This is my 50th blog post. I’ve enjoyed immensely this outlet for the conveyance of biblical truth and perspective. And I have equally enjoyed interacting with many of your thoughts in the comment threads and in personal emails or Facebook notes. In no way do I pretend to have all of the answers or the uniquely biblical perspective in any given situation. But so far, this experience has been one of great advantage for me. It has forced me to dig deeper and study harder than I ever have before. For that especially, I am grateful.
When deciding on the topic for this blog, I wrestled with may possibilities. But after much deliberation, I decided to address the perspective of fallaciousness toward the biblical account, as applied by the popular culture. Over the past one-hundred years or so, and exponentially increasing by the year, there has been suspiciousness, and even outright denial of biblical truth. The idea that the Bible could contain the historical account of the beginning of life, and even more suspiciously, an accurate historical narrative concerning the plan and involvement of God for the salvation and restoration of mankind, has been deemed illogical. In academia, it is largely believed that the Bible and science don’t mix – That faith is pitted against logic – That to believe in the God of the Bible is to turn away from reality.
In this blog, I would like to demonstrate that the opposite is true. Namely, that science and all of its discoveries leads us to the God of the Bible – That to believe in scientific claim in place of Scripture is illogical – That God Himself is the ultimate reality, and that which denies Him is fallacious itself.
Part I. There Is A God.
Academia would have us believe that all of life that exists and has ever existed has come about by pure chance. The alignment of certain criteria at just the right time throughout history has ultimately formed us as we are today – and in this same manner, we continue to evolve. Instead of attacking all the specifics here (because there are MANY good books which address these issues in their entirety), I would like only to address the logic behind the claim.
First, we must establish a clear understanding of worldview. Worldview is how we “view” the world. It has been metaphorized as the “glasses through which we see the world.” I am a biblical Christian. Every event that takes place in the world, I see through the the lens of scripture. An atheist would see the same events in a completely different perspective, or at least to a different degree.
Short example: A powerful earthquake hits Japan. I see it as part of God’s historical narrative – and ultimately as a sign that Jesus is coming back soon (based on several passages of scripture from the Bible). An atheist would see it as tectonic plates rubbing at fault lines and nothing more. I also believe in these mechanics. No question there… but I see it as part of a bigger picture.
Allow me to also testify that science is a GOOD THING! I believe that the God of creation instituted these scientific laws and facts (which we discover from time to time) in order to allow the universe to function as He desires. Discovering God’s scientific laws leads us into a deeper understanding of His order, design, and omnipotence.
That being said, there is a significant problem with a purely scientific worldview. The general, overarching conviction of a purely scientific worldview is that nothing comes from nothing. Matter does not generate itself; it can only be formed from other matter. Logically, this presents a big problem…
According to the theory of evolution (secularly held as fact now, although there are immense holes in the theory), humans and monkeys evolved from a common primate – which evolved from Amniotes – which evolved from Tetrapods – etc., etc., etc… until we get back to some ambiguous single-celled organism – from there, scientists are unsure of the process by which carbon-based life began. The biggest difficulty with this theory is the problem of a “First Cause.”
Let’s say the universe was created by a “Big Bang” of sorts… What existed that produced this bang? I know, I know… Nitrogen and Hydrogen in space. Well, where did the Nitrogen and Hydrogen come from? And where did the space come from? At some point, one must believe (have faith) that something (possibly elements, some matter, or minimally – space) “just was.” This belief is logically inconsistent with the purely scientific worldview. In other words, it is illogical to hold a purely scientific worldview. Essentially, the scientific statement would be something like, “I believe in evolution, and that matter only comes from matter. But I believe that the first matter came from nothing.” Science cannot explain the problem of the “First Cause.” It is impossible.
