WIXLIB

The Real Godof the influence of pagan philosophy. They note that pervertedGnostic ideas “obscured the Christian creed” and that theologiansschooled in pagan philosophy tried to explain the nature of Godthrough speculation instead of teaching what God had revealedabout Himself in Scripture. After centuries of such discussion anddebate, it is not surprising that the often abstract God of modernChristianity bears little resemblance to the true God of scripture.Other European ideas also undermined and altered theteachings about the real God. The Enlightenment of the 18thcentury, and scientific discoveries that seemed to contradictScripture, led some to conclude the Bible and its God were onlymyths (see God’s Funeral, Wilson, 1999). Darwin’s speculationsabout evolution seemed to remove the need for a God of creation. Julian Huxley, a promoter of Darwin’s ideas, confidentlystated: “There is no longer either need or room for supernaturalbeings capable of affecting the course of events in the evolutionary pattern of thought. The earth was not created, it evolved. Sodid all the animals and plants that inhabit it, including ourhuman selves, mind and soul as well as brain and body.” Huxleyalso asserted boldly that, “operationally, God is beginning toresemble not a ruler, but the last fading grin of a cosmicCheshire cat.” In the face of what seemed to be overpoweringdiscoveries made by scientists, theologians retreated and backpedaled in their teachings about God.Huxley made another observation that is still influencing contemporary views of God. He commented: “Our concept of Godneeds to stress religious experience instead of a belief in a particulardogma.” In other words, God is the warm feeling that you feel inyour heart—not a Supreme Being whose existence you can proveand who intervenes in history. This idea was promoted in the1600s by the French philosopher Pascal who said: “It is the heartthat experiences God, and not the reason.” The Reformation theologian, John Wesley, also spoke of the “warmed heart” as a signthat one had discovered religious truth. Yet all this clashes dramatically with Paul’s admonition to a Greek audience to “prove allthings; hold fast to what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21). Theprophet Malachi quotes God as saying: “Prove Me” (Malachi 3:10,6

Questions About God?KJV). Proof involves solid and convincing reasons. Belief in thereal God involves the mind—not just warm feelings in the heart!Over the last two centuries, belief in God has come underattack by many intellectuals in the West—the children of theEnlightenment. The German philosopher Nietzsche asserted that“God is a thought.” Freud termed belief in God a form of mentaldisorder that mankind would eventually grow out of. Karl Marxtermed religious belief “the opium of the people.” Atheist H. L.Mencken asserted: “God is the immemorial refuge of the incompetent, the helpless, the miserable.” Playwright Tennessee Williamsdescribed God as a “senile delinquent.” In the 1960s, prominenttheologians echoed Nietzsche’s earlier sentiments and actuallyasked: “Is God dead?” Oxford zoologist Richard Dawkins asserted,in a speech titled A Scientist’s Case Against God, that there is noevidence to support religion, and that better educated peopletoday admit this (Science, August 15, 1997, p. 892). He claims thatanyone who believes in a Creator God is “scientifically illiterate.”In light of such assaults against belief in God, the near absenceof powerful biblical teaching by clerics, and the dearth of honest,objective presentations of physical evidence by scientists, it is notsurprising that the real God of this universe remains little known tomost people today. But questions need to be asked. Are the criticsright, or have they been deceived? Have the rantings of secular,atheistic individuals tragically misled our society about God? Let usnotice several important lessons that we can learn from the Bibleand our recent past that relate to questions about God. We will thenexamine seven proofs that demonstrate the reality of the true God.New Evidence, New LessonsDavid wrote in the Psalms more than 3,000 years ago: “Thefool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1).Solomon states: “The mouth of fools pours out foolishness”(Proverbs 15:2). Looking back over the last few centuries it ispainfully obvious that many of the “enlightened” intellectualswho have molded our modern world were simply wrong! Theymade foolish assumptions and foolish statements that many peo7

