Evolution - is it reality?!

Okay, later than intended (due to my failure to publish the previous post when I had intended to do so!), a few comments on the film that my wife and I watched at the "Cité de l'Océan" exhibition in Biarritz.

As already stated, the English-language version was narrated by David Attenborough - a convinced evolutionist. This meant that everything was interpreted as evidence for Charles Darwin's celebrated theory. There, of course, is the first problem for what is now known as "neo-Darwinism" - it is a theory! 

Now, I have been challenged on that claim before now. I have been told that the word "theory", when used by Darwin, does not mean what most people understand by it! What has never been made clear to me is what it does mean! The dictionary definition of "theory" will be slightly different depending on which particular dictionary is used. However, the Cambridge English Dictionary states that a theory is: "a formal statement of the rules on which a subject of study is based or of ideas that are suggested to explain a fact or event or, more generally, an opinion or explanation." In other words, a theory is not a proven fact! 

What I found interesting in the film that we watched, was the frequent use of the word "perhaps"! "Perhaps" this happened; "perhaps" that happened; "perhaps" something else happened! However, in the next sentence, that "perhaps" had become an established fact! That, I have to say, is something that I have discovered to be the case, over and over again, throughout a goodly number of years being interested in the subject. 

Science should be, I would claim, a constant seeking after knowledge. "The scientist ... must be free to ask any question, to doubt any assertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors." (J.Robert Oppenheimer; Physicist). True science should look at evidence, not close its eyes to anything that doesn't fit its own particular ideas. A scientific "fact" is something that is both observable, and repeatable. The theory of evolution is neither!

On the other hand, when I observe the world around me - whether I look at the delicate petals of a tiny flower; the exquisite colours and patterns of the wings of some butterflies; the night sky with its myriad of stars, all moving in such a way that we are able to predict where they will be, in our line of vision, in six months' time - or sixty years!; a murmur of starlings performing their aerial acrobatics in the sky above me; an aeroplane taking off from the nearby Bergerac Airport; or a thousand and one other things; I see overwhelming evidence of design, and planning, and creation.

I am, of course, a fully convinced creationist - and I make no apology for being so. I would also claim that I am not some uneducated, mentally retarded, 'brainwashed', person. I have a considerable list of formal academic qualifications, and (for what it's worth!) a reasonable IQ. However, even if one does not accept the existence of a supernatural Being, Who created all that exists by the power of His Word, and to Whom, in the English language, we ascribe the nomenclature "God", I fail to understand how any unbiased, right-minded, person can fail to see order and design all around us.

Of course, "intelligent design" (ID) does raise the question of the identity of the Designer - but that is another issue!

If you have the time, and the inclination (and almost an hour to spare!), I commend this video to you. If, part of the way through, you decide that you don't wish to watch any more, at least scroll to 55'50 - and make sure that you wait until 56'00! You may be surprised!

https://youtu.be/7ToSEAj2V0s

Life on Mars!

"Its near perfect design and shape means it must be the result of intelligent design and certainly not a trick of light and shadow" (Paranormal Crucible web site computer narration).

An interesting comment, I hope you will agree!  It refers to a pyramid-shaped  object, photographed by the Mars "Curiosity Rover" - the unmanned space vehicle, placed on the surface of the Red Planet, by NASA (North American Space Administration).  According to those who believe that there was (or still is!) civilised life on Mars, it is clear evidence of an intelligence that designed, and built, the "structure".

Perhaps it is; perhaps it is not.  What I find fascinating is that the majority, if not all, of those who would make this astounding claim, will still insist that the universe itself is merely the result of random chance events over billions of years!  They will insist that the complexity of the eye - mammal, fish, or insect - "just happened" in a series of "evolutionary" changes (for which there is absolutely no evidence of which I am aware!).

If one is prepared to examine the subject with a truly open mind, one quickly realises that there is, indeed, design and purpose behind all that we see and experience - on planet Earth, and beyond!  The only question is:"Who designed it all"?

The Old Testament book of Genesis (Beginnings) gives a clear and simple answer: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen.1:1).  Those who refuse to accept that simple statement do so, not on the basis of what they claim to be "scientific evidence", but because they are not prepared to accept the very existence of One to Whom all of mankind is ultimately answerable.  They demand 'evidence' for the existence of God, unable, or unwilling, to recognise that such evidence is all around them.

Whether we examine the immensity, and the regularity, of the cosmos; or whether we marvel at the workings of DNA; we are surrounded by evidence of intelligent design - and only the blinkered will claim otherwise.  

