Think of nothing. Can you even imagine what nothing is?
Can something come from nothing?
Doesn't it take more faith to think that something came from nothing, than to believe that something was created? Anyone that does not believe there is a God is running on extreme faith because when you look at the universe and all of its intricacies, design, laws, and order - there is absolutely NO chance that it could have created itself.
No human has ever come close to explaining this and they never will be able to explain it without God (or at least some form of Intelligent design). The really sad part is that people actually think it is possible that something can come from nothing, because a few of the scientists have said so. The question is whether these scientists are speaking fact or fiction. Is what they say the truth?
Darwin discovered that species can change over time. That is all he did. He was not a genius, he was not any more special than you or me, he simply figured out a small part of the ultimate design that is the Universe. Since his time, people have formed a religion out of his idea of Evolution, now claiming that because evolution exists, there is no need for God. In no way if this logical, reasonable, or intelligent thought.
Another problem we have is time. People think that time can make the impossible possible. This idea is evidence of the complete ignorance and blindness of our culture. If you believe that time itself can make a red coke can blue, it shows that you are not aware of the reality that a coke can that is red will always remain red unless it is changed. If you believe there is no God you believe that the universe began with one single source - such as an element. But where did that element (or original source) come from?
Even so, one element alone cannot create an entire universe. In order for all of these to exists, there has to be something to change the purpose of all of these random elements coming together to create life. This is the only way different animals can occur, different plants, and different minerals... that one original source had to either be changed or change itself into something that could ultimately create all of the things that we see now. I can assure you that one speck of star dust, nor one speck of anything, can change itself. That speck, being the very first speck to exists, would not have had a chance to "evolve" yet so the chance of it having the ability to change itself and create multiple specks out of itself that all serve different purposes... is beyond unlikely. It is impossible.
If you find a Watch on the ground in the forest, there is no way you would ever think, "Oh wow, look what the dust, rain, and leaves came together to create over a period of billions and billions of years!" No, the idea is preposterous. You know that the watch was created by a human being because it is way too intricate to have been designed by chance and let alone, designed by itself.
The same goes for the Universe. Did you know they have counted over 70 Sextillion stars so far? Do you know the intricacies of how the eyeball works? Did you know that new discoveries are still being made about the individual cell? Do you really believe that everything that exists could come from one tiny speck of star dust that came to be on its own (which is what MANY well known scientists believe).
I think that takes more faith to believe that nonsense than to see with my very eyes the incredible CREATION that is the Universe. It's just so plain... how can someone not see it?
Evolution is not a reasonable theory, it is driven by culture and not fact. Evolutionists will do and say everything they can to try and prove that this theory has any legitimate claims and can coincide with science, but when it comes down to it they have nothing.
Not only do they have nothing but they are not willing to examine the claims of the creationist and therefore, they cannot be labeled as true scientists. To be a scientist you must look at ALL possibilities and be willing to follow the truth wherever it leads. That is the entire purpose of science.
If you study Darwin's Theory of evolution you will quickly discover the many many many errors (that evolutionists have since tried to correct by changing and developing the theory). Darwin himself had doubts of his theory - because of this ultimate question. He could not explain how something came from nothing.
Every evolutionist fails at answering their own questions about why the earth exists and how the universe came to be because they do not want to believe that God could exist. Yet, there is an overabundance of evidence that could persuade them IF they gave it a reasonable chance, just as they would for any other form of scientific study. Simply in the design alone of the universe is enough evidence. God can be proven without any mention of the Bible or Jesus. Look at your hand - do you know how it works? Do you know exactly how much goes into one simple movement of the finger? Is it even a plausible idea that this "machine" that is your finger could have created itself?
How about your brain? Just try to explain the evolution of that.
The question still lingers...
How did something come from nothing?
Many (if not most) scientists today acknowledge that this theory of evolution ridiculous and not a valid theory. However, our culture has grasped onto it SO tightly because it means that maybe, just maybe... life could have created itself and therefore, there is no need for a God. They have come up with evidence that is not evidence, facts that are not fact, and logic that is simply not logical, and for what? To give man some level of importance without the existence of God.
Famous philosophers and scientists have always struggled with this question of something coming from nothing because no matter what path they take to try and explain it, it always leads up to..."I don't know. I can't know."
What makes a scientist so much smarter than the average person? They go to school for a number of years, studying theories and ideas that other men have come up with before them. What makes people believe everything they hear a philosopher say? I have no more or less respect for scientists and philosophers because all they do is learn how the earth works and functions in a particular and universal manner, without ever thinking outside the box.
No matter how hard one tries to explain the box (that is the universe), you will never understand it until you look outside the box and see that nothing comes from nothing, and something always comes from something.
