Babies are aborted for convenience even in the ninth month of pregnancy. Elderly and disabled people are quietly “put down” because someone decided their lives were no longer worth living. The Internet has created unprecedented levels of addiction to pornography. Governments run numbers rackets that they once prosecuted mobsters for running. Court decisions about sodomy laws and same-sex “marriage” reveal a basic confusion about human sexuality. Activists even are pushing society to accept sexual relationships between adults and children.

Everyone seems to agree that no one can know for sure what’s right or wrong for someone else. Christians are dismissed as “judgmental” or “intolerant” if they disagree with the moral choices other people make. Almost everyone rejects the idea of moral truth that applies to all people everywhere. Yet those same people have strong feelings about justice and injustice, and they expect others to agree with them! No one seems to realize the contradiction. Both those beliefs can’t be true, yet we believe them both!

People don’t realize the idea of right and wrong no longer makes any sense. If there are no moral absolutes, then nothing is wrong or unjust. If everyone decides right and wrong for himself, then no one should be punished for doing whatever he wants. It’s only a matter of time before civilized society is completely impossible.

The problem is that we’ve believed two false ideas that make it impossible to maintain just, free society.

If we just stop and think about those ideas for a moment, it becomes very clear that they aren’t true. But most of us are caught up in the pressing problems of daily life and just don’t spend much time thinking about questions like “How can people know what is true about religion and morals?”

Christians say we have the solution, but in fact we’re part of the problem. We can tell unbelievers what God says is right and wrong, but we can’t imagine what to say when they tell us religion and morals are just matters of personal belief. Most of us actually agree! “You can’t prove God and Jesus,” we say. “You just have to take it on faith.”

We can’t be “salt and light” in lost society, because we think just like lost society thinks.

And there’s the heart of the problem: Almost no one believes you can prove what is true when it comes to religion and morals. But the truth is, if you can’t prove it, there’s no hope of creating just, free society. If we can’t prove Christianity is true, we can’t offer our world any real hope, either in this life or the next, because it’s all just a matter of opinion anyway.

If Christians don’t stop for a moment and think about this one question – and understand this one crucial truth – then our world will continue its steady slide into chaos. New depravities will come into vogue with every shift of public opinion – and no one will even be able to explain why they are wrong.

Nothing said in this little book is complicated or original. All it does is point out the non-sense almost everyone believes about religion and morals and show how we really can know what is true. I hope it helps Christians clear their minds and take possession of the only truth that offers any hope of creating just, free society.

*****
This is an online book, not a random series of blog postings. To assist you in reading straight through, a link to the next chapter is posted at the bottom of each page. The categories at the right list each chapter in sequence.

I’m leaving these entries open for comments because I think the Holy Spirit teaches us better when we are in dialogue than when we muddle about in isolation. Constructive critiques are welcome; uncivilized excretions will be flushed. If you have questions, they may be addressed to kainosblog (at) gmail.com.

Next installment
02 – The basic problem

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

Every faction in society is its own tribe, and conflicts multiply at every hand. No one can prove what is right or wrong. Some even insist there is no such thing as right and wrong, that individuals and societies create their own values as the need arises. The whole world seems to be slowly spinning out into chaos.

Religion seems to be no help. Every man has his own god, each woman her goddess. Ancient religions and the newest cults offer truths as varied as all the diverse cultures of the world.

Philosophy and science seem to be no help. Philosophers argue endlessly about obscure ideas that make no difference in the real world. Scientists can diagram your DNA but can’t isolate truth or justice in a test tube.

Most educated people say religious and moral truth are nothing more than personal opinion. Religious people can’t lecture others on morality because the others don’t share their beliefs.

Conservative Christians say they believe in absolute truth, but none of them can explain how they can prove the truth to those who reject their revelation. When you ask them how they know what is true, they reply, “Because God says so.”

But “because God says so” carries no weight with people who reject the reality of God or who claim the divine reality is not what Christians say it is. If a religion can’t prove to unbelievers what is true, it is nothing more than personal opinion.

What’s more, if religion is merely personal opinion, then even evil religions are true. And if morals are merely personal opinion, then no act is really wrong or unjust. If no one can know for a fact what is true and just, no one should be punished for following their own law.

What hope does a society have if it believes no one can know what is true and just? What happens to a society that believes right and wrong are merely matters of personal opinion?

