Evolution has become the go-to response for many who hold to an atheistic worldview when asked to account for the appearance of life on earth.  Despite this common refrain, evolution has never been an explanation for the beginning of life.  The theory of evolution as presented in Darwin’s Origin of the Species, does not offer an explanation for the appearance of life.  Darwin's theory assumes the existence of life and then offers an explanation of how these first, primitive organisms evolved to bring about the remarkable diversity we see today.
Some of the best minds in the world have worked tirelessly trying to formulate laboratory conditions that would allow inanimate, non-living matter to come together to create life. They have never been able to do so. Amazingly, if they were able to construct some sort of living organism, all it would prove is that with the proper environmental conditions, a mind could, through the use of intelligence, design life. The possibility of the environmental conditions coming together and forming life by chance is highly improbable for numerous reasons. Supporters of the idea of spontaneous generation of life (abiogenesis) have presented various ideas including the so-called “primordial soup,” (a pond, puddle, ocean, lake, etc.) where the various building blocks necessary for the development of life came together and began to mutate, and somehow randomly produced a self-replicating entity. Early evolutionary biologists greatly underestimated the complexity of even the simplest life forms. A simple protozoan is often thought to be one of the earliest, simplest organisms. Even these “simple” organisms are now known to be overwhelmingly complex.
One of the many scientists who worked in the laboratory to build foundational components for life was Stanley Miller. He was able, through input of an electrical charge in combination with water vapor, methane, ammonia, and hydrogen gasses to form amino acids in a test tube. This has been hailed by many as proof that under the right circumstances, life could be formed by chance in earth's early environment. As I mentioned before, this merely proves that intelligence combined with the right ingredients in the right place, in the right combination, could produce a starting point for life as amino acids are foundational for the formation of proteins. Having all the raw materials necessary to build life isn't the issue. Synthesizing these ingredients in the right combinations, amounts, and in an environment that supports their stability, is what makes abiogenesis extraordinarily improbable given the current atheistic beliefs about the age of the universe, the stability of compounds, and about just how many “ingredients” are necessary for the simplest life to develop.
The simplest life form requires millions of parts at the atomic level.1 In a 1973 book entitled, Evolution: Possible or Impossible, James Coppedge laid out the following time and probability estimates. He allowed for the  commonly held view that the earth is 4.6 billion years old, AND that all the components necessary for life were available in the primordial sea, AND that bonding processes were sped up by a trillion times, AND that every atom on earth was used.  With those parameters in place  the estimated chance of one protein forming would be approximately 1 in 10,000. A protein is not life. It is a building block for life. An estimated 239 proteins are necessary for life to exist. Coppedge estimated the probability of those 239 proteins forming with those assumed properties present on earth to be 1 in 10119,879. The time required to accomplish this would be 10119,831years. This is 10,000,000,000,000,000,000........ longer than the earth has existed. (The number would be 10 with over 100,000 zeroes after it longer than the earth has existed.) This is outside the range of probability. Keep in mind that a fully functioning first organism needs to form before any natural selection/evolution can take place.2
For me, it doesn't appear that there is any good reason to believe that life just popped into existence. Rather, I believe that many atheistic scientists have a preconceived bias that it had to happen through naturalistic causes and therefore a supernatural cause is ruled out a priori.  That seems to be a more closed-minded approach to where the evidence leads than that of the theist.
In the upcoming post, I will begin to move away from these high-science discussions to more of my philosophical reasons that I believe God exists. Next we will discuss the possibility of objective morality.
Until then,
TG
1https://www.trueorigin.org/abio.php
2Coppedge, James, F. 1973. Evolution:  Possible or impossible? Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI.

The teleological argument states that if something shows signs of design, then, there must be a designer.  This argument was famously discussed in William Paley’s 1802, Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of a Deity.  The oft used “Watchmaker” analogy derives from there.  Here is a quick paraphrase of the Watchmaker analogy.
I’m walking in the forest and hit my foot on a rock.  You ask me, “Where did that rock come from?”  I answer that the rock, for all I know, has always been there.  Or, that it naturally ended up there through erosive processes, a landslide, etc.  If however, I am walking through the forest and find a watch lying on the ground, my deduction would be different.  I would assume that the watch hadn’t come together and arrived at that point by natural processes.  The intricacies, function, and design of the watch necessitates a designer, or a watchmaker. 
Paley went on to describe that the appearance of complexity in the natural world pointed to an even more powerful, intelligent Designer.  The premises and conclusion of Paley’s teleological argument goes something like this.
Premises

1. Human artifacts are the product of intelligent design and have purpose.
2. The universe resembles these artifacts regarding the appearance of design and purpose.
3. Therefore:  It is probable that the universe is the product of intelligent design and has purpose.
4. The universe is enormous and is vastly more complex than human artifacts.

