III: The Designer and Purposeful Design
The ability to reason properly is hindered when a person chooses to
reject the source of all truth. As Golata argued, “If God is not the creator of
both the universe and mankind, then mankind is not under any ethical obligation
to God; hence, man himself becomes the measure of all things, including
morality.”[1] A sense of morality proves difficult to
define for those who reject God as the source of moral truths. As argued
earlier God desires for humans to understand His love and share this love with
others, but instead a growing number of people judge Christianity as intolerant
and immoral. Obviously, the non-Christian can use their sense of reason to
discover some truths in life, but eventually one must accept Christ, or only
ever become more confused. Apart from Christ one will either be deluded into
believing this meaningless temporary life is grander than history has proven or
become someone who wallows in depression consistently anticipating regret and
despair.[2] The point being argued here is the mind has
the ability to comprehend what God has revealed about Himself, and despite
contrary opinions one can make rational sense of the truths revealed about God
in the Bible.
Upon observing the growing number of atheists
supporting postmodernism or secular humanism what is evident is apart from
Christ one cannot even argue for there being truth. The other dominant
religious views reject a proper understanding of truth in favor of irrational
cultural beliefs. In Hinduism, a person believes anything can be deified, as a
recent news article was speaking of a man who created a shrine for the
worshiping of Donald Trump. Clearly this view of God is not even a proper
definition of God, as the true God cannot come from human origins. Where the
Christians already accept the universe had a beginning before science confirmed
this to be true, Hinduism still endorses the belief in space and time never having
an absolute point of origin. Non-Vedic Sanskrit texts and the Puranas teach on
how the universe is endless, and cyclic, thus the universe is eternal.[3] In
Buddhism essentially the same cosmological ideas were adopted, but according to
the Samyutta Nikāya the Buddha believed even thinking on the origins of the
universe was useless.[4] Some
ancient beliefs must reject or avoid scientific truth whereas the
post-modernist and secular humanist must reject logical truth.
To believe in Islam one must reject historical
truth, for where even secular scholars recognize Jesus Christ died on the
cross, the Muslim denies this to be true. Regarding how the seeker of truth
should understand the diversity of religions Moreland argued for one thinking
of a maze filled with many paths.[5] As
argued at the beginning of this paper logical fallacies keep people from
accepting the truth, but for the impartial seeker of truth the right path will
be easier found. As Moreland argued, “The challenge is to find the one path that
leads you to the final destination – the center.”[6] No other worldview offers such a balanced perspective on life as
Christianity. A balanced understanding for why there is suffering and death yet
still true purpose and hope in life is found only in Christ.[7]
Only in Christ does one find rational reason to have hope in eternal
love and eternal life. If in an honest pursuit of truth, the mind created to
seek out and understand the bigger answers in life will discover where the path
leads. The mind can identify the universe had a first cause, is designed to
support human life, the Triune God is the Designer, and the problem of evil is
best reconciled when one accepts Christ. Perhaps one who is open to accepting
what has been shared so far may still have questions with regards to the DNA
evidence seemingly proving the human is closely related to the ape. For if
humanity evolved from apes, one cannot so easily argue for the human mind being
made in the image of God.
For the discouraged evangelist what is important to note is whatever
can be discovered supportive of Christianity was intentionally revealed by God.
After having shared the Parable of the Sower, the twelve disciples and others
came up to Jesus seeking an explanation (Mark 4:10). Christ told these seekers
of truth, “The secret of the Kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those
on the outside everything is said in parables so that, "'they may be ever
seeing but never perceiving, and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven” (Mark 4:11-12)! In this passage, one
sees how the Kingdom of God is for those who come to Christ seeking after
answers. The seeker must be willing to accept one truth before discovering
another or gaining a deeper understanding on any given issue. Ultimately, the person
who rejects Christ is simply disinterested, proving unable to accept the Spirit
of truth (John 14:16-17). The apologist must be prepared, for when pursuing
truth in a politically corrupt and biased society one may first have to strip
away several lies and preconceived notions.
The belief in random mutations accounting
for the existence of complex living organisms has been scientifically proven false.
Because of advanced methods used in
laboratories today, one can examine molecular life and find clear evidence
against atheistic evolution. Regarding the recent discoveries in science,
micro-biologist Michael Behe writes, “…one higher category cannot descend from
another by means of an unplanned process such as Darwin’s mechanism.”[8] Since a key premise of the Darwinian argument
proves unable to explain the process of creation, atheistic evolution is false.