Step outside of culture and look outside of the box and take a look at what you see. Can you still believe that there isn't a God?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I've been doing quite a bit of thinking about theism and trying to gather pieces of evidence from all sides of the debate. There are many things from your post that I would like to comment on, but since my thoughts have come about not only from your writings, but from my readings as well, I will keep most of my thoughts in my own blog. If you are interested in reading about how one can question the existence of God and whether or not ID is the answer for our world, I encourage you to read some of what I'm writing.
I agree that everything in the universe appears to be designed. But I don't think the answer has to be either 'chance' or 'God.' There are other explanations in between. Using your 'watch in the forest' example, the watch, of course, did not come about by chance. It was designed by Mr. Smith. But Mr. Smith also is extremely complex and came from Mr. and Mrs. Smith. So, with the case of the universe and Intelligent Design, doesn't it only open up the larger question of who designed the designer? Aside from the answer that God is beyond and outside of science, how can this question be answered?
The question can be answered pretty easily, but it requires faith to understand it. If you're someone who faithfully believes in science, you're out of luck on this one unfortunately.
This is exactly why the Bible says we must have faith, because we are not God, we are not all knowing, we do not have any control or power over anything, we are nothing without Him. But if it is proof that you need, there is proof - but I can assure you, it will never be found in the mind of an unbeliever. You can't find out the truth about anything unless you go to the source of it or at least find a resource. In this case, it would be the Bible and any commentator/theologian that bases all of their writings on the Bible. If you base your understandings on culture, secular writings, and your own thoughts, you will never get anywhere. You will be asking yourself the same questions for as long as you live.
I know you are considering the claims of Christians, but what you should do is consider the claims of the Bible. Many Christians don't even know what the claims of the Bible are because they have not read it.
No one designed the designer. The designer has no beginning and no end, because time only exists in our universe. Outside of that is no time, and it is there that God exists, which is why he is all powerful, all knowing, and all present (he can be everywhere at one time). God is not a human by any means, yet he loves his creation. He created all of this and that is what makes his plan so amazing :)
My main qualm with your comment is the following, although I understand that comparing God with computers is unfortunate. I just feel it was the best example to demonstrate my point. It would be as if it is up for debate which is better, MAC or PC, but in order to find the answer you can only read evidence put forth by Apple and MAC users. It is hard for me to believe in God and the Bible when the only place to find an answer is in the Bible. Not trying to argue, only trying to point out where I get stuck with the logic. But then I'm guessing that with God, logic cannot be used! Again, mind boggling.
So for me as an unbeliever, in order to become a believer, I have to have faith and be a believer? Again, not trying to sound silly! :)
In the case of the MAC or PC dilemma, you would need to try them both to see which is actually better. In that case though, I don't think there is one that is better than the other, it is all subjective. In the case of evolution vs. intelligent design or creationism, you're dealing with fact or fiction. One is either true or not.
More people question the reliability of the Bible over *any other book or document in history*
My question is, why? There are over 24,000 manuscripts that date back to just 25 years after the New Testament events occurred. That is far more impressive than Caesar, Plato, Homer's Iliad, or any other document out there, which no one ever questions.
Nothing significant has changed in the Bible over the thousands of years it has been in existence. If anything, it is the most reliable book that has ever been written.
It is actually 66 books put into one book, that contains prophesies (that have been fulfilled and are being fulfilled now), history (that is unquestionably true), scientific facts that were not "discovered" until thousands of years later, and the Bible contains SO much wisdom and honesty.
This "story" that all of these authors have just "magically" put together is absolutely the most intricate, beautiful, and complex of all stories. A person can spend their life day after day studying it and still not be able to grasp all that it contains.
That is why it is worth reading. You cannot learn about cooking unless you read a cook book. You cannot learn about any history unless you read the most reliable source out there. I can assure you that you'll never learn about God through a book written by a man. The Bible claims to have been inspired by God himself, and I believe the proof of that is in its complexity and its continuity. There is no way these authors could have put this together on their own, because they lived in different time periods, they did not know each other, all they did was write about the events that occurred in their time, and looking back on those events today we can now see how ALL of it fits together. We are privileged to be living in such a time that we are able to see it. We have more evidence and proof than Christians had years ago, but they still had faith, because that is what it is all about. No amount of proof will do it, because this is all about something that is much bigger than science.
As for the believer/unbeliever question I don't quite understand the question. If you believe, then you are a believer. If you do not believer, you're not a believer. So, yes to be a believer you must have faith. I think maybe you are wanting some hard scientific proof (according to human standards) that is going to prove God's existence. However, the very fact that you are alive and the universe exists and all of the complexity of it all is all the proof that one *should* need.
I understand your dilemma though. If you ask a Christian if God is real of course they are going to say yes and if you ask an Atheist , he'll say there is no God, and so on. This is exactly why *faith* is what God requires, because it is up to you to decide where the evidence *points* and then decide which way to go (through faith).
In relation to God and should you ever come to a decision, it will be as a result of faith. You can have faith that there is no God or have faith that there is a God.
Post a Comment