The Real Godple believed! These misguided individuals were essentially theblind leading the blind.Marx’s communism proved to be a dismal failure that causeduntold suffering. Freud’s psychological theories have largely beendiscredited. While Freud proclaimed religion a neurosis, one ofhis students, Carl Jung, found religion to be very beneficial intreating psychologically disturbed individuals (God: The Evidence,Glynn, 1997, p. 69). In fact, a growing body of scientific literaturedocuments the positive effects of certain religious beliefs on personal health. Marx and Freud, whose ideas did much to secularizeour society by undermining its religious and moral foundation,were sadly mistaken about many things.The same is now being said about the ideas of Charles Darwinand his free-thinking contemporaries. The evolutionary theories ofDarwin that supposedly did away with the need for a Creator Godhave come under increasing criticism in recent decades. A growingnumber of scholars—among them cosmologists, biologists, biochemists and paleontologists—are admitting that the theory ofevolution simply does not and cannot explain the origin of theearth, the origin of life or the origin of species. The ideas generatedby Darwin and others simply do not fit with the facts of the fossilrecord or what has been discovered about the universe in the lastcentury (see Creation and Evolution, Hayward, 1995; “DebatingDarwin,” Christian Century, July 15–22, 1998, pp. 678–681).As the 20th century comes to a close and we begin a new millennium, questions about God are being asked with a new earnestness.Evolutionists’ purposeless universe has proven to be a psychologically empty and depressing concept. Surprising discoveries about theuniverse point to an intelligent creator (see Newsweek, July 20, 1998,pp. 47–52; November 9, 1998, p. 88). Naturalistic science thatseemed to provide answers to all questions is now recognized ashaving serious limitations. In the remainder of this booklet, we willsee what can be learned about the real God by examining proofsfrom both the natural world and the Bible. The evidence is astounding and it is powerful—and it comes from “scientifically literate”scholars. You can prove that God exists—you do not have to doubtor just blindly “take it on faith.” The God of the universe is real!8

Proof 1 —Creation Demands a CreatorThe theory of evolution postulates that the earth and theuniverse came into existence slowly over eons of time, orthat the universe has always existed. The atheistastronomer Carl Sagan once stated that, “the Cosmos is all that isor ever was or ever will be.” However that simply is not true!Studies in cosmology have demonstrated in recent years that therewas a time when the cosmos did not exist—that it had a beginningat a specific point in time. This is exactly what the Bible states. InGenesis 1:1 we read: “In the beginning God created the heavensand the earth.” Both the Bible and the discoveries of science clearly indicate that the earth and the universe have not always existed.Astronomers studying galactic motion have observed that theuniverse is expanding outward from a given point, but at a decreasing rate of speed. The universe appears to have begun with a largeexplosion. This is referred to as the “big bang.” Scientists havebeen able to detect echoes of this explosion that still reverberatethrough the universe—called the “radiation echo” or “backgroundnoise.” Stephen Hawking, a theoretical physicist at CambridgeUniversity, has written that the big bang cosmology may reveal “themind of God,” and American astrophysicist George Smoot has suggested that background radiation represents “the handwriting ofGod” (Science, August 15, 1997, p. 890). Such evidence is forcingscientists to reevaluate long-cherished naturalistic theories.Physicists have also formulated laws concerning thermodynamics.The First Law of Thermodynamics states that the amount of energy in9

