For the truth to ever be shared and recognized
on a wider scale language was necessary, and thus the ability for the mind to
create a written language is essential. Leading linguists and evolutionists
have confessed to being completely puzzled by the human ability to communicate
through language and the written word. As linguist Patricia Kuhl has observed,
“the mechanism that controls the interface between language and social
cognition remains a mystery.”[1] Paleontologist Simon Morris has observed the
human gift of language is “somehow imprinted on our brains…” thus for good
reason Morris also happens to be a Christian.[2] To say human language is an obstacle for
those denying the existence of God is no exaggeration, as the experts have
given up on solving this mystery.
Multiple experts from respected fields of study including
evolutionists, anthropologists, computer scientists, and linguistics have
discovered no plausible explanation for how and why language exists from an
evolutionary perspective.[3] Regarding this study journalist Tom Wolfe
remarked, “I had never heard of a group of experts coming together to announce
what abject failures they were…”[4] Since the idea of Darwinism came into being
scientists in other fields of study have discovered so many valuable and
advancing truths. Meanwhile the atheistic evolutionists have discovered nothing
of progressive value. From the naturalist perspective
the mystery of language, thus the mystery of the human mind, has never been
resolved. As an engineering technologist and Christian ethicist Paul Golata
argued, “God provides the best framework from which to understand
intelligence.”[5] God
is relational and has even communicated with humanity through the language of
mathematics. This language was not invented by humans but was discovered. As
Werner Heisenberg observed, “…the fact that we can explain nature by simple
mathematical laws tells us that here we have met some genuine feature of
reality, not something that we have — in any meaning of the word — invented
ourselves.”[6] What sets humans far
above the animals is the ability to communicate ideas and express emotions
through speech, written words, and in discovering and sharing mathematical
truths. The human mind coming into being by chance remains a faithful hope for
atheists.
Language has always been a gift from God intended for people to
comprehend, appreciate, and share the truth. As Wolfe argued, “Speech is 95
percent plus of what lifts man above animal!”[7] The relational aspect
of language is expected if one believes humankind is made in the image of a
loving and relational God. This ability for the mind to communicate truth
and express selfless love is one of the first pieces of evidence for the human
mind being designed by the Triune God. This gift of course led to the writing
of God’s revelation resulting in the Bible, where the ultimate truth about the
Designer is made known. Jesus said I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John
14:6 NIV).[8] Where the deist believes in a God who has not
revealed His identity, the Christian is faithful to a God who has revealed
Himself, who wants to be known. Without fearing opposing views, the Christian
should investigate and grow in their knowledge of what is true, for their faith
is in the Provider of all truth.[9] In Christ being the Truth, one sees there
must be a deeper understanding about what truth is. Truth is not subjective,
nor can one simply argue truth is objective, but truth is alive and eternal. God
desires for the Christian to love Him with all their mind, and Jesus expects the
Christian to worship God in Spirit and in truth (Matt. 22:37; John 4:21-24).
Therefore, the Christian should seek after a deeper understanding in the
fields of science, philosophy, and of course theology to better articulate the
truth to any person who believes contrary.[10] From multiple fields of study there has been
amazing discoveries supportive of the Biblical worldview, thus there is no
excuse for ignorance in the Church today. The Bible is clear on how the
faithful must be wise towards outsiders, being ready to provide answers to everyone
who asks why one should place their faith in Christ (Col. 4: 5-6, 1 Pet. 3:15).
Absolute
Truth and the Rational Mind
One cannot ignore the necessity of a stable mind when seeking after
truth, for the recognition of self is the first observable truth no person can
honestly deny. When analyzing what others have designed one cannot deny the
necessity of their being a mind apart from oneself. When observing the signs of
design in nature one cannot rightfully deny the necessity of an intelligent
first cause, for intelligence has always proven to be necessary for complex
design.[11] One may argue against the manner in which the
Designer created and feel there are flaws in creation, but there is no true
evidence against the clear signs of design in nature. As will be argued for
later in this text even when one addresses the problem of suffering and what
evils have come upon the world the most apparent hope is found in Christ. Ultimately,
what can be discovered about God in nature and through divine revelation connects
to Christ who brings light to the Christian ability to reason.[12] In Hebrews the writer reflects on what
mankind is where God is mindful of them and cares for them, crowning them with
honor and putting everything under their feet (Heb. 2:6-8). People inherited a
responsibility in this world, for this world. Every person feels this in some
way. Influenced by Hebrews 2:6-8 Anne Runehoy wrote, “…human beings need
special capacities, for example, the capacity to analyze, reflect, make
decisions, and possess awareness in relation to their own person and others.”[13] People were intended to live united and in
pursuit of the greater good. In Christ one discovers the way, the ultimate
truth, and the greater good found in the life He gives. The rational mind is
always dependent on another mind when seeking to progress in life, and many
great minds have even unintentionally provided support for Christianity.
