1.) DESIGN
QUESTION: IS THE UNIVERSE DESIGNED?
Simple observation should reveal that the Universe is clearly the result of intelligent design, plan, and purpose. The Universe is incredibly orderly and complex. This is not the result of chance or natural events, it is the result of an intelligent designer. Consider the microscopic world of the atom with the precise mass ratio of the electron to the proton, or consider the large domain of our solar system with the precise masses and orbits of the planets. Consider photosynthesis, human reproduction, hearts, lungs, livers, kidneys, eyes, and so on. The conclusion that these complex systems are the result of an intelligent designer requires much less faith than the idea it arose by time and chance. Think about the “units of life” that come in pairs like eyes, ears, hands, feet, etc. – they are exactly alike, but yet they are exactly reversed – an incredible design feature – and the concept reproduces like a carbon copy.
We are not aware of any evolutionist literature that offers an explanation of how complex organs & systems evolved. THINK! How could something like human reproduction have evolved? How did half the population evolve male systems, and the other half evolve female systems that work together so precisely and in such incredible complexity to produce a baby? And the baby is not capable of producing offspring until many years later when it is suitably able to care for them – what an incredible design concept!
Mount Rushmore, as you probably know, consists of the facial images of four ex-Presidents on the side of a mountain. Suppose a tour guide told his tour group that those faces are "the result of billions of years of nature, such as glaciers, lightning and erosion." What would the tour group think? How long would the tour guide keep his job? He'd be fired by lunch time and his tour group would think he was insane. Those images obviously required planning, design, and an artist.
Suppose an anatomy teacher at your school taught that human faces are "the result of billions of years of nature, such as mutations, natural selection, etc." How long would this anatomy professor keep his job? Actually he would feel very secure in his job and might even be promoted to Dean. The anatomy professor who teaches that the human body appears to be the result of an intelligent design, is the one that potentially would be fired.
Look at your computer. Suppose we tried to convince you that a glass factory, a plastic factory, a metal factory, a paint factory, and a silicon factory all exploded, started on fire and mixed together. The result of this explosion, chemical reaction and time was your computer. You would never believe it. Your intellect and logic would cause you to passionately deny an explanation that an explosion and mixing of chemicals and time could ever produce something as functional and orderly as a computer.
Don't let anyone convince you that your body is the end product of an explosion, the mixing of chemicals and time. Your body is infinitely more complex than your computer. That is because it was made by a very intelligent designer!
2.) THE FIRST LAW of THERMODYNAMICS
QUESTION: HOW DID THE UNIVERSE GET HERE?
Ask the atheists to explain how they think the Universe originated. Did all the energy and matter in the Universe create itself by natural processes? The First Law of Thermodynamics states that energy and matter are neither created nor destroyed. Atheist beliefs contradict this basic law of science. Creationists recognize that energy and matter had a supernatural origin. This position does require faith, but it is in conjunction with the First Law and thus requires less faith than the atheist's position that it created itself from nothing.
Imagine that you could create a very special box. This box is sealed so that nothing can enter it from the outside, and there is nothing inside the box to begin with. If we came back to that box in 20 billion years, would there be anything inside of it? The First Law of Thermodynamics recognizes there will be nothing inside the box. Matter and energy do not appear from nothing. An atheist may say that since this entire Universe came from self-created matter and self created energy, it is possible an entire Universe may exist in that box.
3.) THE SECOND LAW of THERMODYNAMICS
QUESTION: HOW DID THE UNIVERSE BECOME SO ORDERLY? HOW DID THE UNIVERSE BECOME CHARGED WITH SO MUCH USEFUL ENERGY?
Question for an atheist: Did all the energy and matter in the Universe increase in complexity and order on its own? The Second Law states that in a closed system (like the Universe, the earth is not a closed system) over time, energy will become less available, systems will become more disordered and entropy will increase. This Law explains that the Universe is running out of available energy (energy that can do work, like the sun, coal, gasoline, etc.). The heat produced by burning gasoline is energy...but it cannot do any work until it is harnessed. The claim that the Universe originated as a compact bundle of matter that expanded (Big Bang) and self-created an orderly, energy filled Universe, severely violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
Creationists believe a supernatural entity, working outside the natural laws of science gave order and available energy to the Creation. This requires faith, but much less faith than the belief that order and abundant energy appeared by chance.
4.) BIOGENESIS
QUESTION: HOW DID LIFE ORIGINATE?
Remember some of your Biology classes? Early in the semester the teacher taught you that spontaneous generation was impossible (Spontaneous generation was a belief that life originated from non-living things). People used to believe that bacteria could originate from broth, that rats could originate from garbage and maggots could originate from rotting meat. Over 130 years ago, Louis Pasteur conducted experiments that demonstrated the folly of spontaneous generation.