Those who still believe the human mind is an untrustworthy product of evolution
are either lying or misinformed. As Behe states, “Random mutation and natural
selection cannot build a brain or even coherently modify one.”[9] Nonetheless, as stated earlier there is a
growing number of Christians who believe a guided process of evolution
happening alongside the creation of Adam in the garden is not contrary to the
Bible. There are also ancient nonbiblical sources verifying the Genesis account
was remembered thousands of years before the Jews were exiled to Babylon.
Within their pictographs those who migrated to China preserved the account of
the flood, the creation of Adam in the garden, the Tower of Babel, and even the
part the devil/serpent had to play, to name a few Genesis accounts.[10] Thus the claim the Jews made up the first books of the Bible when
exiled to Babylon cannot be substantiated. Although the theory of human
evolution is of no threat to theism the faithful seeker of truth must not be so
quick at accepting Darwin’s theory.
People have heard about the many hominid fossils discovered verifying
the human brain evolved from these prior ancestors. The Christian who truly
trusts in Christ will take the initiative to investigate such claims instead of
ignoring them out of fear of losing their faith. The claim of there being
multiple hominids in the family tree leading up to homo-sapiens is a lie. The false
Lucy claim has already been mentioned, and any other extinct monkey paleontologists
may dig up is just that, an extinct ape-like creature. There is plenty of
evidence for Neanderthals having once lived, and many humans share some of
their DNA, reason being because the Neanderthal was human. Homo-erectus
certainly lived, and these people could travel far distances across the sea in
a watercraft created with steering and propulsion mechanisms.[11] The Australian archaeologist who made this
discovery, Mike Morwood stated, “We’re not dealing with glorified chimpanzees
here… We’re dealing with a species that has many of the characteristics of
modern people.”[12] The mind made to worship God must reconsider
how Adam and Eve truly looked, for where people judge by outward appearances
the Lord looks at the heart (1 Sam. 16:7). Where the human imagines Adam and
Eve were exceptionally beautiful physically, what is most important is these
two were made in the image of God being able to communicate, learn, and create.
Macro-evolution does not happen, devolution happens, as observed with
all the different dog breeds. The cute fluffy dog is not as exceptional as the
wolf, and certainly not as smart. Here is the uncomfortable truth Adam and Eve
may have been two rather hairy and likely short human beings, but these two
were very much human, and were certainly smarter than people are today. The
preflood people were exceptionally intelligent, as Cain went and built the
first city, and in a few more generations people were building bronze and iron
tools, and creating stringed instruments and pipes (Gen. 4:17, 21-22). Where
humans may be taller and softer in appearance today the average mind is easily domesticated,
easily influenced, and prone to being enslaved. Hence, the need for a Savior,
and the need for the human mind to depend on the mind of God.
Like how schools still teach Lucy was an ancestor even though the
founders confessed to being biased, the teaching on the genetic similarity
between the chimpanzee and human is misrepresented as well. When analyzing the
data for both the human and chimpanzee genome geneticist Richard Buggs
calculated the similarity between these two species could be less than 70%.[13] Separate studies have shown upon analyzing
the base pairs of DNA for the human and chimpanzee there is a difference of 360
million.[14] Regardless of the DNA similarities between
different species one can argue similarity in design does not prove one
creature evolved from another. The case grows more confusing because DNA
similarities does not always mean similar appearances in design. At this point research indicates humans are 90% genetically
related to a cat.[15] Better
yet, genetically speaking a mouse is 99% equivalent to a human.[16] Perhaps
more research needs to be done, because all this information leaves one feeling
confused. Surely the experts in this field of study have a more profound
understanding than the common man analyzing this data. Regarding an exact percentage difference
between human and chimpanzee geneticist Svante Paabo states, “I don’t think
there’s any way to calculate a number… In the end, it’s a political and social
and cultural thing about how we see our differences.”[17] As Meyer has observed
the experts recognize their theories do not work, but no one is willing to admit
this truth.[18]
Evidently, these atheistic origin of life intellectuals are story tellers who
have fooled themselves, or these experts are charlatans with an agenda.
If the similarity between a chimp and human was a remaining obstacle one
should just accept DNA similarities is not evidence in support of atheistic
evolution, and certainly not evidence against the mind being designed by God.
