Long ago, the great philosopher Aristotle identified that our thought processes follow a set of 3 primary, universal and unchanging "rules"...
We call these rules the "classical laws of thought", also known as the "laws of logic".
It's very easy to demonstrate these laws are indeed universal and unchanging, with a simple statement of truth called a "deductive syllogism":
Major premise: All men grow older.
Minor premise: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates will grow older.
As we consider the major premise, and minor premise, our logical minds tell us that the conclusion is true and factual without exception - given the truth of the premises.
Moreover, assuming the premises remain true, our minds tell us that:
1. The conclusion would have been equally true in the past.
2. The conclusion won't change in the future.
3. The conclusion is true regardless of location.
4. The conclusion is true even if certain individuals were to claim otherwise.
...What this shows is that we can trust and depend on our logical thought processes to recognize and establish truth and facts. This is the very mechanism which enables us to build knowledge.
If the logical thought processes that we use (to think about the data that we take in with our senses) were in a state of change, however gradual the change might be...
...we would not be able to depend on human thinking to tell us anything with absolute certainty!
Science would not be possible, because the scientific method could not be conducted in an existence where every thought is questionable and uncertain.
If our minds were in a state of change, the conclusion to the syllogism above, "Socrates will grow older," could never be known as "true". The concept of truth would not exist. But of course, we know that absolute truth exists, because our minds are able to recognize that indeed the conclusion is valid.
Therefore, rational thinkers cannot deny the fact that logical thought processes are universal and unchanging. This doesn't mean that we all think perfectly, and never make mistakes - we're all capable of thinking illogically; it simply means that we have access to truth, and are able to distinguish fact from fiction, when we are thinking correctly.
Now consider Darwinian evolution...
...which claims that our bodies and brains have evolved over many millions of years, and are still evolving to this day.
In other words, evolution says that we have changed in the past, are changing now, and will change in the future.
So The Million Dollar Question For
The Atheistic Evolutionist Is This:
"How are unchanging logical thought processes (per the classical laws of logic), and changing brains over time (per evolution), compatible?"
They clearly aren't compatible in any way.
If our thinking is solely dependent on material (changing) brains as Darwinism claims, it would invariably mean that our logical thought processes are in a constant state of change.
...And we've already seen the inescapable problem that this poses: It would mean that truth cannot exist, and that facts and knowledge are an illusion.
Let's again consider our syllogism from earlier...
Major premise: All men grow older.
Minor premise: Socrates is a man.
Conclusion: Therefore, Socrates will grow older.
...We know with absolute certainty that the conclusion of this syllogism will always be true (assuming the premises hold), regardless of supposed evolutionary change.
Clearly, logic and truth transcend our material brains. There must necessarily be more.
So we have a black and white contradiction between Darwinian/materialistic evolution, and the logical thought processes that we rely on to establish truth, fact, and knowledge.
...We must therefore reject one, or the other. They are distinctly and completely incompatible.
And because we have already established that universal, unchanging logic and truth cannot be rejected...
We must necessarily reject Darwinian evolution. It completely fails to offer a valid mechanism by which we are indeed able to think logically and rationally.
But the plot thickens, as we consider several additional observations:
1. While Darwinian evolution is necessarily and obviously false...
...it's true that the human race is mutating, which means that our physical bodies are susceptible to a limited amount of change.
With that said, it's important to understand that we're mutating in a direction that is precisely opposite of the genetic information gain that "fish to man" evolution would require...
Research shows that we are losing vital genetic information with each new generation, as neutral and harmful mutations overwhelm the exceedingly rare number of so-called "beneficial" mutations. This is an empirically verified phenomenon called "genetic entropy".
So while it's true that we're experiencing change, and that this change needs to be "reconciled" with our ability to think logically (as we'll cover in a moment)...
...don't mistake it for Darwinian change. It's just the opposite, as mentioned.
2. The physical makeup of our brains varies from person to person. The unique biological wiring and electrochemical makeup of my brain is different than yours...
If per Darwinian beliefs our thoughts were entirely the product of material brains, our unique chemistry would mean that one man's logic and truth is another man's fallacy; one man's brain wiring would conclude one answer, while another man's brain wiring would conclude an entirely different one... And both would be "right"!
...So in considering our observations to this point, how then is it possible that we're each capable of absolute logical thought processes which enable us to recognize truth, establish fact, and gain knowledge itself?
The answer to this mystery...
...is found within the Biblical worldview that we are much more than mere material beings!
The Bible explains that "we are not our bodies or brains" per se, but that we are spiritual beings residing in the flesh...
Added to that, there are numerous verses in the Bible which indicate that our spirits - our true selves - are able to experience emotion...
...which reveals that our spirits are capable of thought.
The inference is therefore that we have an immaterial mind intertwined with our physical brains...
And thus, we have a viable explanation that solves the mystery of our logical minds.