What do we do? How do we get justice for the weak and oppressed? How do we protect freedom from tyrants who want to force their will on others? How can a society even agree on what justice is? What could persuade an unbelieving world to accept the moral guidance that Christian truth has to offer?

Think about it!
Why would the conscience of a God-denier be an unreliable guide to what is right and just?

Get involved!
Ask an unbelieving friend how much authority the Bible has for him.

Next installment
03 – The crucial question

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

Your personal experience may cause you to believe, but it doesn’t prove anything to someone who doesn’t share your experience or whose experience contradicts yours. Why should others care that Jesus changed your life when Deepak Chopra or Dr. Phil changed theirs?

Just because Christianity works for you, doesn’t mean it’s true. Plenty of cult members will testify that their bizarre ritual gives them spiritual peace and enlightenment. The devil himself will work miracles for you – if it means he can keep you separated from God.

When a born-again Christian offers his personal experience as proof of Jesus’ deity, he gives up any claim to having real truth to offer a skeptical world. His “because Jesus changed my life” answer is rooted in a belief that truth is a matter of personal choice, not proven fact.

In the 1800s, the influential Christian philosopher Soren Kierkegaard came to the famous conclusion, “There is no truth, but truth for me.” In an age when people thought science had proven the world could be explained without God, Kierkegaard told them they could hold on to the truth of Christianity by basing it on a passionate personal choice of what to believe.

That philosophy is called existentialism, and its conquest of Christianity was so complete that today even many conservative Christians cannot see how anyone could claim they can prove the truth of Christianity. In fact, the idea of proving religious or moral truth seems arrogant to practically everyone.

This is even true among born-again Christians. According to one researcher, 96% of Americans believe in a “higher power,” 80% identify themselves as Christians, and 41% say they are born-again Christians. Yet 64% of all adults say truth is merely personal opinion; the number rises to 83% among teenagers.

One person’s experience, however, cannot be enough to prove the truth of his religion. Your testimony by itself doesn’t carry any more weight than someone else’s testimony. It offers no compelling evidence for anyone else and has nothing to say in reply to those who claim their personal experience contradicts yours.

If personal experience proves the truth of religion, then “evil” religions are just as valid as “good” ones. Christianity isn’t actually true, just true for Christians – and Satanism also is true for Satanists.

Religious and moral truth must be based on facts. If truth is to be anything more than personal opinion, it must be something you can prove to others. If your religion and morals are based only on your personal experience, then your religion and morals are – for all practical purposes – irrelevant to everyone but you.

If the truth of every person’s religion is merely a matter of personal opinion, then child-sacrificing pagans must be allowed to worship freely. If every person’s morals are merely a matter of personal opinion, then society owes an apology to every person ever imprisoned for disagreeing with society’s values.

Think about it!
Does the idea of proving the truth of religious and moral truth seem arrogant to you? Why or why not?

Get involved!
Ask a Christian friend, “How do you know Jesus is the way back to God?” Ask an unbelieving friend, “Who had the most influence on who you are as a spiritual person today?”

Next installment
04 – The deepening crisis

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

Most Christians think our religion and morals are true by faith and not because of provable facts. That can’t be true, however, because that would leave us with only personal opinion and subjective experience – instead of facts – as our witnesses to the truth. By themselves, personal opinion and subjective experience carry no weight with the skeptic who (properly) expects convincing proof that the Christian worldview is true.

Because we have agreed with the skeptic that religious and moral truth are based on personal experience, Christians cannot effectively bear witness to the truth of the gospel or take a stand for social justice. Society no longer listens to us because we have agreed that our “truth” really is no more than personal opinion based only on our own experience.

What happens to a society that believes truth and justice are merely matters of personal opinion? 

Chaos grows because people have been told each person decides for himself what is right and wrong. No one’s values apply to anyone else. People have been told they are only highly evolved animals. They have been told their world is an accident. They have been told, “If it feels good, do it.” 

People inevitably reach the logical conclusion that a person should do whatever he wants to do – just don’t get caught. Each one begins to do, as the Scripture says, what is “right in his own eyes.” Most people choose what they want, not what others need.
Recent research in the United States, for example, showed that almost two-thirds of Americans approve of gambling and of couples living together outside of marriage. Almost half harbor no moral reservations about abortion or extramarital sex. About one-third see no problem with homosexuality or pornography.