Sadly, for those who deny absolute truth even the existence of their
own mind is questioned. As Descartes defended the truth one is certain of is “I
think, therefore I am.”[14] The individual can know their mind exists,
hence why one can question anything. In recognizing this is true at the same
time the individual knows this cannot be the greatest truth, for no human mind must
exist apart from all other minds. To deny this absolute truth is completely
illogical. Since one recognizes their existence is not a necessary truth which
all other truths depend on, there must be a greater truth. The greater truth
must be an eternal truth, an eternal mind who must be for all other minds to
exist. Philosopher William Lane Craig presents the Cosmological Argument, contending
for the necessity of the first cause being the mind of God.
1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, the universe has a cause.
4. The cause of the universe is God.[15]
To fully appreciate the significance of this simple argument one must
first believe there are absolute truths in logic. The first premise is key to
understanding for those who argue God needed a cause, and the need for causes
would then go back for infinity. Time began at the Big Bang, so there was no existence
of time until the creation of space and time. If there is complex
design discovered in nature an eternal mind must have designed the universe,
and this Designer wants to be recognized. Before presenting a logical argument in defense of this
claim readers must first understand what fallacies to be aware of when seeking
after logical truth. There are those who are hindered from recognizing truth
because of never having learned how to think objectively. For these cases, the
individual usually comes to conclusions for emotional reasons, or because of
not taking the initiative to question what the majority accepts to be true.
Cultural practices and traditions often govern the decisions one makes, leaving
so many with a false sense of reality. No matter how smart
a person is the one seeking to grow in knowledge will become more confused if
the truth is rejected in favor of tradition.
Logical
Fallacies Distracting from the Truth
Before accepting what is eternally true and of lasting value one must
humbly recognize their method of reasoning is likely faulty. People are easily
influenced, easily misguided, and prone to being dishonest with themselves. As
Groothuis warns, “We must be ruthless with ourselves in the process of pursuing
truth, given the manifold temptations to self-deception and denial.”[16] Upon recognizing people commonly have their
worldview formed by logical fallacies, readers will understand how the majority
can be wrong, even amongst the smartest of people. The three logical fallacies
to be shared here are taught in university college math classes and are
universally recognized. An appeal to
emotions is a logical
fallacy focused on manipulating the emotions of another to win an argument
without the use of factual evidence. This logical fallacy is often used by
politicians and in debates between a theist and an atheist. One may argue
against a certain idea or worldview such as Christianity and in doing so appeal
to the emotions of the audience. Even Christians often argue for their faith
being based on feelings. People often express their views beginning with “it
just feels right to me,” or “it just doesn’t feel right to me.” Arguing from an
appeal to emotions does not provide evidence for anything being true or false.
The embracing of this illogical reasoning will result in self-centered people
who care more about their wants and comforts than caring for the truth
The human mind was created to work with
others for the purpose of caring for this world (Gen. 1:28). After the fall,
greed crept in, self-centeredness, envy, and the desire to follow others before
God. Consequently, sin resulted in the human mind becoming emotionally weaker
and more vulnerable. Upon hearing the gospel message and choosing to deny
Christ the honest skeptic has accepted the wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23). Upon
rejecting Christ, one chooses to believe life is meaningless, hopeless, and
thus in the end there is only death. Therefore, on the basic level even the
skeptic accepts those who reject Christ presuppose self-centered actions/sin will
ultimately result in death. For those who deny the possibility of God existing,
one cannot expect such a person to care about truth, much less seek after it,
thus these survivors will naturally linger where their herd is grazing. If
there is an ultimate moral authority, the biblical God, naturally those who
deny this authority have fooled themselves and have allowed themselves to be
fooled. For many who want to be accepted and relevant, truth and facts become
secondary issues, if even considered at all, for on average humans are prone to
gathering with those who shout the loudest.
People are often prone to being lazy thinkers, being easily
persuaded because of an appeal to ignorance. This logical fallacy is
where one is choosing to believe or not believe while not considering the
possibility of their being evidence against their worldview. With this fallacy
a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or vice versa.