However, the most amazing thing is that this wonderful Creator of all that is, desires to be in a loving relationship with weak, sinful, human beings such as you, and me.  To make that possible, He took upon Himself human flesh and, in the Persona (not a typo - see my book: "Great Words" - details above - and the chapter on "Trinity") of Jesus of Nazareth, lived a human life - yet without sin, in any shape, manner, or form. (see Heb 4:15).  Out of that great love for us, He even went to the cross, becoming sin for us, and dying the death that we deserve. (see Rom.5:8; II Cor.5:21; inter al).  Before He breathed His last, he uttered a great shout of triumph - in the Greek language in which the New Testament is largely written, the single word "Tetelestai" - "Finished!" (Jn.19:30).  He had completed the amazing work of salvation, and the way had been opened for those who come to Him, confessing their sins, repenting of those sins, and seeking His help through the indwelling of God the Holy Spirit, to come into the presence, and know the fellowship, of that same Creator God.

Have you made that move?  He is ever waiting - but not for ever!  "Behold, now is the acceptable time; behold, now is the day of salvation." (II Cor 6:2; emphasis added).

He has been my Saviour, and Lord, and Friend, for more years than I care to consider.  I have often let Him down (and still do!); but He has never let me down.  I commend Him to you and, as always, if you think that I may be able to be of help at a personal level, please feel free to contact me via the e-mail address at the top of the page. 

 

It was Humpty Dumpty!

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less." (Through the Looking Glass; ch.6)

We seem to be living in an increasingly Humpty Dumpty world.  As a "child who was born on the Sabbath Day" (well, it was actually a Sunday - but in the little rhyme, the two terms are synonymous!), I was always happy to claim to living up to what I was supposed to be: "bonnie, and blithe, and good, and gay".  However, I am less likely, today, to refer to myself by that last adjective.

Likewise, politicians in a number of parts of the world have, recently, redefined the word 'marriage'.  All that it now means is that two (for the moment!) people declare love for one another.  There is no need for even the possibility of procreation; and there are still questions as to what would constitute grounds for divorce!

Even as long-standing a word as 'evolution' seems to be able to change (or ought I to say, evolve?!) its meaning.  I have been reading up on SEO (Search Engine Optimisation) with regard to getting more 'traffic' to this blog.  In one article, I read: "Thus, through evolution, smart engineers at the engines devised better ways to find valuable results that searchers would appreciate and enjoy."

Two things jumped out at me.  First of all, there was the interesting juxtaposition of 'evolution' and 'devised'.  Surely, I asked myself, the whole point of evolution is that it is the result of random choices made over a very long period of time?!  If something is 'devised', that clearly implies that there has been forethought, planning, design.  It certainly doesn't sit well with a notion of random choice.

Nor should it.  The second thing that I saw was the reference to "smart engineers".  That suggests a certain level of intelligence - certainly not a mindless, chaotic, series of accidentally fortuitous circumstances!

Of course, this is the point made by the proponents of ID (Intelligent Design) - that there is abundant evidence in the known universe for us to be able to postulate a creative, intelligent, mind behind all that is. As the old advertisement, for something or other, had it: "You know it makes sense!" 

Speaking, by telephone, with a very dear friend in the south of England, earlier this evening (or last evening, if one wishes to be pedantically accurate - it is now past midnight!) we discussed, among other things, this very point.  Charles Darwin confessed that his theory with regard to the origin of species was flawed by the failure to discover fossil evidence of any of the necessary 'intermediate' creatures.  However, more than 200 years after his birth, and more than 150 years after the publication of On the Origin of Species, such evidence is still notable by its absence.

Another problem, recognised by Darwin, concerns the eye.  He wrote: “To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”  Indeed, the thousands of elements in the single-lens eye must all be in position, and working correctly, for that eye to have any vision.  Take away any of the elements, and the eye simply doesn't function!

Evolution is, in fact, a pseudo-science that provides a philosophical framework for those who refuse to admit the existence of a Creator to Whom we are all, ultimately, accountable.  It is the refuge of those who are like the Biblical 'fool' who says in his heart, "There is no God"! (Ps.14:1).  By the way, the Hebrew word used (nabal) refers to someone who is 'empty-headed' in a morally deficient sense, not to someone who is intellectually wanting.

Praise God, He has not left Himself without witness, and the day is coming - perhaps sooner than many think - when at the Name of Jesus (Who, of course, is God the Son) every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that He is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (see Phil.2:10-11).