When examining DNA people are trying to understand complex information designed
by the most advanced mind. One should simply humbly accept DNA is evidence for
God, and the human mind can comprehend this much to be
true. The discovery of DNA is so amazing the faithful Darwinist who rejects
intelligent design is guilty of trying to make this conflicting truth support
their presupposed view. This is like a stubborn child trying to fit a square
into the circle space on a shape sorter toy. Moreland addresses the obvious
elephant in a room filled with scientists who reject God, stating “Indeed, the
amount of information in the genetic code of a human being is more than all the
information in all the books in the Library of Congress combined!”[19] Information must come from an intelligent
mind, so it just seems absurd to argue for atheistic evolution being true
starting with supposed DNA evidence. The honest atheist
is in an awkward place when having to accept a person is 90% related to a cat,
99% percent related to a mouse, and 70% related to the chimp. If the seeker of truth is willing to accept what has been
presented thus far, the next step in the journey will be to investigate the
evidence for Jesus Christ. If Christ is more than a dead historical figure
and truly is God, what He has to say about the human condition must be of the
utmost value.
Where the Evidence Leads
The unbiased seeker of truth would discover the right road leads to Christ. When
considering the early historical evidence outside of the Bible there is more
mention of Jesus than Tiberius Cesar who was the ruling emperor during this
period.[20] From non-biblical documents, Jewish, Greek,
and Roman historians verify some amazing truths about Jesus. From these sources
one discovers this Rabbi had quite a following, miraculously healed people and
performed exorcisms, was crucified by Pontius Pilate after being rejected by
the Jewish authorities, the skies turned dark when Christ was crucified, and a
short time later people claimed to see Him resurrected.[21] Critical scholars recognize the tomb of Jesus
was empty, as early accounts from Tertullian and Justin Martyr attested to the
fact being since the enemies could not show the body as evidence they spread
the idea of a body heist.[22] The empty tomb is significantly important
because this means no person can counter the evidence for the resurrection by
claiming the body has not yet been discovered.
Before conversion Paul was an enemy to Christianity, during this time Paul
must have spoken with the Jewish leaders to verify where Jesus had been buried.
Paul must have believed the rumor being the disciples were heretics who had
stolen the body. However, Paul provided the earliest testimony for Jesus being
resurrected, as even liberal scholars view Pauls’ testimony as being of the
utmost importance.[23] Even according to skeptical scholars based on
the evidence and semantics Paul very much believed in the empty tomb, and the
physical resurrection of Jesus.[24] Many facts in history are attested to being true based on two to three
sources, so since there are several accounts for the empty tomb and the
resurrection this should render the historical claim as unimpeachable.[25] The early testimony from Paul to the church
in Corinth should not be overlooked. The historian must consider probability when
studying historical claims, hence if Paul spoke to the other eyewitnesses Paul
must have heard about the empty tomb.[26] There is early eyewitness accounts, there is
enemy attestation supportive of Jesus miracles, and critical scholars recognize
the disciples and the apostle Paul were killed for believing Christ
resurrected. There are several books written about the overwhelming evidence
for Jesus life, death, and resurrection, but the skeptic claims the primary
reason one must deny the evidence is because the dead cannot be resurrected.
Probably one of the most famous of New Testament critics/scholars is
Bart Ehrman, someone whom a growing number of Christians find to be quite
daunting. This is rather odd, since the arguments Ehrman presents cannot refute
any of the evidence for the resurrection. As argued earlier the mind seeking
after truth must be suspect of those who promote misinformation. For example,
leading skeptical scholars claim the Gospel of John is more legend than fact
since the text was written later than the synoptic gospels. According to Ehrman
the idea of Jesus being God was something the early church did not believe
hence John's authorship is in question.[27] However, the earliest section of a New
Testament text to be discovered is John 18:31-38.[28] Furthermore, witnesses who knew the
apostles, like Clement and Irenaeus, confirmed John was the writer of this
final authoritative gospel.[29] This is significant because John
18:31-38 records an account where Jesus is conversing with Pilate, and
verifying His kingdom is from beyond this world (v. 36). In this passage Christ
clearly stated His reason for being born into this world was "...to
testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me" (v.
37). Well in this same account Jesus declared the only way to Heaven is through
Him (14:6). In conclusion this account is too early to be attributed to legend.