Yet somehow everyone is baffled at the rise of moral chaos in society. Teenagers entertain themselves with group sex parties. A live-in boyfriend molests his partner’s child. The very sick and the very old are terminated for social convenience. Men take what they want at the point of a gun, then kill the victim to reduce the chances of getting caught.

When a society is steeped in moral chaos, the inevitable result is anarchy. Even if we don’t want to believe it, men are not by nature good. When society excuses immorality and injustice, men wonder why they should obey social rules that really are only matters of opinion. When they see others living for their own pleasure and desires, they wonder why they should deny themselves. When others take from them, they take from someone else.

Even though they have been told there are no moral absolutes, people still feel deeply about their own personal values. They see or experience injustice and recognize the evil, even if they can’t tell you how they know it is wrong.

But skeptical society gives people no standard of morality to which they can appeal for justice. Government no longer stands up for the weak and powerless. So the weak and powerless find like-minded individuals and take action, seeking to force the “evildoers” to conform to the activists’ moral values.

Anti-globalists conduct violent demonstrations against meetings of powerful elites. Animal rights activists engage in desperate actions to draw attention to their cause. Environmental militants attack chemical factories. “Pro-life” vigilantes execute abortionists. Armed gangs set up roadblocks on lonely roads. Powerful men oppress whole towns and cities.

What are people to do when chaos begins to overwhelm traditional morality? Is there no way for people to agree on what is right so they can organize a just, free, civilized society?

Think about it!
Make a list of the examples of moral chaos that concern you most.

Get involved!
Ask your church leader or Bible teacher to help you learn what the Bible says about the moral issues on your list.

Next installment
05 – The worldview dead-end

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

The only way to create a just, civilized society is to build it on a worldview that can prove what is true and just.

A worldview is simply the way people make sense of their world and figure out what is true and just. Everyone has a worldview, though most haven’t ever thought about what theirs is. Many people’s worldviews are a hodgepodge of ideas and beliefs that contradict each other.

You’ve seen these worldviews at work. You probably even agree with one or more of them:

Pragmatism – This is the idea that the meaning, value, or truth of a belief or action is its practical effectiveness. The pragmatist says something is good if it works. The problem is that evil can work very well. History books and newspapers are filled with the names of men who effectively used big lies and mass murder to accomplish their goals.

Utilitarianism – This is the idea that the right act is the one most likely to produce the greatest good for the greatest number of people. The utilitarian is willing to let one man die for the people. The problem is that guilty people might think the death of an innocent witness is a good thing.

Naturalism – This is the idea that the physical world is all that is real. The naturalist says nothing is real if it can’t be known by the five senses. The problem is that life is full of real things – love, joy, and peace, as well as truth and justice – that you can’t see or touch.

Humanism – This is the idea that the greatest good is improving humanity. The humanist might focus on idealistic goals like eliminating poverty or disease. The problem is that self-serving people can have very different ideas about what counts as improvement, and the humanist has no way of proving that his idea is truly good.

Hedonism – This is the idea that the good thing is what gives a person pleasure. The hedonist wants to live in an orderly society because pleasure-seeking is difficult when anarchy rules. He cares little, however, about the suffering of others, as long as it doesn’t affect him personally. The problem is that one person’s pleasure often comes at the expense of others. For a few, the suffering of others actually is a source of pleasure. A world full of people seeking their own pleasure is bound to be a chaotic place.

Existentialism – This is the idea that an individual decides for himself what is right and true and embraces it passionately. The existentialist searches for a truth that will change his life – and immerses himself in whatever might meet his need. The problem is that one man passionately pursues a “good” that another one sees as an evil to be fought with equal intensity.

Relativism – This is the idea that what is right and true depends on what an individual or group believes. The relativist says no person or society can judge the religion or morals of another person or society. All religions and moral systems are of equal value, and each one is true for the people who believe it. The  problem is that evil religions would be true for the people who follow them, and society can’t punish someone for doing what he truly believes he ought to do, even if the society believes it is evil.

Skepticism – This is the idea that no one can know for sure what is true. The skeptic always doubts when other people claim to know what is right and true for others. He refuses to accept any truth that cannot be proven beyond all doubt. The problem is that nothing can be proven beyond all doubt – and the skeptic’s daily life is in fact filled with beliefs and values that he accepts without absolute proof.