Obviously, nobody can say for certain how mind and brain interact. In fact, to this day, scientists aren't even certain how memory works...
But for the most part, the symbiotic relationship between mind and brain can be thought of in the following way: Our immaterial minds formulate thoughts and conclusions, while our brains process the resulting messages and send the appropriate signals to our physical bodies. It is analogous to a person sitting behind a computer, where the brain is the computer and the "real self" is giving the computer commands.
Of course, our minds also receive data from our bodies (via the 5 senses), which is the "input" that becomes the subject matter of logical thought processes.
The Atheist's Response...
The most common response given by atheists and materialists to the "logical dilemma" that we've identified here...
...is that "logic must somehow exist independent of the brain".
Allow me to stress that these are materialists implying that logical thought processes are not dependent on the only material thing capable of thought, according to their own philosophy... The brain.
So where do they claim that logical thought processes originate, if not the brain? From asteroids?
Obviously, the notion that logical thought processes exist somewhere out in "nowhere land" is a departure from logic itself. The materialist, in refusing to contemplate a worldview outside of their own, has no other choice but to offer explanations that are anything but cogent.
The Bible tells us that God, our immaterial, universal, unchanging, and loving creator...
...made mankind in His own image.
God gave us the ability to think logically, because logic is part of His own nature; God's "currency" is faith, but it is also knowledge and wisdom. God urges us to gain wisdom, and teaches us in His Word that the fear (respect) of the Lord is the beginning of all wisdom.
If not for our God-given ability to think logically, we would be incapable of gaining knowledge and wisdom, and therefore unable to fulfill an integral part of God's desire for our lives!
Will The Real Grand Theory Of
Everything, Please Stand Up?
The deeper we delve into the "mysteries of life" by following the Biblical roadmap, the more things coalesce; the pieces of the puzzle began to form a very clear and seamless picture...
Near Death Experiences, also referred to as "NDE's", provide corroborating evidence that we are indeed spiritual beings at the core, and that our bodies are merely a temporary "shell", if you will...
There are literally millions of reported NDE cases where patients, who have been resuscitated from complete heart failure or even clinical brain death, vividly recount details of an out of body experience...
...during which they were obviously able to think, as well as feel emotion. In fact, a consistent theme among NDE survivors is a feeling of being "more alive than ever".
Skeptics have a number of "rescuing devices" that they use to dismiss the growing mountain of evidence that human consciousness survives death...
But there is simply no "naturalistic" explanation whatsoever for how some NDE survivors are able to accurately describe "unknowable details" of events that transpired around their physical bodies, or even miles away from their physical bodies, while they were "out"...
A number of these "remote viewing" experiences have been documented by prominent physicians and reported in peer-reviewed medical journals.
Obviously, doctors and nurses cannot see a spirit leaving the body of a patient laying in a hospital bed or on the operating table...
...which immediately implies that the human spirit must reside in an "invisible realm" - i.e., another dimension.
What's intriguing here is that science, and in particular string theory, has for many years predicted the strong possibility of other dimensions...
...other dimensions where our laws of physics do not apply, and where other lifeforms may exist.
Essentially, string theory is where science and the supernatural shake hands.
Consider that while there is much disagreement and conjecture on exactly what might exist in the extra dimensions that string theory postulates, the "door of possibilities" is wide open...
"Supernatural", by definition, simply refers to that which operates or exists "beyond the known laws of nature". So why would another dimension, with laws of physics entirely different from our own, or perhaps no laws at all....
...not be considered a "supernatural realm", when that's precisely what it is?
Nevertheless, natural science, being that it operates under the premise of methodological naturalism, rejects all notions of the supernatural.
Mankind's quest for truth ultimately boils down to a "battle" between intelligent causation vs. mindless causation...
And yet, despite having no objective proof of one cause over the other, modern science has painted itself into a corner by categorically rejecting intelligent causation - despite that it provides the only logical and cohesive answer to life's deepest mysteries.
But getting back to string theory...
...my point is not that it is true. We don't yet know. But it's certainly intriguing that string theorists "unknowingly" support the truth of the Biblical worldview...
The Bible refers to a "spiritual realm", which fits the mold of another dimension, and clearly one with "laws of physics" entirely different from our own...
The Bible describes this spiritual dimension as the realm of God the Father, God the Son (Jesus), and God the Holy Spirit; the realm of angels and human spirits; the realm of Satan and demons (fallen angels); and the realm of heaven and hell.
...It's an existence just as real as our own, but in a dimensional plain of sorts, that is invisible to us under normal circumstances. This correlates with how NDE survivors report being able to see into the earthly realm while in their "out of body state of being" - almost like a one way mirror from one dimensional existence into another. Fascinating.
The spiritual dimension, and the "alien beings" (angels, demons, etc.) that reside therein, offer a logical solution to yet another of life's mysteries: Paranomal activity.