Instead, from scientific discovery, we can determine that it is more logical to believe in creation. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity is an incredible example of this. There are many aspects to this theory, but one conclusion (widely – almost uniformly – accepted by scientists) is that time, space, and matter must have all come into existence at the same point – because they cannot function independently of each other. Following this to its logical conclusion, if all three of these elements came into being at the same point, the undetermined “First Cause” who/that would be responsible must be outside of their (the elements’) restrictions. He/it cannot possibly be restricted by the aforementioned elements because He/it existed before they came into being.
However, if I believe in an all powerful God who created the universe (those elements of time, space, and matter), then it is perfectly logical for me to believe that He formed the world and everything in it in six days, as scripture describes. There is no logical inconsistency there.
At the very least, it is undeniable that holding any given position on the origin of the universe takes some amount of faith. Those with a scientific worldview have faith in their logic, their ability to understand the natural world, their theory, nature itself, or some combination of these. Those who hold a biblical worldview have faith in the God of the Bible.
Part II. He Is The Ultimate Existence.
Since, as above proven, it is more logical to have faith in a supernatural Being than to not have faith in a supernatural Being, we should at this point deduce some things about this Entity – so that we can more clearly understand our own purpose.
The unmitigated nature of this “First Cause’s” creation (the bringing about of time, space, and matter) reveals some important qualities of It. Firstly, It is omnipotent (all-powerful). It created everything that we know. The Creator of something is not confined by its limitations, thus, It is more powerful than the natural world’s restrictions.
Secondly, It is orderly. Its creation functions within and through systematic order – elements, physical and natural laws, rotations and revolutions, etc. Whatever this Being is, It is obviously orderly.
Thirdly, there is an element of design. This Being created time, matter, and space to work together and purposefully. Since the three (according to the accepted Theory of Relativity, as above mentioned) elements of time, space, and matter work together purposefully, there is a personal dimension to the creation. There was a reason that the creation was brought about. And since they work together so essentially, it is logically deducible that the Creating Being designed them to function in that manner.
Fourthly, this Being is the owner of existence. If It created existence, It is the rightful owner of that existence. All that there is, which has been made under Its authority, rightfully belongs to It.
Lastly, this Being is eternal. Not only pre-existent, but also ever-existent. Remember, time was one of the elements brought into existence by the Creator. Therefore, It (the Creator) is not confined by its (time’s) limitations. The Creator has always been, and always will be.
If this Being, the “First Cause,” is eternal, omnipotent, orderly, and purposeful, then it is the highest, and most absolute representation of reality that exists. Since It is before all, and has the power to end all, then there is nothing more “real” that Itself. It is the ultimate expression of what power is. It is the ultimate expression of what design is… of purpose, of order… of existence. It is more real than anything else that exists. This Being is the ultimate existence.
Thus, if this Being were to reveal more of Its nature or character, then It would also be the most perfect representation of whatever aspect it reveals. If love is part of Its character, then It is the purest representation of love. If morality is part of Its character, then It is the purest representation of morality. And so forth. In every aspect, It is “holy” – meaning, set apart.
Part III. His Creation Messed Up.
If this Being made everything for Its pleasure, and put incredible thought and creativity into the intricacies involved, then how grand it was for It to enjoy Its perfect creation! It must have been glorious to interact with, hold, and enjoy what It had purposefully made. But what would happen if this creation rebelled against its Creator? That which the Creator had made perfect would become stained, scarred, and fallible.
The Bible tells us that creation was made with freedom of choice. And because that creation chose imperfection over perfection (selfish desire over the Creator’s perfect plan), it is now fallen to a degree. Adam, the first created human, walked and talked with the Creator. This is perfectly logical – seeing that Adam was an unstained representation of the Creator’s being. Adam and Eve came to call this Creator “He,” and “God.” And who would know the Creator better than one who walked and talked with Him? But Adam chose to rebel against God. He disobeyed because of his temptation to be like God. Adam sinned against his Creator.