God willing readers will not be easily intimidated by those in
authoritative positions like professors who share misdirecting lies or
intentionally ambiguous information. For example, instead of simply stating
"... Luke meant to write a history of early Christianity, not a
novel," and "all of the ancient Christian authors... appear to have
understood it in this way" Ehrman decided to distract readers from this
truth.[30] Before recognizing the perceived
historicity of the Gospel of Luke Ehrman first insinuates there may be
"fictional elements" in the text.[31] Essentially, in light of the evidence readers
must not stress on what Ehrman believes may or may not be so. For further
research Truth in a Culture of Doubt is a recommended read for countering
the claims of form critics like Ehrman.[32] Ultimately, if the evidence proves substantial for one to conclude the
incarnation and the resurrection is true, Christianity is true.
As argued earlier the very existence of the universe and the human
mind is miraculous, and there are forces not bound by the natural realm and
dependent on an unseen realm. If one can discover evidence for the Triune God,
rational reason to believe miracles are possible, and historical evidence for
the resurrection, one must wonder what else God desires for the seeker to discover.
Upon recognizing the limitations of the human mind and the fallen nature of
humanity one discovers further reason for depending on the eternal mind of God.
Despite what some may believe there is a limit to the human imagination and
apart from Christ people are not inherently good but are set on destruction. The
reason these two issues must be addressed is because the only way one can
accept what God has revealed about Himself is if one humbly accepts their
limitations. Regardless of what can be discovered there comes a point where one
must choose to trust in the Lord with all their heart without depending first
on their own understanding (Prov. 3:5). However, Christ does not expect people
to trust Him without good reason. God has provided more than enough reasons to
acknowledge Him and revere Him. At the crossroads one must accept their desperate
need to depend on God and accept the truth being whoever rejects God/Love
embraces death/judgement. As will be argued before the conclusion the ultimate choice
separates those who are defenders of truth from those who despise the truth.
Accepting the Need for Divine Revelation
The truth is humans are very predictable. In
ancient times polytheism was commonly practiced and each of these gods were
created in the image of fallen humans. From the Sumerians to the ancient Greeks, and on the other side of the
ocean as well, the major civilizations were polytheistic. The answer to this
grand mystery is not ancient aliens, but simply this is the best a unity of
human minds could imagine. Some have argued for Zoroastrianism
being the earliest mono-theistic religion, claiming this religion influenced
the Jewish exiles in Babylon. Zoroastrianism was founded about 300 years before
Alexander the Great, and scholars have concluded Zoroaster was born around the
time the Jews were taken captive by the Babylonians.[33] This is similar to how and why the Quran came
after the Bible, as Zoroastrianism was likely inspired by Judaism and not vice
versa. Based on the archeological evidence, like the Moabite Stone dated to 840
BC and graffiti at Kuntillet ‘Ajrud dated at around 800 BC, the Jews worshiped
Yahweh well before being taken captive by the Babylonians.[34] There is no reliable evidence in support of
the Judeo-Christian concept of God being stolen from other religions.
When the Jews emerged believing there is one God with no beginning and
no end, the world was presented with the greatest being one could conceive of
existing. Consider the thought people are incapable of imagining the God of the
Bible, a God with no image conceivable by man, with no beginning or end, three
persons in one being. The skeptic should reconsider the point Anselm of
Canturbury was making, “…there is no doubt that something than which a greater
cannot be thought exists both in the understanding and in reality.”[35] The only reason the Judeo-Christian God is
the greatest being one can think of existing is because humans are incapable of
imagining such a God.
The characters in a novel could never know of being in a narrative
unless somehow the author revealed Himself. Only then could they recognize this
Author was somehow able to give life and understanding to what He imagined into
being. Naturally, these characters could not imagine One greater than the Author
who gave life to what He spoke into being. Hence why Anselm states, “This being
exists so truly that it cannot be thought not to exist.”[36] One might argue for it
being possible to replace God in the ontological argument with something else
by adding supreme or greater before the title. For example, one
cannot imagine something greater than the greatest universe with perfect
conditions for intelligent life. Anselm would argue the difference between the universe and God is the
universe does not necessarily need to exist.[37] Philosopher Yujin Nagasawa does a fine job at
proving the parody objection fails because the argument is (i) not structurally
parallel to the ontological argument, or (ii) not dialectically parallel to the
ontological argument.[38] Regarding these parody attacks Nagasawa
observed these arguments had to be modified in such a way where the argument is,
“…ironically, no longer a parody: it is the ontological argument itself.”[39] Since a self-sustaining eternal universe has
been proven impossible the Triune God remains the greatest concept any person
can imagine existing.