Endless reports of hauntings, unexplained sightings, demonic activity, and similar paranormal phenomena are reported by people throughout the world, every week, every month, and every year...
This includes "extraterrestrial" and U.F.O. sightings, which also tie in seamlessly with the Biblical worldview. But don't take my word for it.
It takes a certain level of denial to conclude that countless millions of people, over the centuries, from all different cultures and walks of life, are all either liars, or mentally unstable...
...especially when one considers that there are often multiple eyewitnesses present, who are able to corroborate the details of what can only be described as supernatural phenomena.
Corroborating evidence is a very powerful thing, and we're establishing here that not only is there corroborating evidence for the Biblical worldview...
It all ties perfectly together...
Much like a "grand theory" of everything.
Creation Is The Empirical Standard...
We've already established why Darwinian evolution must be rejected in favor of absolute logic and truth...
But it can equally be rejected on the basis that creation is the empirical standard, as the evidence continues to demonstrate...
1. Why do we observe life only from life (biogenesis)? Biogenesis is precisely what the Biblical worldview and creation model predict. Abiogenesis (life from non-life with no intelligent input) has never been observed. And yet, that's precisely what an atheistic/evolutionary worldview would demand.
So when we consider that (natural) life can only originate from existing life, according to all that we've ever observed, what is the most logical inference to be drawn from this fact, in regard to the first life? It certainly isn't life from non-life!
...The Bible reveals that our living God and creator breathed into the nostrils of man the breath of life. Hence, logical inference points squarely to the creation model.
Why is it that scientists are unable to take a human corpse, which provides all the biological ingredients of life, and bring it back to life using the very latest technology? ...Once again, the simple answer is that we are more than just flesh. Our spirits are what bring life to our bodies, and when we pass on, our spirits depart from the physical.
I believe that when God breathed the breath of life into man, he was breathing the first human spirit into the body of flesh that he had just formed. Life only from life... Biogenesis.
2. We have never observed encoded information originate from scratch, void of intelligence. And is it any wonder? Bill Gates referred to DNA as being like a computer program (which geneticists concur with), but more advanced than anything mankind has ever devised...
We therefore have 100% inference that DNA was not only created, but by a designer more intelligent than the entirety of mankind.
But let's take a more detailed look...
Our senses enable us to receive "input" about ourselves and the world around us. Our minds enable us to think logically about this sensory input, by which we're able to determine truth and fact. Truth and fact are stored as knowledge; that which we know for certain. And this knowledge, when conveyed or communicated, is what we call information.
The DNA of every living organism contains a veritable library of specialized, instructional information used in the organism's formation, growth, and survival. This information is more sophisticated than anything else known to man, including the information used to assemble nuclear weapons, supercomputers, and space stations...
Never in the history of mankind to modern day, has instructional information used in the assembly of functional and complex systems, been observed to originate mindlessly...
In every case, without exception, instructional information of this nature has originated from knowledge, and that knowledge, from intelligence.
But what about biological information?
...Quite simply, the medium over which knowledge is conveyed as information, has absolutely no bearing on the obvious requirement of intelligence, because information is immaterial. A harddrive containing 1,000 gigabytes of information weighs precisely the same as a hardrive containing no information at all - meaning the physical medium has no impact on the information itself. It is the same with knowledge conveyed verbally, through print, via sign language, etc. Again, information is simply knowledge conveyed. And thus, information is an immaterial entity, despite that it can be stored in various physical, tangible mediums and formats, including within biological organisms.
3. Hold up your hand and move your pointer finger up and down... Would your finger muscles be of any benefit without the brain wiring to control them? Of course not. Would that specific brain wiring be of any benefit without your finger muscles? It would be useless, of course. And would your brain wiring or finger muscles be of any benefit without the nerves that connect them? No again. Now consider that there are thousands of these "symbiotic sets" throughout your body...
The evolutionary mechanism of natural selection is only said to "act" if and when a random mutation (which is a mistake in genetic information) offers a fitness benefit to the organism. The problem is that random mistakes are exactly that - random: Mistakes do not coordinate to create a "complimentary" simultaneous change in three (or more) entirely separately areas of an organism, resulting in the emergence of a "selectable benefit"... In other words, going back to our example, random mutation isn't going to create a precise, laser targeted change in genetic information to facilitate the "raw material" for your finger muscle, and the brain wiring for your finger muscle, and the nerves connecting the two, simultaneously, over and over again, as supposed macroevolution transpires!
...For such an event to happen even once is not mathematically viable. (Mistakes in sequential information - which is precisely what random genetic mutations are - invariably corrupt the overall information.) And yet, this is exactly what evolution claims must have necessarily happened countless millions of times, as fish (and their less complex ancestors) supposedly evolved into you and me. It truly is craziness.