From here on, I use the word ‘skepticism’ to refer to the dominant worldview of Americans, Europeans, and others – including Christians – who have been influenced by the skeptic’s values and way of thinking. One person’s skepticism may differ from another’s as they reflect different elements of various worldviews. Virtually all varieties of today’s skepticism, however, involve elements of naturalism, existentialism, and relativism. The Western worldview is especially skeptical when it comes to religion and morals.

The skeptic doubts there is any such thing as absolute truth. He doubts whether a person even could know absolutely what is right or wrong for himself. He is very sure no one can know what is true for others when it comes to religion and morals.

In practice, none of these worldviews – and others not listed – can prove what is true in religion and morals and provide the foundation for a just, civilized society. None of them can point to provable facts to validate what it says is true and just. Let a society try to live by any of these philosophies, and sooner or later it must devolve into chaos, anarchy, and tyranny.

Think about it!
How do you know what is true and just? How would you convince a skeptic to consider your worldview?

Get involved!
Ask your church leader or Bible teacher to recommend a resource on developing a Christian worldview.

Next installment
06 – The future tyranny

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

Most Westerners decided more than two centuries ago that kings and aristocrats could not be trusted to rule justly. Most working-class people today don’t trust the wealthy elite to secure justice for the common man.

What about democracy? Doesn’t democracy create justice by majority vote? How can democracy produce justice when its laws only reflect the opinions of a majority? Doesn’t majority belief often support the oppression of minorities? Didn’t most Americans once believe slavery was just? Was slavery not wrong until a majority decided otherwise?

Even if the majority opinion in a society actually happens to be just, how long can that last if the ruling worldview says right and wrong are merely matters of personal opinion?

If a society’s standard of justice cannot be proven to be true and morals are reduced to personal or social preferences, then taboos change with the wind. All that is required to turn wrong into right is a good public relations campaign. A savvy mass-media strategy can turn today’s “God-ordained social order” into tomorrow’s “puritanical repression.”

In America and Europe, behavior the majority once considered plainly right and wrong are now seen as matters of personal preference. One culture’s values are considered no more or less legitimate than another’s, even within the same society. One person’s “good” may be another’s “bad,” and we are told no one must force his values on another.

Chaos grows in a society that can’t agree on what is right and wrong. Every man does what is right in his own eyes – or worse, what he thinks he can get away with. When the government can only enforce the consensus of selfish people, justice is replaced by the latest poll results. Social order cannot be maintained by a government hopelessly fragmented over what is right or wrong. If a nation denies anyone can prove what is right or wrong, it cannot lecture another nation about human rights.

When law and order crumbles, anarchy rises to take its place. The strong brazenly rob the weak of what little they have. Innocent women and children are slaughtered in the name of ancient hatreds. By force, a man takes his neighbor’s wife – or her son – for himself. No one is ever safe, anywhere, unless he is unusually well-armed.

Now come the final hours of human civilization. Nation-states dissolve as tribes devour one another. The powerful bleed their victims with no one able to say why they shouldn’t. The smart, wealthy, and violent few live in luxury while the masses groan in suffocating poverty. The powerful struggle for control of the weapons of oblivion.

A world awash in anarchy is primed for tyranny. With no common standard of justice to create a vision of freedom, a society cannot direct itself. The strong prey upon the weak until the weak cry out for a protector, who himself then preys upon the weak. The tyrant offers the last hope for social order – if not a just peace, then at least freedom from unofficial violence.

If there is no provable standard of justice, tyranny is the only way left to establish social order. When people are drowning in anarchy, they will welcome someone strong enough to take charge, even if he is only the strongest of the thugs. The strongman controls the anarchy with a totalitarian government that gives people social order in exchange for their freedom of thought and action.

The idea that the individual decides right and wrong for himself is eroding traditional moral values in every major society in the world. Skepticism infiltrates through popular American music and movies, political ideas like democracy and human rights, and economic dreams of free-market prosperity. If the “liberation” of a society is successful, social and moral chaos grows, and skepticism removes every barrier that would keep the society from sliding into anarchy and tyranny. The traditional society resists the advance of individualism with the only tool at its disposal: the heavy hammer of power wielded by authority.