As already argued the existence of a fine-tuned universe is good
reason to believe God is the cause, and the mind was designed to recognize God
is the creator. However, before the discovery of the Big Bang people denying
the biblical account could still claim the universe is eternal. Before the divine revelation of who God is was shared with
Moses polytheistic accounts were predominate, and these beliefs did not support
the universe being created by one supreme God. Without knowledge of the
biblical God all of existence could only be understood as temporary and
unnecessary. Creatures live and die, and civilizations rise and fall. Nothing
lasts forever, and nothing is perfect, hence why the gods of mythology were all
flawed and relatable to humans. There is no reason for someone to imagine the
one true God into being hence why the God of the Bible is distinct from all
creation, beyond what the human mind could imagine.
Without the knowledge people have of God today all the human mind
would be able to comprehend about existence would be either something exists,
or does not exist, but nothing must exist. Anselm viewed belief in God
as being necessary before one could truly understand more rational reasons to
believe.[40] The human mind was intended to recognize God,
seek after God, and discover what He has revealed about Himself. For those
living today God has left evidence verifying what He has revealed to be true in
the Scriptures. The Cause of the creation is the only entity whose existence is
necessary. Some may claim one cannot know the first
cause, and this would be correct if God did not reveal Himself. The only
reason humans are even capable of believing in what Plantinga refers to as a
“maximal concept” is because the first cause is more than an imagined concept.[41]
If a “maximal concept” like the Triune God of the Bible is responsible
for creation, ancient humans would not have come to this conclusion on their
own. Humans can imagine flawed gods with human characteristics, or aliens with
humanoid or animal like characteristics, but the human mind cannot imagine into
being something beyond a combination of what is observable.[42] This is common sense; human imagination is
limited. Though a man may have the audacity to try arguing otherwise, no man
can imagine what a woman experiences when giving birth to a child. The
Ontological Argument would not even be possible unless the maximal first cause
revealed His existence to humanity in some way at some point in recorded
history. A maximal concept beyond the universe could not reveal itself to those
bound by space and time, because a concept cannot make itself known unless the
concept lives. The Christian places their faith in the Triune God who is beyond
space and time. Evidence discovered supporting the God of the Bible in physics and
biology is valuable, but the Ontological Argument would be incomprehensible without
divine revelation. If not for the Biblical account, there would be no true
relational God who wants to be known. No humans could or would make up the Triune
God of the Bible, hence why only in recent years has there been discoveries in
physics proving useful for one to logically argue for the Trinity.
For the love of God to be known in this realm necessary sacrifices were
made. Christ was crucified so the human mind could gain a deeper understanding
and appreciation for the perfect justice and grace of God. Bear in mind the
recognized limits of human imagination. Consider if not for divine revelation
one could not imagine a reality before space and time where numerous
manifestations of love were shared within the Trinity. Many manifestations of
beauty and love were only feelings or thoughts in the mind of God before
becoming real for any created being. There is a unique sensation of love and
peace the weeping father feels when listening to his daughters’ beating heart
in the chest of the one who lives because the daughter died. Another unique
sensation of love and peace is felt by two siblings who forgive each other and
are united after losing their mother. There is also the unique love mixed with
pride a soldier feels for their brother in arms who dies in the battlefield
after fighting bravely and saving lives. Before creation there could have been
individual words to describe each of these deeply loving sensations in the mind
of God. If the Bible were not true the greatest example of love would be a lie,
and any sense of hope during suffering is an illusion, for if only death is
certain life is meaningless. The greatest truths in life are fully recognized
and appreciated because of a knowledge of suffering. The crucifix is beautiful
today and is seen as a symbol of hope. The horror of Christ on the cross
suffering and dying for my sins is at the same time a beautiful truth I am most
grateful for. If the idea of sacrificial love were only real in the
imagination, such a thought would not truly be as great as the reality of the
person who lays down their life for others (John 15:13).
Certainly, a non-believer
can think rationally and present rational arguments, however those opposed to Christianity
cannot consistently provide rational reasons for rejecting Christ, and
certainly none for rejecting the possibility of a Designer. The atheistic
naturalist cannot even make rational sense of human consciousness, for based on
their presupposed view their own ability to reason is unreliable. As Morris
questioned, “Is it not curious that the many and various explanations for
consciousness, so convincing to some, have persistently slipped past the
attention of the Nobel committee?”[43]
In being both a Christian and an unbiased scientist Morris argued, “…what we
presently perceive is not all that there is—and indeed we may only be at the
earliest stages of our exploration.”[44]
The irony is those who reject the idea of theism entirely are the ones being
closed minded and guilty of limiting intellectual growth and human progress.