It Was Never Evolution, And Always Creation...
...which has been able to offer answers to life's biggest mysteries, including what some consider the biggest mystery of all - the very purpose of our existence!
(Yes, you do have a purpose, and your life does have meaning.)
This is not "God of the gaps", but rather the most logical interpretation from the evidence available.
As we've seen, the evidence is all around us - empirical evidence included.
The atheist who claims "no evidence for God" is committing the mother of all logical fallacies...
To claim "no evidence" is to claim omniscience, coupled with objective proof of how the universe began. Obviously, nobody possesses either requirement.
The fact is, we all share the same body of evidence from which to formulate our individual interpretations, conclusions, and worldviews.
Ask yourself a simple question: If God created the universe, is the universe itself, and everything within, some form of evidence for God - whether direct or indirect? Of course!
In the same way that a home is evidence of a builder, a created universe is evidence of nothing but a creator: A created universe cannot possibly be evidence of anything else (including naturalistic origins), just like a home with a builder cannot be evidence of a home without a builder...
...And so, it's plain to see that the atheist who claims "no evidence for God/creation" is making a statement that they cannot logically defend. Again, to logically defend such a claim would require "objective proof in hand" that the universe formed mindlessly. Despite this, the "no evidence" claim is a virtual motto among atheists.
In reality, the question was never one of evidence, or lack thereof.
Rather, the question has always been, "What is the most logical interpretation from the evidence available to everyone?"
But at this point, is that really still a question in your mind?
Life's Simple Purpose...
All talk of evidence aside, the truth of God and His creation have been made obvious to all, like a home and its builder, or a painter and painting.
Right now, today, wherever you are and whatever your situation or past...
You have a loving heavenly Father who created you to be a part of His family... Our purpose is simple and elegant: To love God, love others, and be loved by Him.
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." - John 3:16
Here's the kicker... Living a life of sin is not your best life. You're only cheating yourself if you believe otherwise. God didn't name sins in the Bible to make life difficult. He listed them by name to warn us of the things that we should avoid because they cause us, or those around us, inevitable harm... In the same way, do you not warn your own children of potential dangers?
God gave us a free will, so that true love is possible, but warned us of sin from the very beginning, because He loves us...
The best possible life that you can experience comes not from following your own selfish and sinful desires, but by following Jesus, and doing the Father's will for your life... This doesn't mean a life of no suffering, pain or sorrow. But indeed, it promises the most joyful and fulfilling life attainable.
If you're ready to accept Jesus into your heart and life, there is no particular "special prayer" that you need to pray...
Simply talk to God as you would your best friend in the world... Let Him know that you're sorry for your sins and that you are placing your trust in Jesus and his sacrifice on the cross, to have your sins washed away and your slate wiped forever clean... Let God know that you're ready to repent, and ready to put Him first by following Jesus for the rest of your life... Amen!
And then, please get in touch with me if you'd be willing... Feel free to message me on Facebook. I'd love to hear from you, and answer any questions you might have (as best I can)...
P.S. Be sure to bookmark this page and check back soon as additional resources are added to this section (and please note that links will not always be added in consecutive order):
- Silver Bullet Reloaded
- The Eternal Truth Argument
- The 7 Dichotomies (That Prove God's Existence)
- The Uncaused First Cause (New!)
- Atheism Destroyed In 2 Minutes Flat (New!)
- The Deductive Truth Argument For God's Existence
- The Cosmoepistemological Argument For God's Existence (New!)
- The Impossible, Possible Truth
- The Dillahunty Dodge (New!)
- No Problem Of Evil
- The AKA Argument
- The MIMs Argument
- The Broken Circle
- Atheism: A House Built On Sand
- The Problem Of Solipsism
- The Self Evident Defeater
- Proof of God Via The Laws Of Physics
- Atheists Have No Evidence (New!)
- Good Evil
- Biblical Morality
- More About Logic
- More About Truth
- Transitive Truth
- The Atheist's 'Science' Vs. The Theist's Science (New!)
- The Not So Great Debate
- Fallacies About Fallacies
- Information: Proof Of Immaterial Consciousness
- Proof Of The Human Soul
- God Of Math
- The Absolute Standard
- Question Evolution Day!
- Evolution: A Product Of Desperate Imagination
- Evolutionary Truth By Piltdown Superman (External)
- Is Christianity Incompatible With Science? (External)
- Answers For Hope Apologetics Blog (External)
- Cosmic Proof Of God
- Creation Vs. Evolution
- The Top 5 Atheist Arguments
- Human Consciousness Explained!
- Genetic Relativity
- Genetic Relativity Part ll
- Intelligent Selection
- The Protein Problem
- Carbon 14 In Diamond (External)
- Carbon 14 In Dinosaur Bones (External)
- Do Freethinkers Exist?
- Self Evident Truth
- The Amazing Shape!