Conclusion:  The universe must have a vastly intelligent and powerful designer.
Paley’s argument is not intended to be exhaustive, nor is it immune to criticism.  Richard Dawkins, the atheistic crusader, has famously responded to Paley’s argument with a book entitled, The Blind Watchmaker.  David Hume penned his work, Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, in 1779, which sets forth his arguments against the teleological argument.  As with any argument, including arguments for God, everyone approaches the data/evidences with their own presuppositions.  That is, no one is without bias.  Understanding that bias is inevitable is helpful in understanding why something that seems perfectly reasonable to you may seem completely irrational to someone else.
For our purposes, we will not go into tremendous detail regarding the teleological argument.  Instead, we will discuss some foundational topics and principles.
                The Beginning of the Universe, including all matter, mass, energy and time.
                                Three Possibilities

1. The Universe Spontaneously Generated as a part of a closed system.
2. The Universe is Eternal
3. The Universe was Created

Regarding the universe popping into existence on its own, there are numerous problems.  One involves the First Law of Thermodynamics.  The First Law says that in a closed system there is a finite amount of energy that remains constant.  When energy is used, it transitions to less usable forms of energy.  Burning a piece of wood is an example referred to by Cengel and Boles in their 2002 work, Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach, which is used as a textbook in engineering schools.  The wood contains energy which when burned becomes radiant heat and/or ash.  The amount of energy remains the same.  It simply is changed into different forms.  This is true of our universe.  The First Law of Thermodynamics including the principle of the conservation of energy, is one of the most widely accepted scientific truths.   Stated simply, when it came into being, there was a finite amount of energy within the universe.  This energy is neither added to nor lost.  It simply changes forms.  Before it existed, the universe was nothing.  No energy, no mass, matter, etc.  As such, it would require an infusion of energy from outside itself to remain consistent with the First Law.  For non-energy to produce massive energy contradicts this known principle and renders the idea of a self-creating universe to being implausible.
Secondly, the idea of an eternal universe denies the Second Law of Thermodynamics.  The second law states that this finite energy is being expended in its usable form as it is transferred into less usable, less accessible forms, i.e. the ash and the radiant heat from the burning wood.  The Second Law is also the source of the idea that the universe is moving toward disorder or entropy.  As the usable energy in the universe is transferred into less usable, less accessible forms, entropy is the natural result.  If the universe were eternal, we would have run out of usable energy and the universe would have reached chaotic disorder.
Finally, the idea of a Creator God is consistent with the First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics as He was the outside agent Who was neither material, energy, mass, etc. Himself, but Who acted to introduce these, or create these out of nothing.  Some may contend that God as the answer isn’t intellectually satisfying or scientifically rigorous.  I disagree.  Science is limited to observable phenomena in our universe, i.e. light, sound, matter, mass, energy, time, etc.  Those who want to explore beyond the beginning of these are leaving the realm of the scientific and enter the realm of the meta-physic or the supernatural.  One may contend that just because a god created the universe, doesn’t mean it was the God of the Bible.  This is a valid argument.  We will explore that challenge in a later post.
Most scientists have recognized the problems inherent in the ideas of a self-creating universe or an eternal universe and have developed alternate theories.  Most of these theories simply push the question of a start back one step.  Others may use terminology and descriptions that sound oddly like those one would use to describe a Creator/God, but since their presuppositions don’t allow for it, they use other words and terms in their descriptions.  The general conclusion in the scientific community is that the universe has a definite beginning.  Most scientists refer to this as “The Big Bang.”
Next week, we will begin to look at the “Big Bang,” and its implications in the scientific community as well as for those of us who believe that God created the universe.
(Thank you to Jeff Miller, PhD at Apologetics Press.  Your article, God and the Laws of Thermodynamics: A Mechanical Engineer’s Perspective, was helpful to me as I wrote this.  https://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=9&article=2106 )