Though they don’t realize it, traditional authorities and their liberalizing enemies both actually serve the same master. Regardless of who wins the struggle for control, the result is tyranny. And there is one tyrant who eagerly awaits his opportunity to bring worldwide anarchy under control, the one called “Antichrist.”

Who will resist the slide toward tyranny? Can no one prove what is just?

Think about it!
List ways majority opinion has changed for the better. List ways it has changed for the worse. How could majority opinion ever be a reliable guide to truth and justice?

Get involved!
Ask a Muslim friend how American culture erodes moral values.

Next installment
07 – The crucial truth

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

There is, however, one worldview that can prove what is true and just and make it possible to create a civilized society. Only the Christian worldview can make sense out of the concepts of justice, morality, and human rights. Only the Christian worldview can point to provable facts to validate what it says is true and just.

In fact, the powerful idea of human rights – that people have “inalienable” rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness – arose out of the Christian worldview. The American Declaration of Independence, written by Christian men for a fledgling country that accepted Christianity as God’s truth, says mankind was endowed with those rights by the Creator.

Apart from the truth that mankind is created in the image of God, the ideas of justice and human rights make no sense. If man is just an animal in an accidental universe, what sense is there in talking about human rights? What place does justice have in the law of the jungle?

The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights asserts that mankind has certain inalienable rights, yet it never explains how that august body knows those rights exist or can prove what they are.

In fact, the idea of human rights is left over from a time when people believed in a God who created humanity in his image – a God the UN denies. If God is not real, why do we still talk about human rights?

The second president of the United States, John Adams, observed that the country’s constitution “was written for a religious and moral people and is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” He might well have said the constitution was written for a Christian people, because no other religion or moral system would ever have given birth to such a vision of human dignity, freedom, and justice.

The truth is that apart from one specific religion – Christianity – there is no such thing as justice at all, much less any reason to think people have inalienable rights.

Christianity’s ability to stand for those rights, however, was crippled when Christians were deceived into believing existentialism’s lie: “There is no truth, but truth for me.” That deception reduced truth to personal opinion and undermined the confidence Christians had in their worldview, a confidence based on two key facts – one scientific, the other historical.

We will examine those two facts, but only after we identify a second deception, this one perpetrated by skepticism, that keeps Christians and others from understanding that the Christian worldview – and only the Christian worldview – stands on the solid foundation of provable fact.

Think about it!
What is the “crucial truth” referred to in this chapter’s title?

Get involved!
Read the Declaration of Independence at http://www.archives.gov. Write in your own words what it says about human rights.

Next installment
08 – The double standard

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

Christians have accepted a double standard in the way skeptics use the words ‘fact,’ ‘know,’ and ‘prove.’

What is a fact? When can we say we know something is true? When is a fact proven?

A fact is something that actually happened or is really true, a reality. To know a fact is to be confident it has been proven true. A fact is proven when it is shown by experience to be dependable.

When it comes to religion and morals, however, skeptics use those three words in a very different way. They demand a higher standard of proof. Instead of experience proving a fact is dependably true, skeptics demand that religious and moral facts be proven beyond all doubt.

The skeptic hides behind a naturalistic worldview that claims the only meaningful facts are those that can be proven by the five senses. While it creates the impression of being scientific, the claim is anything but that.

Like the Russian cosmonaut who declared God does not exist because he didn’t see him in space, the skeptic rejects religious and moral truth because it cannot be proven “scientifically” by the five senses.

The skeptic demands proof beyond all doubt for religious and moral truth, as if proof beyond all doubt is what science provides. Proof beyond all doubt, however, is an impossible standard – and it is a higher standard than the skeptic expects in any other area of life.

In everyday life, people routinely accept facts that can’t be proven beyond all doubt. We know the sun will rise tomorrow, because our experience tells us we can depend on that fact. But who can say he knows beyond all doubt that it will rise?

We also accept facts of which we have no personal experience. You took your history teacher’s word for it that George Washington was inaugurated in New York City on April 30, 1789, but even she wasn’t old enough to have witnessed it personally.

We also routinely accept facts that cannot be proven scientifically. Most people would advise you not to demand “scientific” proof when your fiancée says, “I love you.”

Demanding proof beyond all doubt for religious and moral truth is a double standard because no one demands such a level of proof in any other area of real life. Pretending science demands or provides absolute proof is a fraud.

