see who He really is.
My goal in this study is that with a proper and in depth
understanding of who God is, we will respond to Him as we ought to and
strive to make Him the priority He ought to be in our lives..
Recommended resources (with
caution)
http://www.doesgodexist.org ,
http://www.existence-of-god.com/
,
http://www.allaboutgod.com/does-god-exist.htm
.