     How would one learn the truth about a person from history?  Martin Luther King Jr., John F. Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington…anyone we wanted to learn about who preceded our arrival on planet earth.  A fair questioner could ask if we have a high level of certainty that the aforementioned individuals actually lived.  The same questioner could then go about using the Historical Method to determine the legitimacy of the claims made about these people.  He may then weigh the forensic evidence that these people lived their lives in particular ways.  In order to learn about these leaders from the past, or any other person from the past, requires that we first search for literature, archaeological evidence, and other clues that allude to their existence.
     The Historical Method is a means for collecting data to discover what has transpired in the past.  When investigating purported events, whether alleged to have occurred a month ago or a millennium ago, all evidence must be examined to determine the accuracy of reports.  When reviewing historical writings (often referred to as textual criticism) there are numerous factors that historians consider. 
     1.  Authorship—was the person an eyewitness to the events they are reporting, a primary            source.  Or, was the person a secondary source, that is, did they get their information directly from a primary source.
                a.Motivation of the writer.  Was there a motive for the writer to communicate falsehood or  truth?
    2.  Dating—how much time has passed since the events occurred and when the author wrote his/her account.
    3.  Manuscripts—Original or a copy?  If a copy?
          a.Accuracy compared to the original.  Deduced through comparing multiple copies looking for textual variants.
               i.How early are the copies?  How many do we have?  These factors help assure the veracity of the copies. 
     There are many other criteria that may be considered when researching history, but these are some of the important ones.  I will not begin to examine the New Testament accounts of Jesus, or even go into the Old Testament documents in today’s blog entry.  I am only wanting to establish that there is a means for discovering historical fact or at least a means for determining whether there is good evidence for purported events.  I also want to establish that it is IMPOSSIBLE to discover historical truth through the scientific method.  Scientific inquiry is of great value in determining scientific truth.  It is useless with unrepeatable events such as births.  You and I have a birthdate.  Science will not reveal that to us.  Historical documents such as our Birth Certificates, Passports, newspaper articles about us, biographies written about us, etc. are how one would learn about us.
     Later in this series we will assess historical documents in reference to the God of the Bible, including the Bible itself, as well as other Christian and non-Christian references.  Next however, we will examine the evidence for a Creator/God from nature including life on earth as well as the apparent design of the universe.  This, “argument from design” is often referred to as the Teleological Argument. 
     Until next time.  
​     TG 

At the moment, I have two competing subjects I want to explore with you.  One is regarding ultimate questions, such as, “How do we know that truth exists?”  “Is there a God?” “What is our purpose?”  You know, lite, trivial stuff.  On the other hand, I feel led to engage you on a journey to diving deeper into the peculiar physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual mix that make you the being God has created you to be.  I believe I may toggle between these two topics over the coming weeks.  But for now, let's discuss these ultimate questions.
    Raise your hand if you’ve ever doubted that the God of the Bible exists.  Raise your hand if you’ve doubted the truth of the Bible.  Tap your feet if you’ve ever worried that some “smart” person may come up with proofs that the story of Jesus, as told in the Bible, is not true.  Finally, have you ever avoided engaging an intelligent friend, classmate, co-worker, etc. because you felt that you may not be able to answer the questions they ask you?  If you said yes to any of these, give me a lap!  JUST KIDDING!!!!  Nope, you just fit right in to the human race by having those thoughts at one time or another.  However, I do believe God has given us a mandate to seek to overcome these doubts and fears and to be voices of truth in a world living in a truth vacuum. 
 In I Peter 3:15 we hear: 
               But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer (apologia) to                           every  man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.
     Some translations of that finish with, “yet with gentleness and respect.”  We are hearing this command from the guy who denied Jesus during His trial, but also the guy who stepped out on the water.  He’s also the disciple who, though he denied him, did follow his Master to the courtyard.  He then was one of the very first people to race to the empty tomb to realize that Jesus had risen!  Shortly after that, Jesus appeared to Peter.  Peter has a very clear testimony/very strong apologia for the hope that he has in Christ.  He was an eyewitness to the most remarkable miracle since God spoke all of time, matter, and space into existence. 
     But Peter knew that you and I would believe in Christ based on the testimony of others.  He knew that we would face skeptics.  So, he is encouraging us to learn to “give a reason for the hope that is in us, yet with gentleness and respect.”  Wow.  That is a foreign concept in this day and time.  That is, to share something that another person may not believe or even be opposed to with gentleness and respect.  Quite frankly, I believe the love, patience, kindness, gentleness, and respect we show those outside of our faith, may have as much to do with them coming to know Jesus as the words you share.  The ideal is that you have thought through and have a good rationale for why you believe what you believe. 
    Over the next few blogs, I will share with you how I build a case for my world view and ultimately, my faith in Christ to someone coming from a very un-churched or anti-Christian background.  Feel free to ask questions here on the blog page of issues or questions that may have come up in your own interactions with non-believers.
Blessings,
TG  

