He'll Understand and Say Well Done!
Thursday, August 29, 2019
Wednesday, August 28, 2019
Wednesday, August 21, 2019
Tuesday, August 20, 2019
The Information in DNA is Best Explained by a Creator
By Dennis Edwards
Our bodies not only have irreducibly complex biological machines at work in each and every cell, but each cell has a DNA molecule which holds the information needed for the cell to reproduce itself, repair itself, etc. The DNA is an information code, the computer code of the cell. Where did the information, the computer code we find in the DNA molecule come from? "There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.”[1] Therefore, where does the information in the DNA come from?
Dr. Stephen Meyer, a proponent of the Intelligent Design hypothesis, has written extensively on the subject. In his book, The Signature in the Cell, he deals with the problem that specified information, the kind we find in DNA - which is purposeful, gives to the Darwinian Theory of Evolution. He writes,
“Our uniform experience affirms that specified information – whether inscribed in hieroglyphics, written in a book, encoded in a radio signal, or produced in a simulation experimente – always arises from an intelligent source, from a mind and not a strictly material process. So the discovery of the specified digital information in the DNA molecule provides strong grounds for inferring that intelligence played a roll in the origin of DNA. Indeed, whenever we find specified information and we know the causal story of how that information arose, we always find that it arose from an intelligent source. It follows that the best, most causally adequet explanation for the origin of the specified, digitally encoded information in DNA is that it too had an intelligent source. Intelligent Design best explains the DNA enigma.”[2]
Nobel laureate and biochemist E.C. Komfield had a similar thought on the complexity within the cell when he observed the biological machines at work. He wrote,
“While laboring among the intricacies and definately minute particles in a laboritory, I frequently have been overwhelmed by a sense of the infinite wisdom of God…One is rather amazed that a mechanism of such intricacy could ever function properly at all…The simplist man-made mechanism requires a planner and a maker; how a mechanism ten times more involved and intricate can be conceived as self-constructed and self-developed is completely beyond me.”
Astronomer and mathematician Fred Hoyle who framed mathematically the Steady-State model of the universe and studied the mathematical probabilities of life forming randomly from non-life made the following comment:
“There is not a shred of objective evidence to support the hypothesis that life began in an organic soup here on earth. Indeed, Francis Crick, who shared the Nobel Prize for the discovery of the structure of DNA, is one biophysicist who finds this theory unconvincing. So why do biologists indulge in unsubstantiated fantasies in order to deny what is so patently obvious, that 200,000 amino acid chains, and hence life, did not appear by chance. The answer lies in a Theory developed over a century ago, which sought to explain the development of life as an inevitable product of the purely local natural process. Its author, Charles Darwin, hesitated to challenge the Church´s doctrine on the creation, and publicly at least did not trace the implications of his ideas back to their bearing on the origin of life. However, he privately suggested that life itself may have been produced in “some warm little pond,” and to this day his followers have sought to explain the origin of terrestrial life in terms of a process of chemical evolution from the primordial soup. But, as we have seen, this theory simply does not fit the facts.”[3]
With the help of his university students, Hoyle calculated the probability of life forming from non-life from some unknown natural process. He concluded,
“The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one to a number with 40,000 zeros after it. (Probability scientists consider one to a number with 50 zeros after it impossible, so thosands of zeros would dimish impossible beyond our ability to imagine.- Dennis) It is enough to bury Darwin and the whole General Theory of Evolution. There was no primordial soup, neither on this planet nor any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must, therefore, have been the product of purposeful intelligence.”[4]
The leaders of today’s scientific community are aware of these difficulties. Because of Hoyle’s vociferous attacks against the idea of life forming from non-life spontaneously, he was denied a Nobel Prize, though he was one of the most prominant astronomers and mathematicians of his time. So why do scientists ignore the obvious? A Professor of Genetics for many years at Harvard University, Richard Lewontin, candidly reveals the secret.
“We take the side of evolutionary science (that life came form non-life spontaneously) in spite of the patent absurdities of some of its constructs, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just so stories, because we have a prior committment to materialism, and that materialism is absolute for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door.”[5]
In other words, it is their pior belief system and committment to only materialistic explanations that force the scientists to reject supernational explanations even though the physical evidence is best explained by metaphysical means. They do not want a Divine foot in the door of scholastic thinking. Students would not be so quick to abandom faith and believe the unsubstaniated evolutionary stories.