After disregarding the
evidential reasons to believe those opposed to Christianity will ultimately
fall back on logically fallacious reasoning. Sadly, the
growing number of atheists in America today have left the faith because the
church failed to provide answers, but more so because of hypocrisy and failed leadership.
No person leaves the faith because there is a lack of evidence, but at the
heart of the matter one leaves for emotional reasons. Reasons for rejecting
Christianity usually spawn from ignorance and emotions, and naturally all who
are ignorant and driven by emotions before logic will be easier to manipulate.
This is a truth every professor must know on some level, and this is a truth
every college student must keep in mind. Hence the critical scholar who claims
the deified Jesus is based on legend is being dishonest as the evidence for the
earliest witnesses worshiping Christ as the risen Savior is a historical fact
acknowledged by most scholars.[45] The one who genuinely wants to
believe will take the initiative to thoroughly investigate the evidence for or
against Christianity. For those who fall away today the lies of the world are so
appealing and distracting Christianity becomes unattractive. However, no person
can honestly deny the fact if all people lived up to the ethical standard
provided by Jesus the world would be a better place.
If all genuinely believed in the one true God, people would work
together being likeminded when pursuing beneficial innovations for humanity. As
Golata argued, “It is God, a super intelligent Designer and Creator, that
provides the answer for how the mind (spiritual) can connect to the material.”[46] The human mind was designed to be innovative,
but for the sake of caring for what God has created, and for the benefit of all
humanity. When analyzing the other major religions, one will not find a
unifying message of hope stretching beyond the material realm. Atheistic
worldviews certainly fail at improving humanity, and if intelligent atheists
pursue innovations harmful towards the human species their argument for
survival of the fittest must be false. Being an expert in engineering
technology Golata has observed atheist thinkers are obsessed with creating
artificial superintelligence. Regarding the potential ASI threat to human
survival Golata has observed these highly intelligent people are indifferent
because of their faith in evolution. Golata explains their reasoning being,
“Whatever is progress in and of itself is to be considered to be an
evolutionary success.”[47] Evidently, upon rejecting Christ and the idea
of absolute moral truths even the most intelligent minds can prove to be the
most foolish.
If a growing number of atheistic innovators are seeking to create
something potentially destructive to humanity this serves to prove those who
reject Christ will ultimately, even if unintentionally, work against humanity.
This is reminiscent of the gathering of great minds who sought after
discovering the naturalistic explanation for language. These great minds failed
because of presupposing God does not exist. As for the religious beliefs that
emerged from Christianity, like Islam and Mormonism, any secular critical
scholar would agree what these religions all have in common is being guilty of
plagiarism. If the Bible never existed, perhaps there would be only
polytheistic beliefs like Hinduism, which endorses segregation and
discrimination, and secular worldviews like Communism and Socialism would have
still emerged. If there was no Christianity naturally there would be no Christ,
and to imagine a world without Christ one need only look at what comes of the
world when His teachings are ignored. (Sweden may be the exception where
ignorance of historical truths has seemingly resulted in temporary bliss. Living
a lie is often preferred over the truth, hence the story of history.) No person
can honestly deny if all people loved their neighbors as themselves, and loved
their enemies, there would be no enemies, there would be world peace (Mark
12:31, Matt. 5:44). The human mind was designed to seek after truth, and
without the ability to think rationally one could not argue for the eternal
truth revealed in Christ and His Word. If the evidence leads to the God of the
Bible, and the lessons from Christ are undeniably true, Christianity must be true.
[1] Golata, The Ethics of Superintelligent Design, 1.
[2] David Walsh, The Third Millennium:
Reflections on Faith and Reason, (Washington D.C., Georgetown University
Press, 1999), 193.
[3] Dermot Killingley, “KÅMA,” in The Hindu World, ed. Sushi
Mittal and Gene Thursby, (London: UK, Routledge, 2004), 284.
[4] Eva K.
Neumaier, “Buddhist Forms of Belief in Creation,” in Buddhism, Christianity
and the question of Creation: Karmic or Divine?, ed. Perry Schmidt-Leukel,
(London: UK, Routledge, 2016), 48-49.
[6] Moreland, Love Your God with
all Your Mind, 157.