This view does not consider perhaps one has done insufficient research,
therefore insufficient information resulted in one concluding a proposition
true or false. In debates, appeal to ignorance is sometimes used to shift the
burden of proof. If a teacher declares to a class there
is scientific evidence for evolution and no evidence for God, this is appealing
to the ignorance of the students. Often Christians’ choose to be ignorant
of certain subjects because of their fear in discovering some truth contrary to
their faith. The one who claims to be faithful while fearing truth will not be
able to grow spiritually, and neither prove very productive in helping others
to grow. When the faithful one grows in their knowledge
of science, culture, history, religion, etc. one grows in their confidence to
better engage with a diverse group of people. The humble yet educated
learner will listen and wait for the right opportunity to share their
understanding on the subject in question. For example, concerning Darwinism,
the Christian must first understand the arguments for and against atheistic
evolution before attempting to persuade the naturalist to believe in Christ.
Appeal to popularity is using the popularity
of an idea as evidence for this being true. For example, in America today the
idea of Communism being a good thing is growing in popularity, despite
historical evidence to the contrary. Often people will want to accept what the
majority believe out of fear of being treated as an outcast. Companies make use
of this deception to sell their products with clever marketing through the
media. Social and political figures seek to win the approval of others by
claiming to support whatever belief or idea is trending. Sadly, appeal to
popularity is a common logical fallacy used to indoctrinate young minds. The
Christian needs to come to a point in their life where doubts and questions
about the faith are no longer pushed to the side. One must seek after the truth
individually while still depending on the research done by other minds. This
journey of discovery is most exciting as seekers of truth will see how science
and history are supportive friends of Christianity.
An
example in recent history which proved how easily large groups of people can be
fooled was during the O.J. Simpson trial. All the evidence showed O.J. Simpson
was the murderer. The defense lawyers appealed to each of these logical
fallacies and proved large groups of people can be easily manipulated. A trial
for the murder of two innocent people became focused on racism and corrupt
police officers. The defense lawyers successfully convinced the jury and
thousands, perhaps millions of viewers, racism was the true reason Simpson was
being accused of murder. The jury found Simpson innocent of all charges and
multitudes cheered when the verdict was given. The simple truth is people are
easily influenced and quick to believe misinformation presented by
authoritative figures. Even the renowned scholar and sceptic Bart D. Ehrman was
troubled to learn the majority living in Sweden were educated to believe Jesus
was never real, seeing Him to be a fabricated character like the Easter bunny.[17] The
clear lesson from history is all people are vulnerable to being fooled, even in
large numbers, as evidenced in Nazi Germany during WWII, or observed during the
O.J. Simpson trial. An entire nation can be fooled into believing a lie.
A person must first recognize and then confess
to being guilty of not thinking properly, before one can begin to discover and
accept what is true. If
there is absolute truth, being the mind able to reason and question, everything
cannot be meaningless. Instead of just accepting what can be observed as true
and simply seeking out the essentials for survival, the human mind cannot rest.
The human mind could have easily never existed but at the same time is the most
significant observable truth. If the universe had a first cause, this means
space and time came into being from a source outside of the natural realm, thus
the first cause is supernatural and timeless/eternal. The reason the universe
appears to be designed and finetuned for life is because the universe has been designed.
The individual mind recognizes their existence is certain, the reader knows
this is the most apparent absolute truth one cannot deny. But the individual
recognizes their existence is not something that must be. The most necessary
truth must be an eternal invulnerable mind.
Regarding the complexity of living organisms as discovered in
micro-biology scientists admit there is evidence for design, yet many do not
accept the Designer being the God of the Bible. Perhaps for a combination of reasons the
average scientist does not confess to believing the Biblical account of
creation. Perhaps being influenced by popular opinion among peers who
presuppose belief in God is unscientific, or emotional reasons is more often
why the God of the Bible is rejected. The most intelligent of minds can often
be the most stubborn and prideful. When faced with the evidence for God the
naturalist will often take their own leap of faith when proposing a
counterhypothesis. Directed panspermia is the idea some advanced intelligent
beings were necessary for planting the seeds of life on this planet.[18] After discovering the complexity of DNA,
molecular biologist Francis Crick proposed the explanation for the uniformity
of the genetic code could possibly be extraterrestrial in origin.[19] This hypothesis is not as outlandish as the
multiverse theory because the evidence for design is being observed and
accepted. One is still left wondering who created the aliens responsible for
creating the life on Earth.