The Real Godthe universe remains constant. The Second Law of Thermodynamicsstates that the amount of usable energy in a closed system (the universe) is decreasing. This means the universe is running down—thus,“it could not have existed forever in the past and will not exist foreverinto the future” (When Skeptics Ask, Geisler and Brooks, 1996, p. 220).It had a beginning. The existence of radioactive elements (such as carbon-14) which decay at a measurable rate (called a half-life) also pointsto a time when those elements were made radioactive. Again thispoints to a beginning. This, too, is contrary to what evolutionists havetheorized, but is consistent with Scripture.But what causative agent brought the universe into being?Science operates on the principle that for every effect there is acause. But what caused the “big bang?” Was it merely blind, naturalforces, or was it an intelligent being, a Creator God who carefullyplanned it beforehand? Since this was a one-time event that was notobserved or repeatable, the scientific method is of little value in rendering a decision on this matter. The subject of origins lies beyondthe realm of scientific investigation. However, the Bible describesthe origin of the universe and the earth in terms that are compatiblewith facts ascertained by scientists. The discovery that the universehad a definite beginning agrees with clear statements in the Bible.Scripture repeatedly refers to God as the Creator of the physical earth and universe (Genesis 1; Isaiah 40:28; Mark 13:19;Revelation 4:11). However, the real God is concerned with farmore than just the physical creation. The Bible also reveals there isalso an ongoing spiritual dimension to God’s creation.The Apostle Paul writes that when a person chooses to turnfrom a self-centered way of life, and chooses to begin living by theteachings of Jesus Christ, that person becomes a “new creation” ora “new creature” (2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 6:15). As we willsee, God has an incredible purpose for human beings who arewilling to embark on this challenging spiritual journey. The Bibleindicates very clearly there are more aspects to life than naturalistic science can discover. These aspects are revealed by theCreator—the real God of the universe—and are not discoverablein a laboratory by the scientific method! Creation, in all of itsaspects, requires a creator.10

Proof 2 —Life Demands a Life-GiverThe origin of life presents another challenge to those whowant to reject the idea of a supernatural God.Evolutionists have suggested that life formed spontaneously in a pool of chemicals as the earth cooled billions of yearsago. We are told that carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen and ammoniacombined randomly, with the aid of solar energy and cosmic rays,to form amino acids and DNA molecules. Over eons of time, cellssupposedly developed from these accidental combinations. Whilethis may sound plausible, biochemists know better. Scientists whohave tried to produce life by these methods have learned that it ismuch more difficult than their theories would suggest. A DNAmolecule contains as much information as a volume of an encyclopedia. Proposing this evolutionary theory of life’s origins isanalogous to suggesting that an explosion in a junk yard couldproduce a fully assembled automobile—and that this automobilecould then begin reproducing itself!In the 1950s, Stanley Miller performed a simple experiment tosee if these theories would actually work. He succeeded in producing some simple amino acids, and his experiment was hailed asproving that life could be generated spontaneously from non-livingmatter. However, the proclamations were premature. No one hasyet produced life from a pool of chemicals (pre-biotic soups)—inspite of a lot of tinkering. Astrophysicist Hugh Ross comments:“Even under highly favorable conditions of a laboratory, thesesoups have failed to produce anything remotely resembling life.11

The Real GodOne problem is that they produce only a random distribution ofleft- and right-handed pre-biotic molecules Life chemistrydemands that all the molecules be either right- or left-handed. Withall our learning and technology we cannot even come close tobringing life together in the lab” (The Creator and the Cosmos, Ross,1993, p. 148).Forty years after his initial experiment, Miller stated: “Theproblem of the origin of life has turned out to be much more difficult than I, and most other people, envisioned” (ScientificAmerican, February 1991, p. 117). German biochemist Klaus Dosehas observed that all the experimental efforts have “led to a betterperception of the problem of the origin of life on earth rather than toits solution. At present all discussions on principal theories andexperiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confessionof ignorance” (The Creation Hypothesis, Moreland, 1994, p. 176).This is not surprising. Anaxamander of Miletus, the ancientGreek philosopher, also speculated that life could develop spontaneously from non-living matter. This superstitious idea prevaileduntil the 1800s when experiments done by Redi and Pasteur provedotherwise. These now-classic experiments revealed that maggotsappearing in spoiled meat came not from the meat but from theeggs of flies that came in contact with the meat. Life came fromlife—not from non-life. Until recent decades, this was referred to asthe law of biogenesis. Only in the last several decades—when scientists have attempted to generate life spontaneously to verify evolutionary theories—has this once-accepted law been ignored. Still,there is no evidence that exceptions to this law exist.Human beings can speculate that life could be generated spontaneously from non-living matter, but the facts do not agree withthese speculations. Man has not been able to produce life—inspite of considerable effort on the part of highly intelligent individuals. Scripture portrays God as creating life. In Genesis 2:7 weread: “The LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground andbreathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being”—something all the sophisticated laboratories in theworld have been unable to begin to duplicate. Life demands a lifegiver. There appears to be no other way.12