[7] Walsh, The
Third Millennium, 201-202.
[9] Ibid., 282.
[10]
My good friend Andy Wu
brought this knowledge to my attention and I will be ever grateful. (See
earliest forms of the Chinese pictographs to discover words/symbols are
combined to support the Genesis account. This can be found in the Chinese
pictographs for migrate, garden, to create, complete/finish, beginning,
sorrow, suffering, ship, righteousness, God, and devil), to name
some.
[11]
Robert Kunzig, "Erectus
Afloat," Discover, 01, (Jan 1999), 80.
[12] Ibid.
[13] Jefferey P.
Tomkins, “Comprehensive Analysis of Chimpanzee and Human Chromosomes Reveals
Average DNA Similarity of 70%,” (Answers Research Journal 6, 2013), 64.
[14]
Jefferey P. Tomkins, “Separate Studies
Converge on Human-Chimp DNA Dissimilarity,” Acts & Facts 47
(11) (2018), 9.
[15] Joan U. Pontius, James C. Mullikin,
Douglas R. Smith, Agencourt Sequencing Team, Kerstin Lindblad-Toh, Sante
Gnerre, Michele Clamp et al, "Initial sequence and comparative analysis of
the cat genome," Genome research 17, no. 11 (2007), 1678-1680.
[16]
Chris Gunter, and Ritu
Dhand, “Human Biology by Proxy,” Nature 420, no. 6915 (2002),
509.
[17] J. Cohen,
“EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY: Relative Differences: The Myth of 1%,” (Science 316,
no. 5833, June 7, 2007), 1836.
[18] Meyer, Signature in the Cell,
321.
[20] Geisler and Turek, I Don’t Have
Enough Faith to be an Atheist, 222.
[21]
Moreland, Love Your God
with all Your Mind, 198.
[22]
Groothuis, Christian Apologetics,
560.
[23]
Gary
R. Habermas, The Risen Jesus & Future Hope, (Lanham,
MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2003), 20.
[24] John Granger Cook, "Resurrection in Paganism and the
Question of an Empty Tomb in 1 Corinthians 15," New Testament Studies 63,
no. 1 (01, 2017), 74.
[25]
Habermas, The Risen Jesus & Future Hope, 23.
[26] Cook, "Resurrection in
Paganism and the Question of an Empty Tomb in 1 Corinthians 15," 75.
[27]
Ehrman, Jesus Interrupted,
104-107.
[28] Darrell L. Bock, Studying the Historical
Jesus, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker
Publishing, 2002), 36.
[29]
Bock, Studying the
Historical Jesus, 36.
[30]
Bart D. Ehrman, The
New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings, 2nd ed.,
(New York, Oxford University Press, 2000), 124.
[31]
Ibid.
[32]
Andreas J.
Kostenberger, Darrell L. Bock, Josh D. Chatraw, Truth in a Culture of Doubt,
(Nashville TN: B&H Publishing, 2009.)
[33] Walter A. Elwell, Zoroastrianism,
Evangelical Dictionary of Theology 2nd Edition, (Grand Rapids, MI:
Baker Publishing Group, 2001), 1310.
[34]
Alan
R. Millard, “Were the Israelites Really Canaanites?” Israel: Ancient Kingdom
or Late Invention? Ed. Daniel I. Block, (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing,
2008), Chapter 8.
[35] Anselm of Canturbury, Proslogion with
the Replies of Gaunilo and Anselm (Cambridge, IN: Hackett Publishing Company, 2001), 7.
[36] Ibid., 8.
[37] Anselm, 9.
[38]
Yujin Nagasawa, “The Ontological Argument and
the Devil,” (The Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 238, 2010), 73.
[39]
Ibid.
[40] Cardinal Avery Dulles, A History of Apologetics (Eugene, OR:
Wipf and Stock Publishers, 1999), 99.
[41] Alvin
Plantinga, "A Valid Ontological Argument?" The Philosophical Review
70, no. 1 (1961), 543.
[42]
R. W. Beardsmore, “The Limits
of Human Imagination,” (The British Journal Aesthetics, Vol. 20, Issue 2,
Spring 1980), 99.
[43]
Morris, The Runes of
Evolution: How the Universe Became Self-Aware, 300.
[44]
Ibid.
[45] Richard Bauckham, Jesus and the
God of Israel, (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman's Publishing Company,
2009), 128.
[47] Ibid., 134.
0 comments:
Post a Comment