Richard Dawkins' Selective Courage

It has been noted, in the past, that Richard Dawkins - the 'high priest' of modern secular humanism - is very forthcoming with arguments, insults, and bullying directed at non-scientists and especially folks who adhere to Biblical creationism, even as he is notably hesitant about engaging scientists who advocate intelligent design (ID) and who would present him with the evidence of purpose and design in life. Even a fellow atheist has called Dawkins a coward for refusing to debate Centre for Science & Culture fellow William Lane Craig.  He has also refused to openly debate with Rev David Robertson, minister to St Peter's Free Church, Dundee, and Founder of SOLAS (Centre for Public Christianity).

In fact, Dawkins simply refuses to properly confront the arguments for ID - never mind in the high-stress context of a public debate but even in the safety of his own books, where he also prefers to lambaste creationists. In this he's a lot like other prominent champions of neo-Darwinism.

Now in a very different context, Prof. Dawkins is being called out as being somewhat less than heroic. He is of course a great fountain of abuse and contempt for Judaism and Christianity, but were you ever curious about what he'd say if somebody queried him on the merits of Islam?  Well, it's happened.  Douglas Murray writes in the Jewish Chronicle (February 24, 2013):

"In a recent Al-Jazeerah interview, Richard Dawkins was asked his views on God. He argued that the God of "the Old Testament" is "hideous" and "a monster," and reiterated his claim from The God Delusion that the God of the Torah is the most unpleasant character "in fiction." Asked if he thought the same of the God of the Qur'an, Dawkins ducked the question, saying: "Well, um, the God of the Qur'an I don't know so much about."

How can it be that the world's most fearless atheist, celebrated for his strident opinions on the Christian and Jewish Gods, could profess to know so little about the God of the Qur'an? Has he not had the time? Or is Professor Dawkins simply demonstrating that most crucial trait of his species: survival instinct."

Two cheers for Al-Jazeerah for posing the question. That is delicious. Clearly, the risk-averse Prof. Dawkins knows what's good for him! You can spend all your time railing in public against "hideous" and "monstrous" Christian and Jewish beliefs without fearing for a moment for your safety. 

Some members of other faiths would be less easygoing!

The heavens declare the Glory of God.

One of my German friends, who worked at the time in the family's fine engineering business, showed me the kind of tolerance levels to which the company worked in its machining of metal components.  There was a large circle, drawn on a large sheet of paper.  If my memory serves me well, that circle was about 18" (45cm) in diameter.  In the middle was a dot.  The circle, my friend informed me, represented 1 cm. (0.4").  The dot, to the same scale, represented the tolerance to which the company machined!

I thought back to that event when I was reminded, today, that on July 4th of this year, physicists at the CERN facility in Geneva announced the discovery of a particle that may well be the elusive "Higgs' boson" - referred to, in the popular media, as "the God particle".

One of the staff in the U.S.A. Department of Energy's laboratory in Chicago (which is exclusively dedicated to the study of particle physics), a gentleman who is also a disciple of Jesus, has said this: "Science reveals the nature of God.  ... In the 1980s, we seldom talked about God in scientific circles.  But in the 90s, scientists realised they didn't know anything about the vast majority of the universe.  Now, in the 2000s, scientists discuss the possibiity of a Supreme Being at scientific lectures and colloquia ... Every two to four years, knowledge doubles in the various fields of science ... we are realising that we hardly know anything."  http://ag.org/top/News/index_articledetail.cfm?targetBay=c97d4d5c-a325-4921-9a9e-e9fbddd9cdce&ModID=2&Process=DisplayArticle&RSS_RSSContentID=23358&RSS_OriginatingChannelID=1184&RSS_OriginatingRSSFeedID=3359&RSS_Source

I am reminded that even Albert Einstein stated that: "Everyone who is seriously interested in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the universe- a spirit vastly superior to man, and one in the face of which our modest powers must feel humble."   Long before Einstein, Johannes  Kepler described science as: "thinking God's thoughts after Him."

The point is that, to use my engineering friend's illustration, if that circle was to be drawn ten times its size, and this was to represent the sum total of all of the knowledge in the universe, then what mankind actually knows would not even be enough to be represented by that dot (left at the same size!) in the middle.

Of course, there will always be those who will refuse to accept even the possibility of the existence of the Creator. They are those of whom Paul wrote: "The coming of the lawless one by the activity of Satan will be with all power and with pretended signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are to perish, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.  Therefore God sends upon them a strong delusion, to make them believe what is false, so that all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness." (II Thess 2:9-12; RSV).

Centuries before Paul, the Psalmist-king of Israel wrote: "The heavens are telling the glory of God; and the firmament proclaims His handiwork." (Ps 19:1; RSV).  They still declare that glory today - to those who have eyes to see!