Scientific knowledge is never considered proven beyond all doubt. Good science involves carefully collecting evidence until we have enough to convince reasonable people that we have a really good explanation for what is happening. A good scientist never says anything is absolutely proven. A good scientist is always open to any new evidence that might be found, even when it challenges his pet theory. A good scientist trusts the opinion of experienced observers.

Nothing is ever proven beyond all doubt. Real-life proof is common-sense proof and – like in a courtroom – proof beyond reasonable doubt. Nothing can ever be proven to someone who demands proof beyond all doubt.

The hypocrisy of the skeptic’s insistence on proof beyond all doubt is seen in the fact that the naturalist bias toward “five senses” proof can’t even pass its own test. Which of the five senses proves that the only meaningful facts are those that can be proven by the five senses?

The skeptic’s demand for absolute proof in religion and morals is deeply ingrained in our way of thinking in the Western world. Because most Christians are deeply in bondage to the deception of skepticism, they find it hard to imagine why they would want to prove the truth of Christianity, much less be able to do so. Skeptical society has trained us to believe it is arrogant for a person to claim he knows religious or moral truth that is true for everyone everywhere.

A revolution of the mind must occur if Christians are to understand why it is desirable to prove religious and moral truths beyond reasonable doubt. Exposing the skeptic’s double standard is the first step toward that revolution.

Such proof of religious and moral truth is not only desirable, it is necessary if just, civilized society is to exist at all, much less survive the challenge of growing chaos and approaching anarchy.

If the world is to have any future but tyranny, Christians must come to terms with the liberating truth that the Christian worldview is based on facts that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it is true.

We will look at two facts. The first is the scientific foundation for what Christian theologians call “general revelation.” The second is historical, an event that proves what is true about God and shows us how we can know what is right and just.

Think about it!
What reasons might a Christian have for resisting the idea that Christian faith can be proven to be true?

Get involved!
Ask a science teacher to explain how the scientific method works in proving the truth of a theory. Ask a lawyer to explain proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Next installment
09 – The first fact: God is real

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

The fact is, every person on the face of the earth knows God is real, whether or not he is willing to admit it. The Scripture tells you as much.

In Romans 1.19-21, the Bible says that in creation itself God has left enough evidence for people to know he is real and powerful and that he deserves the respect a creature owes its Creator. Theologians have called that “general revelation.” It means that every person in the world knows enough about the Creator to be responsible on Judgment Day for not living a life that honors God, regardless of whether he has ever heard of Jesus.

Until the emergence of modern science, few people doubted the reality of Creator God. They had differing explanations about how the world came to be, but the vast majority of people throughout history have acknowledged that the Higher Power is real.

It was only with the emergence of modern science that men saw the prospect of explaining how the world came into being without the Creator.

For example, the 19th-century scientist Charles Darwin noticed that animal species apparently change over time. He theorized that one member of a species might survive when others don’t because it is stronger, faster or better adapted in some other way. If it passes on the advantage to its offspring, a whole species might change significantly over time.

That was Darwin’s theory of evolution – “micro” evolution. We all know it as “survival of the fittest.”

The scientists of Darwin’s time were excited about this insight. Some educated people wanted an explanation of the world that didn’t involve Creator God. Darwin expanded on the theory, stretching it past the limits of science to satisfy the desire to believe that God is just a figment of the superstitious imagination.

Toward that end, Darwin sketched out a theory of “macro” evolution. He argued that all the diverse life forms we see around us today – both plants and animals – emerged from a single, accidental spark of life in a prehistoric pool. He argued that, over very long periods of time, simple life forms evolved into complex life forms.

That’s impossible.

All creatures have complex parts that cannot be the product of evolution. Even the most basic part of living things – the cell – is too complex to have evolved.

In Darwin’s defense, he didn’t understand how cells work because the scientists of his time didn’t have microscopes strong enough to reveal the secret. Today’s scientists, however, understand that each cell is a very complex collection of machines made of molecules. The first cell would never have evolved because the different pieces of the machines would have had to evolve separately – right next to each other – and then somehow start working together as a cell. And each tiny cell teems with machines like that.