Because of this single event, creation is no longer what the Creator made it to be. If the Creator is the ultimate expression of morality, then that which rebelled against It would inevitably be immoral. If the Creator is the ultimate expression of love, then that which rebelled against It would inevitably be unloving. Its perfection – creation’s imperfection. Its purity – creation’s impurity. It’s holiness – creation’s unholiness. This presents a catastrophic problem. How can That which is the purest expression of perfection condone or entertain imperfection? How can That which is the purest expression of morality condone or entertain immorality? Enter the great divide. An all-powerful Creator separated from His creation by its rebellion.
HOLD ON A MINUTE… Time Out, Tony! What about the countless evidence that humans evolved from a primate? And the evidence for an earth that is billions of years old? And since the Bible was written a few thousand years after it claims creation happened, how can we be sure of its accuracy?
EVIDENCE for human EVOLUTION – What evidence? Show me the remains/bones of the various stages between primate and humanity. There are none. We have remains of primates (maybe even extinct primates), and we have remains of human-figured people. We do not have remains of anything between. Surprised? This is one of science’s greatest fallacies. The evolution of humans from primates is speculatory at best.
EVIDENCE for an old EARTH – “Carbon Dating.” Scientists, for 50-65 years now have believed they can determine the age of carbon-based organisms by determining the breaking-down of carbon in their remains. First of all, let me say that this is also a theory, not a fact. There have been multiple credible scientists who believe that carbon breaks down at differing rates in reference to the age of the remains. For instance… it may break down twice or ten times as fast once it passes two thousand years old as it does once it passes fifty years old. There is no proof. Secondly, let me assure you that carbon dating has had its own laughable mistakes. I CHALLENGE YOU – if you don’t believe me, please click HERE to read an article which explains some major mistakes of carbon dating, and gives objective examples of its carbon dating mistakes made recently. (Here is an interesting, but short, article from the New York Times testifying to these assertions – just in case you are interested.) (Here is an article revealing some of the mistakes with carbon 14 dating and dinosaurs.)
ACCURACY of the biblical ACCOUNT – Adam walked and talked with God. He got his information from the Source. According to the historical data in Genesis 5, Adam walked and talked with Methuselah for 243 years (243 years of telling the creation account first hand). Methuselah walked with Shem for 98 years, and Shem with Abraham for 150 years. That’s only three generations between Adam talking with God Himself and Abraham fathering the nation of Israel. The Hebrews were an oral culture, priding themselves in storytelling. There is very little chance of inaccuracy here, and if an inaccuracy was taught, it would have quickly been corrected by someone who had heard the story from an earlier source.
Are the old ages a difficulty for you? In Psalm 90, Moses writes that God limits a man’s years to 70 or 80 years. This tells us that he knew exactly what he was writing when he recorded (in Genesis, as its author) the ages of these men of old. Why do we no longer live for that long? – the influence of sin has scarred every aspect of creation. Death entered the world because of it; as sin’s and imperfection’s influence perpetuates, its effects multiply.
Part IV. God Reveals Himself More Fully to His Creation.
With humanity fallen, and God’s perfect creation only a shadow of its former self, the Creator
of all things decides to reveal Himself more fully to His creation. As time, which God created along with matter and space, elapsed, He would show more and more of His character and reality to His creations. The individuals with whom He spoke recorded His words on scrolls and tablets. They were hand-copied over the years with incredible accuracy, as archaeological studies have shown, and are more reliable than any other document from antiquity…
Over 5,500 original manuscripts of the New Testament books exist, having been handwritten over a 50 year period (50A.D. to 100A.D.) in their original language, Greek – at 99.5% accuracy. For a comparison to how this compares with other documents widely accepted by academia as accurate and reliable, click Here. <— But I warn you, it is difficult to deny their accuracy after you read this stuff.
Well, there you have it. Believing in the God of the Bible is logical. He and His revelation to mankind (the Bible) can be and have been upheld by scientific discovery, archaeological finds, historical records, and mathematical statistics. What else do you need?
Grace and Peace,