Later in the semester your teacher taught you evolution. Here is a quote from a current Biology text book: “Life cannot arise by spontaneous generation from inanimate material today, so far as we know, but conditions were very different when the earth was only a few billion years old. In that ancient environment, the origin of life was evidently possible and it is likely that at least the early stages of biological inception were inevitable.” Campbell, Nell; Biology, 1987, page 504. Do you see what this author did? He admitted spontaneous generation is impossible today, but he puts his faith in the belief that the early earth had some unknown different conditions in order for life to originate from inanimate material.
Statements similar to the one in Nell Campbell's text are very intellectually dishonest. Any person seeking scientific explanations to difficult questions should not accept an explanation that clearly violates a law of science in order to uphold a personal bias. Mr. Campbell knows Biogenesis presents a very significant stumbling block to his pro-evolution faith, since scientific (observed) knowledge tells us that life does not arise from dead matter. When his text brings him to explaining life's origin, what does he tell the students? He starts by telling them the truth, that life does not arise from dead things today, but billions of years ago life arising from dead things was "evidently possible" and "inevitable".
Decide for yourself, but it appears that Nell Campbell, when confronted with a scientific law that contradicts his world view (perhaps atheistic), would rather violate the scientific law than acknowledge that supernatural intervention is a possible explanation for the origin of life. What Mr. Campbell wrote is not education. It is not science. It is Nell Campbell's biased unscientific opinion. You are encouraged to decide for yourself.
The “origin of life” question is covered in detail in Dr. Mark Eastman's book "The Creator Beyond Time and Space". Many people think life was once created in a test tube from chemicals and energy in the 1950's. This is known as the Miner-Urey experiment (which is covered in detail in Eastman's book). Here is what actually occurred. They sparked ammonia, methane, hydrogen and water, condensed it, and ran it through a trap (do you think the early earth had traps and condensers? The samples had to be isolated from the spark because a second spark would have destroyed any molecules that were formed). The results of these experiments were mostly tar and carboxylic acid, but a few amino acids were formed. Amino acids may be called the building blocks of life. But it is either gross ignorance or a lie to say they created true life in this experiment. Life requires many things. Long amino acid chains make proteins, chains in the proper order and shape. Miller's experiment did NOT produce any chains. Life also requires DNA, RNA, and never has any experiment produced DNA or RNA from base materials. Never have chains of DNA or RNA been produced, and never has a cell membrane been produced.
The faith that even one protein arose by chance is tremendous. Let's look at statistics. Proteins are made up of chains of amino acids, just like a train is made up of box cars. A chain of box cars makes up a train. A chain of amino acids makes up a protein. Humans have 20 different types of amino acids that make up our proteins, and the average human protein is 400 amino acids long. Remember, the exact arrangement of these amino acids is crucial to the function of the protein. If it is the proper arrangement, it does its job; if the order is mixed up, it is worthless chemical junk.
Imagine many box cars at a train station, and these box cars are made up of twenty different colors. The owner of the station tells you he wants a train to be 400 box cars long, and you are to pick the combination of colored box cars, but if it is not the order he has in mind (and he didn’t tell you his desire) he will fire you.
What are the odds that you will arrange the box cars in the right order? They are the same odds that the amino acids will align themselves by chance to make one functional protein in you (the human body). The odds are 20 to the 400th power. This is the same as 10 to the 520th power, (that is a 1 followed by 520 zeros)! You have better odds of winning the California Super Lotto every week for 11 years, than the odds of one protein in your body having the amino acids being properly aligned by chance. The odds are really much worse because the amino acids must be left-handed, they must form a chain "in series" no parallel branching, their shape (proteins are wound up like a ball of yarn) is crucial, you need an oxygen free environment, and so on. And remember, this is for just one protein. Your body has countless trillions of proteins. The model that reflects a brilliant designer (like God) making meaningful and useful proteins requires much less faith than to trust random chance and natural processes.
5.) LIVING ANIMALS
QUESTION: IS CREATION OR EVOLUTION SUPPORTED BY WHAT IS OBSERVED IN LIVING ANIMALS?
The Creation Model predicts animals will reproduce after their own kind. The Evolution Model predicts that all plants and animals came from a common ancestor. What is observed every day with living animals? Your parents were human, your grandparents were human, and so on. That is what is observed and recorded. Dogs make dogs, hogs make hogs, frogs make frogs, cats make cats, rats make rats (especially in New York), and bats make bats. Every birth since recorded time has supported the creation model. The foundation for science is observation. What is observed? The Creation model is what is observed, animals producing their own kind.
