Conundrum Continues

This post is to provide further information in response to comments made about my previous post, “Controversial Conundrum.” It is important to note that the conundrum I wrote about only applies to Bible believing Christians. It is also important to note that although I have picked scripture references to support the beliefs stated here, that true understanding does not come from a scripture here and there, but a thorough reading of the Bible and the interpreting ability provided by the Holy Spirit (John 14:17, Corinthians 2:11-14).

So, with that stated, here we go.

In reference to my observation from the Bible that God created the world and all life on it, that Adam and Eve brought sin into the world, that death is the result of sin, and therefore there was no death on earth before the first sin.

The comment, summarized:
Maybe the Bible was not meant to be interpreted literally, maybe it is full of metaphors.

My response:
The Bible does contain metaphors, however the beliefs that God created the world, Adam and Eve sinned, and sin brought death to the world are fundamental to the Christian Faith. These are literal Bible truths, not metaphors. The relation between sin and death, and the original sin, are the reasons that Jesus Christ had to die for payment of our sins. Here are the references related to these beliefs:

God created the world and everything in it: Genesis 1:1, Job 38:4-11, John 1:1-3, Exodus 20:11

Adam and Eve were real, literal people: Genesis 4:1-2, 1 Timothy 2:13-14

The first sin came through Adam and Eve: Genesis 3:1-20, Romans 5:12,1 Corinthians 15:21-22

Sin brought death to the world, and Jesus’ death was required to pay for it: Romans 5:12-15, James 1:15, Genesis 2:17, 1 Corinthians 15:21-22

In reference to my following two observations:
1) If one believes that God created the world and all things in it, then any science that does not support that is not revealing truth-so it is flawed science.
2) If one believes that sin and death entered through the first man, then it is not possible to also believe that many years of death led up to the development of man (as held by the general theory of evolution ).

The comment, verbatim:“And maybe God would not appreciate us focusing in on the Bible so exclusively that we discount logical conclusions about the world around us.”

My response:
God gave us brains, and there is nothing in the Bible that indicates we should not use them. The Bible does state we should seek wisdom, but that we have to be careful and not depend entirely on our own understanding. The Bible makes it clear that observation of nature should point to God as its creator, and that people that deny existence of God are not demonstrating wisdom. Here are the references related to these beliefs:

We should seek wisdom: Proverbs 3
We should not depend entirely on our own understanding: Proverbs 3:5
Observation of nature reveals God: Romans 1:18-20, Job 12:7-10
To deny existence of God is not wise: Psalm 14:1

The photo is of an interesting combination of footprints. From my very brief research it appears legitimate, but I want to dig into (pun intended) these types of findings more before finalizing any conclusions.

Controversial Conundrum

I don't usually use big words like "conundrum" but I thought it was appropriate for this post dealing with the situation where people find themselves with "an intricate and difficult problem."

The difficult and intricate problem I am speaking of is encountered when people who are Christians state that they believe in the general theory of evolution as the basis for the origin and development of life. The reason often stated for this belief is “because it is based on valid science.” Before going further, I must admit that I did not see a problem with God using evolution to create life, until I gave it some critical thought.

Before explaining why I believe this is a conundrum, I should explain what is meant by the phrase “general theory of evolution.”

The general theory of evolution holds that our earth and all life on it was created by gradual changes, beginning with non-living matter and leading to the diverse system of life that we see on earth today. The transformation of non-living matter to living organisms and the subsequent gradual changes were driven by a combination of random, undirected activity, mutations and natural selection. This theory holds that there is no evidence that a creator (intelligent life form) directed the origin and development of life on earth.

Why do I believe this is a conundrum? There are two primary reasons.

First, if one is a Christian, then they believe in the God described in the Holy Bible, and that the Holy Bible is divinely inspired-that everything in the Holy Bible is true. Christians must believe that God created earth, plants, animals, and people because it is clearly stated in the Holy Bible.