​One of my daughters recently learned of a personal moral “failure,” of someone she admired.  As we talked I realized how seemingly permanent this failure was to my daughter.  She was devastated and said she’d never look at this person the same.  My daughter asked about my thoughts on the situation.  I shared with her that my opinion of the person hadn’t changed.  I also told her that her Father in Heaven didn’t look at us sinners in a condemning way when we know Jesus.  God isn’t surprised at our sinfulness.  We are. 
                Despite knowing the right theological answers regarding God’s grace, we sometimes live like we’re still keeping score, unconsciously seeking to gain God’s approval when we already have it.  Furthermore, we also allow the enemy of our souls to use our sin to beat us down and define us by our transgressions.  All of God’s wrath for my sins was poured out on His righteous Son.  When Christ rose from the dead, He defeated the enemy.  My sins, all of them.  The sins of my past.  The sins of my future.  Jesus’ death on that cross paid the penalty for all of them. 
                My message to my daughter was this.  Sin is serious.  Sin has separated mankind from God.  My sin separates me from God.  But because He loves us…because He loves me, God made a way to restore our relationship.
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.  John 3:16
                Even though I took my ADHD medicine today, three different thoughts have jumped to the front of my cerebral cortex.  Each of them relates to our names.  Who or what names us?          
                The first thought was from a Seinfeld episode called “The Susie.”  In this episode a co-worker mistakenly calls Elaine, Susie.  Instead of correcting her, Elaine lets it go.  From there it escalates to another level.  Elaine’s life and identity is lost to someone who isn’t real/doesn’t exist.  The second thought was from Donald Miller’s book, Blue Like Jazz.  Miller describes a time he was dating a young lady he really liked.  She liked him as well and communicated her feelings, but he just couldn’t believe it.  He became obsessed with whether this girl liked him or not.  Miller ended up speaking with a kind lady (Diane) from his church who helped him realize that he was “letting this girl name you.”  She went on to explain that he was letting this girl define his value.   Finally, the third thought was from my pastor Chris Hodges’ book, The Daniel Dilemma.  In an early chapter Chris discusses the idea of identity theft.  He tells how the Babylonians renamed Daniel and his friends with names that mocked their true identity and their relationship with God.
How does all this relate to the conversation I had with my daughter?  As believers, our identities shouldn’t change based on the victories or falls we experience in our lives.  The truth is that in Christ we bear His name and are adopted as loved children of God the Father.  “Failure” is never final.  Our falls should direct our gaze back to the One who has already forgiven us.  In these moments we experience the amazing grace God has given us.  Let us thank Him and depend on His power to work in and through us to sanctify us.  Additionally, as believers, let us ask God to empower us to extend this grace to others when they fall.  The body of Christ, the Church, needs to be a place where all of us broken, needy, children can go to be reminded of our true identity through the love, fellowship, and encouragement of our brothers and sisters.  John 13:34-35 tells us to love one another as Christ has loved us.  And, that by this (the love), the world will know that we are His disciples.  Living as people who love and who know who we are, will truly make us salt and light in a dark and often, tasteless world.