The ET origins for human intelligence does not stand well against
scrutiny because of how incredibly old scientists believe the universe is. If
atheistic evolution is true advanced ET would have to consistently seek out
Earth like planets, always needing resources. As can be observed on Earth
intelligent life tends to use up more natural resources as technology advances.
According to the Fermi Paradox argument if intelligent ET life existed humanity
would know at this point in history.[20] When considering how quickly technology is
leading towards AI on Earth, certainly some other civilization in the universe
has already sent out advanced probes to other galaxies. Computer experts
believe within a century there will be AI capable of duplicating itself.[21] Combining this technology with rocket
technology would lead to AI programmed space probes adept to reaching the
nearest star system in 40,000 years, from where duplicates could be made and
sent out to other galaxies.[22] The human mind is intelligent enough to know
eventually the Sun will destroy the Earth, and the only hope for survival is to
plan on how humanity can escape this fate. The AI thinkers today strongly hold
to the belief in “survival of the fittest,” and as Golata has observed the
driving desire for advanced technologists is to “explore new frontiers without
limits.”[23] Great human minds are
already seeking after creating artificial superintelligence, and pursuing
advanced rocket technology capable of sending a probe further into space at a
faster rate. From this perspective one must ponder on the improbability of
there not being advanced ET life since most planets are billions of years older
than Earth. With the technology humans now possess there should at least be
some detection of alien probes.
The ET origins for human intelligence is improbable when one considers
the hundreds of anthropic constants necessary for intelligent life on this
planet to be possible. As astrophysicist Hugh Ross calculated when considering
the necessary requirements for intelligent life to arise and survive on Earth
the chances are one in 10138.[24] One can rationally argue the universe and
human mind resulting from ET intelligence is highly improbable. Ultimately
the argument for advanced ET creating the human mind is an appeal to ignorance.
Unlike other religious texts in antiquity the Bible was the first to
describe the universe as being created by one God, and then this same God
created each living organism. The Christian would not be surprised by the
discovery of the universe having a first cause, or the discovery of complex
design in living organisms. Instead these recent discoveries would mean in this
present age God has willed for the human mind to discover the evidence for what
was already divinely revealed in scripture. The observable truth is the origin
of the universe and the complexity of life is supported by the biblical text.
Upon accepting there is absolute truth, when seeking to discover a greater
truth one must keep in mind observable truths cannot be dependent on logical
fallacies. See
below an example on how a logical argument is formed without depending on
logically fallacious assumptions, for each premise can
be logically defended.
(1) The human mind can observe evidence the
universe is designed.
(2) The human mind coming into being by chance is
improbable.
(3) The universe is complexly designed thus a higher
intelligence created the universe.
(4) The universe is fine-tuned to support human
life.
(5) The human mind was intended to recognize there
is an eternal Designer.
Another problem keeping people from accepting
what is logically true, or observably true, is the human tendency to
exaggerate, or argue over rather insignificant issues. All people are prone
towards embellishing on the truth, even if unintentionally, which often proves
counterproductive. When the Christian claims to be an apologist but begins a debate
insisting one must believe in six literal days of creation, this is not
necessarily true, and can be counterproductive. As argued throughout this paper
the human mind is designed to understand how God has revealed Himself in nature
and in His word. In Genesis readers find there was not a twenty-four-hour cycle
of the Earth spinning around the sun until the fourth day of creation (Gen.
1:14-19). For God a day is not a twenty-four-hour cycle, so both divine
revelation and science are not in conflict if the universe is older than
thousands of years (2 Pet. 3:8). Perhaps the universe and the Earth only appear
to be quite old, either way it does not really matter.
Another reason arguing for the literal days of creation is not necessary is because the idea of atheistic evolution resulting in an intelligent mind is an illogical hypothesis. The opposing side often promotes lies in the schools and in the media. For example, the founders of the supposed Lucy ancestor confessed to being biased and admitted this ape should not be in the family tree.[25] The insistence of atheistic evolution being true is not based on solid observable evidence, and even if some form of naturalistic evolution is true theology and science are not in conflict. A growing number of theologians, apologists and scientists alike have recently united to offer their mutual support for the hypothesis presented by Doctor S. Joshua Swamidass in his book titled The Genealogical Adam and Eve: The Surprising Science of Universal Ancestry.[26] In this book Swamidass presents a logical, scientific, and biblically supported argument unifying evolutionary causes for creation with the biblical account.[27]Despite evolution not being a major obstacle for Christianity hominin fossil seeking paleontologists still tend to exaggerate on their claims. The missing link hunters often insist their worldview is true despite any contrary evidence. What will be noted here is on the ultimate level even Darwin believed there are no “random events,” and there must be a first cause.[28] Considering the improbability of intelligent life emerging by chance the evidence favors a superior intelligence as being the cause. The skeptic may feel it is a stretch for one to claim the evidence is in favor of biblical claims and the Judeo-Christian God. The free minded one will remain open to accepting where the evidence leads.
