Wednesday, May 26, 2004

Evolution vs. creationism: The faith of an atheist

Before responding to Peter Duran, I am compelled to admit that I also disagree in some respects with Jeremy Conley.

As a very conservative, evangelical Christian I am absolutely committed to the inerrancy of Scripture. I believe that all truth is God’s truth.

I believe the evidence provided by our Creator indicates that Darwin is bad science which requires far more faith than belief in a Creator.

However, I also believe the evidence tells us the earth and universe are billions of years old and that Noah’s flood was universal to mankind but not global.

I believe, as do many evangelical Christian apologists, that the Big Bang theory was first described by Moses about 3500 years ago, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”

Regarding Mr. Duran’s letter, I would like to respond with a few points. First, Mr. Duran makes the argument that if one sees clouds that spell out “see Rock City,” there is no reason to assume that there was any directed intelligence behind the existence of those clouds. I will leave it to the reader to decide whether they believe that to be a rational conclusion.

Examples of finding order and information in nature are given as atoms and galaxies. Using atoms as an example is rather like pointing to the existence of humans to prove Darwinism. Only by engaging in circular reasoning can this be used as an example.

By what mechanism did an undirected nature “create” the ordered complexity of an atom? Galaxy formation is rather like cloud formation in that it may show some order but it is beyond a stretch to imply that any specified complexity requirement is met.

In response to another letter, Mr. Duran uses the classic argument, “if God created the universe, who created God?”

The Law of Causality, upon which all science is based, tells us “anything which has a beginning, requires a beginner,” so that which does not have a beginning does not require a beginner.

I submit the evidence tells us the universe had a beginning, therefore the universe had a beginner. If someone wants to live their life assuming the Law of Causality always applies, well, except for just this once, then they have the right to do so. They should understand, however, that this is a statement of faith, not a statement of rationality.

Finally, Mr. Duran tells us that since imperfections exist in our world then “God couldn’t exist.”

God is not required to create to our idea of perfection. His ways are not our ways and his thoughts are not our thoughts. Perhaps God’s desire was to create an environment to most quickly conquer evil and to do that he made things in a way that don’t seem “perfect” to our limited minds.

We do not stand in judgment of God but in recognition and submission. This is a subjective argument and is popular with people who don’t have objective arguments on their side.

To be a committed naturalist, one has to believe (1) the universe sprang from nothing; (2) this “explosion” somehow generated all the laws of physics and nature; (3) the universe produced just the right galaxy, (4) and just the right solar system, (5) with just the right planet, (6) that has just the right moon, (7) and just the right Jupiter, (8) at just the right time.

(9) That life came from non-life (an event so improbable that science has virtually given up on it); (10) that extreme complexity came from simplicity; (11) and that it all happened completely by chance. They have to believe this in spite of the tremendous evidence against it.

Again, it is within one’s right to choose to bet their soul on it, but they should understand this is not a rational bet.

As Norm Geisler said, “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist.”

Pepper Adams

Peachtree City, Ga.

What do you think of this story?
Click here to send a message to the editor.