​While celebrating the Thanksgiving holiday with my family I was struck by how beneficial gratitude is to my heart, soul, and mind.  This blog entry will be closely related to the last one, in that, a heart of gratitude both enables us, and requires us to notice our current situation.  Anxiety about the future is greatly diminished as we experience God’s goodness in the moment.  The Apostle Paul gives us this antidote to worry in his letter to the Philippian church.
Don't worry about anything; instead, pray about everything. Tell God what you need, and thank him for all he has done.  Phil. 4:6 NLT
    Through the years, I have spent so much time looking for the next experience, or expecting God to behave in certain ways.  I end up disappointed with God, or with my circumstances instead of seeing God’s hand at work in the context of my daily life.  In her best-selling book, One Thousand Gifts, Ann Voskamp compiles a list of “the little things” in her day-to-day life that are reminders to her that her Father in Heaven is the giver of every good and perfect gift (James 1:17).  Squire Rushnell has written The Godwink series of books that is another great collection of moments captured by men and women who were touched by “coincidence” in their lives.  Rather than attributing these occurrences to random chance, these people saw them as loving “winks” from a sovereign, loving, Father.
  Over time, I have come to recognize that God is working all the time to show me that He loves me.  As I referred to the passage in James above, every good gift is from our Father.  When anything good happens, it should direct my heart toward my Heavenly Father as He is the one from Whom it comes.  I am learning that God is loving me through His body, the church.  He is loving me through sunrises and sunsets.  He is loving me through my own laughter and smiles as well as from my family and friends. 
  The more I see that every good and perfect gift is from my Father, the more grateful I am.  I recently had a conversation with one of my daughters that reminded me of my own tendency to miss God in my daily life as I don’t have my eyes and ears attuned to His activity.  I was telling my daughter how much her mother and I loved her, and that we truly want good for her.  She honestly responded that “sometimes it doesn’t feel like that.”  I understood exactly what she meant.  God winked at me in that moment as He gave me the answer to her truthful response.  I told her that throughout my life there were times when, “I just didn’t feel like God loved me.”  I told her that my feelings didn’t diminish the fact that God did, indeed, love me.  And, He had given me the greatest evidence of this through giving Jesus to take my sin away so that He could have a relationship with me.  I told her that, though we don’t do it perfectly (only God does!), her mom and I have spent her lifetime, from the time she was conceived, providing evidence that we love her.  Whether she feels it or not doesn’t change that.  And, the more she looks for the evidence in her life, the more she will know it to be true.
  My prayer is that God would continue to give us eyes, ears, and hearts to see the evidence of His love in the “little things” He is doing in our lives every day.  As we see His love for us, let us grow in gratitude and let it transform our hearts, minds, and souls.  

    There is a funny scene in the 1983 comedy hit Vacation where Clark Griswold is tempted to steal money from an open cash register at the El Tovar hotel on the rim of the Grand Canyon where he and his wife and kids spent the night in route to Wally World for a family vacation.  Various unfortunate and humorous events have led to a situation where Clark feels that theft is his best option.  Clark's obsession with his destination, Wally World, a Six Flags-like Theme Park, has caused him to completely lose perspective on where he is, what he is doing, or what is truly important to him.  Having arrived the night before, he and his family have not even had the opportunity to take in the majestic view of the Grand Canyon, one of the Seven Wonders of the Natural World.  After he steals the money from the register, Clark runs out of the hotel to find his wife and kids taking in the panoramic scenery as they look out from the south rim of the canyon.  He quickly ushers the family away as his wife tries to get him to experience the spectacular vista right in front of him.  Unfortunately, Clark needed to flee the scene of his crime which occurred due to his obsession with his destination.  He missed what could have been a far more enjoyable vacation if he had slowed down and enjoyed the trip instead of focusing on the idea he had of his journey's end.  
   The Apostle Peter reminds his readers (the church) that they are strangers and aliens just passing through this world.  Unlike Clark Griswold, however, we are encouraged in scripture to make the most of our time.  Instead as we focus on our eternal destination, we are to be grateful for where God has us right now.  James reminds his readers, Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes.  James 4:14   The journey itself matters.
     Our lives are a mist that appears for a little while and vanishes.  Each day is a gift.  And, every person who crosses our path is an opportunity for us to fulfill the purpose for which we've been created.  We are called to be salt and light.  Every "chance" encounter is an opportunity for us to bring God's radiance and flavor to those with whom we interact.  I am confident that as we live with this aim, we will find that even the mundane, day-to-day, "random" meetings will become a part of a bigger story that brings purpose, peace and joy to our lives.
​TG