Readers may question how one can claim to think rationally while at
the same time believing in God and miracles like those mentioned in the Bible.
The naturalist argues against the possibility of supernatural occurrences, thus
there is no God capable of superseding the natural laws. However, because of recent
discoveries supportive of an extra-dimensional reality the experts in the
higher sciences would disagree with the skeptical naturalist. To be addressed further
in this text from the perspective of the experts in astrophysics even the
seemingly paradoxical Biblical doctrines, like the Trinity, are logically defensible.[29] There are rational arguments for the
supernatural, but what can be observed in nature alone has always argued for
the existence of God. Though known for writing one of the more famous
objections to miracles, even David Hume stated, “The whole frame of nature
bespeaks an intelligent author; and no rational enquirer can, after serious
reflection, suspend his belief a moment with regard to the primary principles
of genuine Theism and Religion.”[30] Perhaps if Hume knew
evolutionists would later believe intelligent life emerging in the universe is
quoted as being “less than 10 to the minus one million power” The Natural
History of Religion would have never been written.[31] Not
only is the existence of the universe a miracle but so is intelligent life.
One
should recognize the natural laws are set in place for good reason, but the
mind is also designed to identify when an event supersedes the natural laws. If
not for understanding and respecting the laws of nature one could not
appreciate the greatest miracles to be argued for like the
incarnation and the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
[1]Simon Conway Morris,
The Runes of Evolution: How the Universe Became Self-Aware,
(West Conshohocken, PA: Templeton Press, 2015), 266.
[2]
Morris, The Runes of
Evolution, 265-266.
[4] Ibid., 4.
[5] Paul Golata, The Ethics of Superintelligent Design, (Eugene,
OR: Wipf & Stock, 2018), 8.
[6] Werner Heisenberg, Physics and
Philosophy, (New York: NY, Penguin Books, 2000), 45.
[7] Wolfe, The Kingdom of Speech,
5.
[8] Unless
otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are in the New International Version (Indianapolis,
IN: Zondervan, 1990).
[9]
J.P. Moreland, and William Lane Craig, Philosophical Foundations for a Christian
Worldview, (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2017), 151.
[10] J.P. Moreland, Love Your God with All Your Mind,
(Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress, 2012), 63.
[11] Stephen C. Meyer, Darwin’s
Doubt, (Broadway, NY: HarperOne, 2013), 396-397.
[12] Steve Wilkens, Faith and Reason: Three Views, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press,
2014), 155.
[13] Anne L. C. Runehov, The Human
being, the World and God: Studies at the Interface of Philosophy of Religion,
Philosophy of Mind and Neuroscience, (Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 2016),
xv.
[14] René
Descartes, Discourse on the Method of
Rightly Conducting the Reason, and Seeking Truth in the Sciences, (Raleigh,
N.C.: Generic NL Freebook Publisher, 1990), 19.
[15] Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case
for Biblical Faith, (Downers Grove: IL, InterVarsity Press, 2011), 214.
[16] Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, 142.
[19] Ibid., 344-345.
[20] Frank J. Tipler, “Intelligent Life in Cosmology,” (International
Journal of Astrobiology, Vol. 2(2): 141-148 (2003), 2.
[21] Tipler, “Intelligent Life in Cosmology,” 2.
[22] Ibid., 3.
[23]
Golata, The Ethics of Superintelligent
Design, 137.
[24] Norman L. Geisler and Frank Turek, I
Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist, (Wheaton, IL. Crossway Books,
2004), 106.
[25] Donald C. Johanson, and Maitland A.
Edey, Lucy: The Beginnings of Humankind, (New York: NY, Simon &
Schuster, 1981), 257-258.
[26] S. Joshua
Swamidass, The Genealogical Adam and Eve: The Surprising Science of
Universal Ancestry, (Downers Grove: IL, IVP Academic, 2019).
[27] Ibid., 174-178.
[28]
Tipler, “Intelligent Life in Cosmology,” 2.
[29]
Hugh Ross, The
Fingerprint of God, (Orange CA: Promise Publishing Co., 1989), 183.
[30] David Hume, The
Natural History of Religion, (London: UK, A. and H. Bradlaugh Bonner,
1889), Introduction.