Proof 3 —Laws Demand a Law-GiverScience exists because scientists understand that the universe operates in an orderly manner according to laws—the laws of physics (of gravity and of motion), the laws ofchemistry and laws of biology. As one writer comments: “Eversince Isaac Newton, science has blared a clear message; the worldfollows rules, rules that are fundamentally mathematical, rulesthat humans can figure out” (Newsweek, July 20, 1998, p. 49).Even evolutionists begin their speculations assuming that therules, or natural laws, worked the same in the beginning as theydo today. If the universe did not operate on these rules, or laws, itwould cease to function and would come apart in chaos. Noticeseveral examples of how these laws work.Gravity holds the planets in their orbits. Without gravitational forces there would be no solar systems. Stars and planetswould be hurtling through space in a helter-skelter manner.Gravitational forces hold the earth at a distance from the sunthat makes it possible for life to exist on this planet. If gravitational forces were either stronger or weaker than they are, stars(such as our sun) would not burn hot enough, or would burnout too rapidly and certain chemical elements essential for lifewould simply not be produced. Our bodies exist because chemicals combine in only certain ways. If chemical reactions did notoccur the same way every time (according to laws), we wouldcease to exist as living, breathing human beings. Life wouldcease to exist.113

The Real GodFor years, biology textbooks have referred to another lawknown as fixity of the species—that there seems to be a geneticlimit to the amount of variation that can occur within a species.Plant and animal breeders are aware of these limits. CharlesDarwin was aware of the variety that could be produced by breeding domestic animals (such as dogs, pigeons, cows and horses).During his cruise on the Beagle, he also observed striking variations among finches and turtles on islands in the Pacific Ocean. Informulating his theory of evolution, he speculated that, givenenough time, these small variations could eventually producetotally new species—that natural forces alone could produce newlife forms without the need for a creator. These ideas had a profound effect on the Western world—especially on its religion—and seriously undermined belief in God.However, time has exposed serious problems with Darwin’sideas. No one has ever observed a new species coming into existence in nature in this way. In spite of many attempts, neither hasanyone been able to produce new species by selective breeding.Dogs may vary in size, color and many other characteristics, butthey are still dogs. Horses are still horses. Fruit flies are still fruitflies. The Bible clearly states many times that God created eachtype of plant and animal “according to its kind” (Genesis 1:11–12,21–25). There is no evidence from the biological world that onespecies can turn into another. The Bible also indicates that Godcreated human beings after the “God kind”—which, as we willsee, has profound implications for the purpose of human life.Even the fossil record supports this fundamental biblical principle. Darwin speculated that intermediate forms of life must haveexisted as species evolved, yet he knew this was not the actualcase. He wrote in The Origin of Species: “Why then is not everygeological formation and every stratum full of such intermediatelinks? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduatedorganic chain, and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravestobjection that can be urged against my theory” (see Geisler andBrooks, p. 228). Darwin assumed these intermediate links wouldbe fo

Contents PAGE 1 Questions About God? 9 Proof 1 - Creation Demands a Creator 11 Proof 2 - Life Demands a Life-Giver 13 Proof 3 - Laws Demand a Law-Giver 16 Proof 4 - Design Demands a Designer 19 Proof 5 - Fulfilled Prophetic Promises 22 Proof 6 - Answered Prayer 24 Proof 7 - A Way of Life That Works 27 Conclusion: A Coming Judgment RG Edition 1.4, January 2008