Valid science involves using the scientific process. The scientific process in its purest form eliminates subjectivity. It uses objective data to prove or disprove the validity of a concept (hypothesis). Valid science reveals truth. Any scientific theory that does not reveal truth is flawed, it is not valid science.

So, if one believes that God (a creator, an intelligent life form) created the earth and all living things, that means they consider it to be a truth. The general theory of evolution does not indicate creation of life by a creator. Since this theory clearly does not indicate what Christians hold to be true, can a Christian consider the general theory of evolution to be true, or consider it to be based on valid science?

Second, according to the Holy Bible, death was introduced by sin. Therefore before sin was committed on earth, there was no death on earth. Adam and Eve committed the first sin at some point after their creation, and therefore after the creation of all living things on earth. The general theory of evolution depends on natural selection. Natural selection is the survival of the fittest, and the death of the least fit. Death had to occur for many years prior to the first sin being committed on earth for the general theory of evolution to be true. Can a Christian believe that the general theory of evolution is true when it contradicts what the Holy Bible states concerning the original sin, and the relationship between sin and death?

Machine Design

There is something that popped into my brain around July of 2008 while sitting in a cafe in Thailand. The sun was setting and I wanted to take photos of people in the cafe using the natural light. The camera could not take a good photograph because the lighting was too low. I could see perfectly fine, the lighting was beautiful, but my very nice high tech digital camera could not capture the scene as well as my 48 year-old eyes could. That is when the question popped into my head. "How likely is it that after almost 200 years after invention of the camera, that the best scientists and engineers have not yet developed imaging technology that achieves the abilities of the human eye, but the human eye was developed and evolved to its current state of excellence by random undirected activity?"

The human eye can automatically white-balance, automatically compensate for changes in contrast and brightness, focuses imperceptibly fast between near and far objects, and only requires a lens of about 1/8 inch in diameter to do the job. No camera can do these things as well as the human eye.

Since that time I have been researching intelligent design and the general theory of evolution. I have just begun the research, so it is too early for me to state my final conclusion and the basis for it. But, at this point, I see serious problems with accepting the general theory of evolution as an explanation of the origin and development of life on earth. To define the term, the general theory of evolution proposes that the earth and all life forms on it were created by a combination of random, undirected activity and natural selection. The general theory of evolution does not require any intelligent life form to direct the process of development of the earth or all the life forms on it. Here are a couple more links relating to the topic:
From Discovery.org
From Answers.com





Just to prime the pump, I will toss out a couple observations:

Item 1:
For life to have started by accident, non-living matter would have to accidentally organize and transform itself to become a living organism. This process is defined as spontaneous generation. There is no evidence to support spontaneous generation. The fact that spontaneous generation is an unsupported hypothesis is taught in biology classes. No one has ever turned non-living matter into a living organism, so there is no reason to expect that spontaneous generation could happen by accident. But spontaneous generation is an absolute requirement for the general theory of evolution to be true.

Item 2:
Plants, animals and humans are examples of machines. By machine, I mean that elements are organized and programmed to peform a function. Living machines are much more sophisticated than non-living machines. Living machines can reproduce, adapt, change, and evolve. All machines require all elements to be assimilated and programmed precisely, or the machine does not function. It took tremendous thinking, planning, designing, coordination, fabricating and testing for us to just build three cranes for an offshore rig. The cranes are very simple machines. I firmly believe that there is not a sane person who has ever lived on this earth that would believe that, given enough time, those cranes would have come into existence without someone making it happen. There is no evidence that supports the hypothesis that random activity could ever result in disorganized elements becoming organized and programmed to perform a function. There are mountains of evidence demonstrating that intelligent life forms have created machines. We observe dams built by beavers, and hydroelectric dams built by humans. All observable evidence related to the creation of machines contradicts the general theory of evolution.

The photos are related to the topic, and related to another bit of evidence that causes trouble with the general theory of evolution. More on this later. Feel free to provide me with any data that contradicts what I have stated here. I want to be sure I have considered all the facts that I can.