The parts of the machines couldn’t have evolved separately because only features that serve a survival purpose develop through evolution. By themselves, the pieces of the machine serve no survival purpose. It takes all of them, in mature form, working together, to make a working cell. Something as basic to life as a cell could never have evolved, even over billions of years. The first cell had to come into being full-blown, intelligently designed to work the way it does.

One impossibility like the complex nature of the cell is enough to discredit the notion that earth’s life forms emerged by chance. Today, irrefutable challenges to macro evolution – filed under the heading of “Intelligent Design Theory” – are piling up left and right. The leading edge of research in virtually every field of science reveals compelling evidence that our world had to have been designed by an intelligence far beyond ours. 

For the better part of a century now, researchers have been realizing that every aspect of the universe is finely tuned to an astounding degree. The slightest variation in any one of millions of situations would make life in the universe completely impossible:

–- A tiny change in the force that holds the atom together would leave you with a world that either has no hydrogen or has only hydrogen – and no possibility of life either way.

–- If the force of gravity was slightly weaker or stronger, the sun would not be able to sustain life on earth.

–- Adjust the rate at which the universe expands, and either solar systems cannot form or the whole universe collapses in on itself – bad news for life either way.

–- Change the wavelength of sunlight ever so slightly, and plants could not process it to feed themselves.

–- Change the size or location of Jupiter just a little, and cosmic rubble would rain down on earth, making survival difficult for life forms.

–- Trade the amazing orderliness of the physical world for a little more unpredictable disorder, and even science itself is impossible.

The list could go on and on. The idea that our incredibly complex and delicately fine-tuned world emerged by chance is preposterous.

The belief that all the diverse forms of animal and plant life evolved from one primitive ancestor requires a leap of faith that boggles the imagination.

The skeptic says, “I don’t believe God exists.” God’s reality, however, is not an issue of personal belief. Not believing that God is real doesn’t change his reality, any more than not believing the sun will rise in the east tomorrow morning will keep it from happening.

God’s reality is an issue of fact – and whether that fact is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The best evidence in every field of science leads to the conclusion that this amazing world is the work of an intelligence far beyond anything we can imagine. The only person who denies it is someone who has not genuinely considered the evidence – or someone who made up his mind ahead of time to deny the reality of Creator God, regardless of the evidence.

The scientific evidence, however, proves beyond any reasonable doubt that God is real.

Think about it!
If everyone knows God is real, why don’t they live lives that honor him? What does Romans 3.10-18 say about it?

Get involved!
Ask an unbelieving friend to read this chapter and share his thoughts about it with you.

Next installment
10 – The second fact: Jesus is alive

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.

There are many beliefs about what the deity is like. If Baron Samedi, voodoo’s anarchist god of death, is God, then the God of Abraham is not. How can anyone know the truth?

There are more than 4,300 religions in the world. Each of them has its own explanation of how the world came to be and what the meaning of life is. The followers of each religion believe it is true. But only one religious faith – Christianity – is based on a fact that proves beyond reasonable doubt that it is true.

The resurrection of Jesus from the dead is a fact that proves he was the Son of God, just like he said. God raised Jesus from the dead to validate Jesus’ teaching about what God is like and how he expects us to live. The resurrection of Jesus gives us a factual basis for knowing the truth about God. No other religious tradition can offer anything that remotely resembles proof of its own truth.

By raising Jesus from the dead, God proved beyond any reasonable doubt that Jesus is the one we can trust to tell us what God is like and what is true and just. In Romans 1.4, Paul explains that raising Jesus from the dead was God’s way of powerfully demonstrating that Jesus is his Son. In Acts 17.31, Luke declares that God raised Jesus from the dead to prove that Jesus is God’s choice to reveal the truth about God to mankind.

The truth of Christianity – and its ideas of justice and human rights – stand or fall on whether the resurrection of Jesus actually happened. If God didn’t raise Jesus from the dead, faith in Christ is worse than pointless (1 Corinthians 15).

Some skeptics doubt that Jesus was a real person. They dismiss the Bible accounts of his life as fiction written to justify the existence of the Christian movement. But Jesus is referred to in other historical accounts written by men who had no interest in promoting Christianity.

The most notable of those historians was Flavius Josephus, a Jew who lived in the same century as Jesus. Josephus wrote about the life, miracles, and death of Jesus. He even recorded the matter-of-fact observation that on the third day after his death Jesus appeared to his disciples “restored to life.” Jesus was a real person who lived a life that was amazing to the people of his time.

