War of the Worldviews

Posted by on August 3, 2012 in Blog, War of the Worldviews | Comments Off on War of the Worldviews

War of the Worldviews

Author: Andy Robbins

In 2005 Stephen Spielberg released his remake of the H.G. Wells story, War of the Worlds. This story, of course, is fictional. But the continuing saga of the war of the worldviews is not fiction. As Christians, we face daily pressure to adopt worldviews that are in stark contrast to how our Savior would have us think.
How should we view difficult social issues such as euthanasia, homosexuality, abortion, capital punishment, evolution, how to vote, and the claim that all paths lead to God? If we are dedicated followers of Christ, we view these issues through the lense of God’s Word. If our worldview is not built upon the foundation of the Word of God, then the only other worldview there is to adopt is a humanistic one.

My next few posts will deal with some of these issues. Let’s begin with evolution.

I chose evolution as my first war-of-the-wordviews issue to address because, 1) so many Christians have adopted it as their own worldview, and 2) the theory of evolution, if true, proves the very first pages of scripture to be false. So if we cannot trust the very first pages of scripture as true, why should we trust the rest of scripture?

There is so much scientific evidence that disproves – or at least calls into question – the theory of evolution, that it’s almost too broad to cover. So for my purposes here, I will address only a couple of issues and then direct you to some resources that can help with further investigation.

I’ll begin by addressing how the theory of evolution clashes with proven and accepted concepts of science. For example, the Second Law of Thermodynamics, otherwise known as the Law of Entropy, or the Law of Decay, states that anything left to itself always degenerates into lower forms of complexity. For instance, everything hot eventually becomes cold if left to itself. Everything that moves eventually slows down and stops if there is not an outside source of energy to keep it moving. Everything that goes up has to come down, everything that is new eventually wears out, and so on.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics is proven and reproducible, and we experience it every day. However, evolutionists would have us believe that a single-celled blob in the bottom of a primordial pond GAINED genetic information ON ITS OWN in order to eventually become a fish, which eventually became a fish-lizard, which eventually became a monkey, which eventually became a man.

The problem here is that, first of all, no one can explain how the elements that formed the single cell got there in first place, except to say that is was from a “big bang” caused by the interaction of gases out in nothingness. And, of course, no one can explain where the gases came from.

The second problem is that a single cell is so complex that it puts even some the most sophisticated computers to shame. Each organelle within a cell has a very specific purpose, and they all carry out their tasks with fine-tuned precision and timing. Sir Fred Hoyle of Cambridge University said that the chances of even a single cell developing through random chance is mathematically equivalent to a tornado hitting a junkyard and assembling a perfectly functioning Boeing 747. In other words, chaos and random chance never result in fine-tuned order. It goes against the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Rather, fine-tuned order will unravel into chaos and lower forms of complexity if left to itself.

Cells, therefore, whether fish cells or human cells, have a specific design and a highly precise logic in how all the parts function together within that design, and thus they have to have had a Designer.

We must also consider that in order to produce something as complex as even one human cell, there has to be information in order to program that cell, not to mention the information required to build an entire human being. It’s exactly like how a computer program must have information in order for the program to do anything, and that information must have been installed by a programmer. It has been estimated that the information contained in one human DNA strand would fill 1,000 Encyclopedia Britannicas. Where did all that information come from if there was no Designer?

The scriptures tell us in the first chapter of Genesis that God made the universe, the earth, and all life upon the earth in a literal six days. It qualifies that they were literal 24-hour days by saying, “And there was evening, and morning, the first day… And there was evening and morning, the second day,” and so on. We have reason to believe, therefore, based upon the genealogies in the Bible, that the earth is somewhere around 6,000 years old.

So where does that place dinosaurs? Glad you asked. There is ample evidence that man lived contemporaneously with dinosaurs. There have been cave drawings discovered proving that early man saw sauropods like Brachiosaurus, and at least three different rock beds have been discovered – two in Texas and one in Russia – that show human footprints alongside dinosaur footprints. There have even been human remains excavated in Utah from rock layers previously thought to be millions of years old.

Speaking of which, we can’t really trust carbon dating of rock and some of the other methods of dating, because stratified rock layers, which are thought to represent periods of time, can be formed quickly during catastrophic conditions, such as during the flood of Noah. This was proven to be true in Spirit Lake in Washington in 1980 when Mount St. Helens erupted. During that catastrophic event, 300 feet of finely stratified rock layers were formed in THREE HOURS! So then, does natural phenomenon like the Grand Canyon represent what a river can do in millions of years? Not really. It represents what can occur during a global catastrophe.

I wish I could go on, but if I did I would have to write a book. If you want to know more, I recommend http://www.answersingenesis.org/ as a great Creation Science resource.

The bottom line is that we can trust the Bible, and if science and the Bible don’t line up, it’s the science that is wrong. And given enough time and open minds, that eventually becomes evident. But therein lies the problem. There is not an abundance of open minds in the field of science today because of atheistic and evolutionary biases. As outspoken evolutionist Sir Arthur Keith admitted, “Evolution is unproven and unprovable. We believe it because the alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable.”

It seems obvious that evolutionists don’t WANT to believe in the Biblical account of creation, because if they did, they would have to answer to the God Who will hold them accountable for all of their actions. As the scriptures say:
“The judgment is based upon this fact: God’s light came into the world, but people loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil. All who do evil hate the light and refuse to go near it for fear their sins will be exposed. But those who do what is right come to the light so that others can see that they are doing what God wants.” -John 3:19,20 (NLT)