Albert Einstein himself touched on Intelligent Design seen in the universe when he wrote the following:
“A scientist’s religious feelings take the form of raptuous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.”[6]
Some 300 years earlier Sir Isaac Newton came to a similar conclusion, but went a bit further along in his thinking, which led him to the God of the Bible and not just a "Universal Consciousness."
“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being…This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world (as the New Age philosophies teach – Dennis), but as Lord over all; and on account of His dominion He is wont to be called Lord God, or Universal Ruler.”[7]
From the DNA, to the biologically complex machines, to the harmony of natural law, to the movement of the celestial bodies themselves, all the evidence points to a Divine Creator God of superior intelligence. God is the best explanation for the information in the DNA molecule and God is the best explanation for the world we see and live in.
If you would like to read my online book Where is America in Bible Prophecy? click on the title.
Tuesday, August 13, 2019
Is There Enough Evidence to Believe?
Dennis Edwards
"Willing to appear openly to those who seek him with all their heart, and to be hidden from those who flee from him with all their heart, God so regulates the knowledge of himself that he has given indications of himself, which are visible to those who seek him and not to those who do not seek him. There is enough light for those to see who only desire to see, and enough obscurity for those who have a contrary disposition.”
Blaise Pascal, French Mathematician and Philosopher from his book “Pensées”
Paul of Tarsus said it a bit differently:
“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.”[1]
Paul tells us that the evidences for God are “clearly seen” so that all men are “without excuse.” He says unbelievers are “suppressing the truth.” In another discourse in Athens at the famous “Mars Hill” or the Areopagus Paul argued in this manner:
“I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god. So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship—and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.
“The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by human hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything. Rather, he himself gives everyone life and breath and everything else. From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’[b] As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’[c]
“Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed.He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”[2]
We see here that Paul is making a reasonable defence of belief in the Almighty God and uses the “fact” or evidence of the resurrection as its “proof.”
But like Pascal notes, some men “flee from Him with all their hearts.” In other words, they willing do not want to believe. Something has happened in their lives that they reject the existence of God. For me, as a young adult, it was the fact that my girlfriend left me for someone else that caused me to reject my childhood faith and God with it. At the same time I was in university and one course after another was attacking the principles of my Christian belief system.
In Geology, I was learning evolution and millions of years of earth time which I accepeted readily and came to the conclusion that if evolution was true then I need not believe in God. My new “Creation Myth” in scientific clothing was intellectually rewarding and freed me from the moral code I had adhered to throughout my childhood. I was free. God was dead and so I could do what I wanted to and that extended to how I interacted with the opposite sex.
What did my new found freedom and belief system result in? It resulted in a sexual behavior best described in today’s terms as attempted date rape. Afterwards, I was disgusted with myself for acting like an animal, though if we come from monkeys and there is no God, why should we be surprised when we actually act like monkeys. Dostoyevski , the Russian writer, wrote,
“If there is no God, then everything is my will and I must express my will.”[3] Or as it is often stated today, “If there is no God, then everything is permissible.” The idea of Nike’s “Just Do It” is a catch phrase for mankind to just do his will and forget there is a God. We’ve been taught to “just do it” and are upset that some people are following that thought process to the extreme even to the point of killing others to fulfill “their will” and express there “divinity.”
The Apostle Peter about two thousand years ago predicted that men would be “willingly ignorant” or ignorant on purpose in the last days. When we fall into unbelief, we don’t want to see the evidences, we don’t want God in our lives. We willingly reject Him.
“Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires (or lusts in the KJV). They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.”[4]
When we reject the knowledge of God, we reject the creation story, the flood record, and the belief of a final judgment. We change our initial belief system into naturalism and exclude the supernatural from our way of thinking. Therefore, we look for only natural explanations of events that take place in the present or in the past. The supernatural is not in our thinking any longer and even if evidence seems to point in the direction of the supernatural, we ignore it. We cling to our naturalistic thinking even though it may not have a very convincing argument or explanation for the evidence at hand. We say, “Well, we don’t understand it now, but in time science will figure it out.”
Here’s a funny and sad response from Richard Dawkins one of today’s outspoken atheists when he was pushed to answer what evidence would convince him that God exists.