Many skeptics dismiss the resurrection of Jesus as a legend manufactured by Jesus’ followers to overcome the shame of his execution and “fulfill” his prediction that he would rise from the dead. Because their minds are closed to the idea that miracles are possible, they never bother to consider the factual evidence for the resurrection.

The resurrection of Jesus cannot be dismissed as impossible on scientific grounds. At most, good science would only conclude that resurrection is improbable. Science can’t even investigate whether resurrection is possible because science can only study events that can be repeated and observed. There are many mysteries in the world science can’t yet explain.

For that reason, the resurrection of Jesus must be examined as a historical event, using the same standards historians use to study other historical events. As a historical event, the resurrection is better documented than many events in the ancient world that historians take for granted.

The eyewitness accounts of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus were preserved in four books written by Matthew and John, who were close friends of Jesus, and Mark and Luke, who were early followers. Because the resurrection of Jesus was such a world-shaking, life-changing event, his followers carefully preserved those eyewitness accounts and the other writings of Jesus’ earliest followers. Copies of those books were written out by hand, and great pains were taken to be sure each new copy was an exact replica of the earlier one.

More than 5,500 full or partial ancient manuscripts of the Christian New Testament have been found. One partial copy was made about 70 years after the resurrection. Most of the New Testament books were written within 60 years of the resurrection.

Skeptics doubt the New Testament accurately describes the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, yet no other ancient eyewitness account was as carefully preserved as the New Testament. No one doubts Caesar won a great victory in Gaul in 57 BC, yet less than a dozen manuscripts of that account exist, and none of the copies dates closer than 900 years to the actual event.

Even if a skeptic agrees that the New Testament has been preserved with remarkable accuracy, he still may reject the resurrection as a legend. Skeptics offer five basic arguments to support their belief that Jesus was not raised from the dead. None of those arguments can explain away the well-documented fact of the empty tomb:

The disciples stole the body to make it look like Jesus was alive. No, because that would have meant sneaking past the squad of Roman soldiers guarding the tomb, moving a 1,500-pound stone blocking the entrance, and then sneaking the body out past the guards.

The Jews stole the body to keep people from claiming Jesus had come back to life. No, because if the Jews had the body, they would have produced it when the rumors of resurrection began to fly.

Jesus wasn’t dead but revived in the tomb and escaped. No, because a man who had been tortured, crucified, and certified as dead couldn’t have rolled away that heavy stone, fought off the guards, and then presented himself in perfect health to his followers.

Jesus’ body was still in the tomb, and people just looked for him in the wrong tomb. No, because the Jews and Romans would have pointed out the correct tomb to stop the rumors of resurrection.

The visions of Jesus after the crucifixion were just hallucinations. No, because hundreds of people saw him and interacted with him on at least 10 different occasions – one group was 500 people – and they all told basically the same story about what happened in each case.

The fact is, the tomb was empty – and still is. The resurrection of Jesus is a fact of history that everyone must deal with. It was such an incredible, world-changing event that people started counting years all over again – BC and AD signify whether an event happened before or after the birth of Jesus. Skeptics reject the resurrection, not for lack of evidence, but simply because admitting it happened would force them to change the way they live their lives.

Without the resurrection, one religion would be as true as any other. Without the resurrection, no one could know for sure what God is like. Even Jews and Muslims, who say they worship the same God as Christians, have no way of proving that their understanding of God is true. Without the resurrection, no one could know which religious tradition can be trusted to teach us about the nature of God, the meaning of life, and what is true and just. Without the resurrection, it’s all just unproven personal opinion.

The resurrection of Jesus was an actual event in history. Because God raised Jesus from the dead, we know God has power even over death and evil. Because God raised Jesus from the dead, we know Jesus taught the truth. The resurrection is a fact – proven beyond reasonable doubt – that leads us to the truth about what God is like and what is true and just.

Think about it!
If God really didn’t raise Jesus from the dead, how would it change your opinion of who he was? Would you follow the teachings of a man who died thinking he was God?

Get involved!
Ask a Jewish or Muslim friend to explain what he believes about God. Ask how he knows his religion is true and other religions are not.

Next installment
11 – The end of Christian apologetics

—–
Copyright © 2007, Kainos Press. All rights reserved.