“Well, I used to say it would be very simple. It would be the second coming of Jesus or a great, big, deep, booming, bass Paul Robeson voice saying, “I am God, and I created.” But I was persuaded…that even if there was this booming voice coming in the clouds of glory, the more probable explanation is that it’s a hallucination, or a conjuring trick by David Copperfield, or something….A supernatural explanation for anything is incoherent. It doesn’t add up to an explanation for anything.”
Dawkins was further pushed to answer the question about evidence and concluded,
“Well, I’m starting to think NOTHING would, which, in a way, goes against the grain, because I’ve always paid lip service to the view that a scientist should change his mind when evidence is forthcoming.” [5]
In other words, Dawkins is confessing that nothing would persuade him. Even if Jesus appeared in the clouds with the holy angels Dawkins would consider that he was delusional and needed pyschiatric help.
Paul of Tarsus, however, has explained what has happened to people like Dawkins.
“In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.”[6]
Pascal says there is enough obscurity for those who have a contrary or disbelieving disposition to not believe. But Paul tells us that actually in their rejection of God, Satan has blinded the understanding of the unbeliever so that they cannot see God. Paul even goes as far to say that God allows them to believe a lie. If that’s what they want, God lets them have it.
“…because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie.”[7]
In the writings of Job, the oldest book in the Bible we find Job saying,
“But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee: Or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee: and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee. Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this? In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.”[8]
In other words, Job is explaining that in our study of animal life, of birds, of geology, of marine creatures we will find that they testify to a Divine Being. Our scientific research should lead us to God. The famous rocket scientist Verner von Braun said,
“My experiences with science led me to God. They challenge science to prove the existence of God. But must we really light a candle to see the sun?”[9] The next quote is by George Washington Carver famous African American scientist:
An honest scientist will go where the evidence leads him. But the trouble is there are very few “honest” scientists. Most are confined within their philosophical belief system and will not accept evidence that is contrary to what they believe. They will always interpret the evidence in accordance to their belief system even if they don’t realize they are doing so. They can’t see the evidence any other way.
C.S. Lewis was one of those rare atheist who followed the evidence of Christianity and came to belief in God even though it was contrary to his initial belief system. He later wrote about his new Christian world view in his essay “Is Theology Poetry?” and said,
“I believe in Christianity as I believe the sun has risen. Not only because I can see it, but because by it I can see everything else.”
His Christian worldview gave him an understanding that he hadn’t had before hand. He saw things differently than he had before. A very similar experience had happened with Saint Augustine who had been a libertine until the time of his finding God. Augustine said,
“Seek not to understand that ye might believe, but seek to believe that you might understand.”
Augustine is telling us that belief in God helps us to have a better understanding of the world around us. Therefore, we should seek to believe. We should investigate to find the truth, to find faith. Like God has said that if we should seek Him, we would find Him, if we would search for Him with all our heart.[10]
Simon Greenleaf the founding father of Harvard’s Law School said the following after his investigation into the evidences of Christianity:
“Of the Divine character of the Bible, I think, no man who deals honestly with his own mind and heart can entertain a reasonable doubt, For myself, I must say, that having for many years made the evidences of Christianity the subject of close study, the result has been a firm and increasing conviction of the authenticity and plenary inspiration of the Bible. It is indeed the Word of God.”[11]
British scholar Sir Frederick Kenyon after twenty-fives years of intense study of the ancient texts avaiable from the Holy Land including the Dead Sea Scrolls said,
“The Christian can take the whole Bible in his hand and say without fear or hesitation that in it he holds the true word of God handed down without essential lost from generation to generation throughout the centuries.”[12]
King David also had something to say about the evidence.
“The heavens declare the glory of God the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. Yet their voice[b] goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.”[13]
The evidence is there for those who seek for it with an open and honest heart.
Notes:
[1] Romans
1:18-21 (NIV)
[2] Acts
17:22-31 (NIV)
[4] 2 peter
3:3-7
[6] 2 Corinthians
4:4
[7] 2
Thessalonians 2:10b-11
[8] Job 12:7-10
[10]
Jeremiah 29:13 “And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye
shall search for me with all your heart.
[12] Kenyon,
Sir. Frederick, “Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts” found in Gowens,
Michael, L., “Be Ready to Answer,” p.36
[13] Psalm
19:1-4 (NIV)
