Favorite Sermon Add to Playlist
Photo of Chad Kreuzer

6. Did Darwin Murder God?

Chad Kreuzer

Description

Darwin claimed he had murdered God. In this message, we will look at compelling evidence that counteracts Darwin’s assertion. We also discover that the theory of evolution is a faith-based initiative.

Presenter

Chad Kreuzer

Anchor Point Films

Conference

Recorded

  • December 31, 2016
    4:15 PM
Logo of Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 (US)

Copyright ©2016 Generation of Youth for Christ.

Free sharing permitted under the Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 3.0 (US) license.

The ideas in this recording are those of its contributors and may not necessarily reflect the views of AudioVerse.

SPONSORED

Audio Downloads

This transcript may be automatically generated

This message was presented at the G Y C twenty sixteen conference has been heard in Houston Texas for other resources like this visit us online who are welcome to the final presentation in this series about creation or evolution which faith will you choose. And normally you know I was going to do this. The second message for any of you who have not been here we switched around the second in the last message the second message was going to be this one but I put it here. Because I want to switch the other one to there. So you're going to hear did Darwin murder gone and to me this is one of the most interesting. Messages on creation that I share. In. You know I'll just tell you a little bit about myself before we get started. My name is Chad cruiser. I am from I was born in Grand Rapids Michigan. My wife and I live full time on the road we are house. Nowhere. So we just travel all the time. And we put on seminars of all the Bible. We put on seminars about. Bible prophecy we put on some of ours about health and. The gum brain connection and various things and we make a living making documentary films so we go on archaeologists historians theologians scholars and we interview them about various subjects and we make documentaries that are to share the messages we've been given our intended audience are for those who are not believers but Christians enjoy them and you know advent. I enjoy them but that's not our target audience. We're looking to reach people who may not be believers at all. And so that's what we do so these are something that they've been a blessing to us and we made them just because we saw a need. We were working with atheists agnostics people who did not believe in the Bible and we thought Man what if somebody would make something that looked like Discovery Channel or History Channel but instead of being skeptical gives a reason to believe. And not only believe in general yes to that but also believe the message we've been given which is to me the most powerful message there is on planet Earth. And I'm not just saying that it's changed my life I came to the knowledge of this message that we've been blessed with the wood that we've been given in the admin to search when I was in college and I want to share this message with others but before we begin our message this afternoon in titled in Darwin murder gone. I said to you by your hands of me for a word of prayer. Great God in our creator. I pray that your Holy Spirit would be in this room in a special way. That you would bless each one of the seminars taking place. Lord I pray here. That you would strengthen our faith in you. We thank you for this time in the name of Jesus. I want to say one thing to you that is not part of this message but. One of the things I mentioned in this the rest of the group if you were here you would have heard it that. Some of you. Many of you may be going to secular university or even some of our universities and may have professors who do not believe in the Adventist message or don't believe in creation. And they will teach you. I had a young man come to me and one from one of our universities and and one. The things that happens is that you hear in the Bible says I've been sharing with you. Each day every single message I've shared a verse it is from Proverbs Chapter eighteen and verse anybody remember seventeen eighteen seventeen and it says the one who states his case first seems. Right. Until the other comes and. Examines him. Meaning if somebody comes to you. Imprisons to you a case for any matter that they know of and believe in and when they stated to you generally is sounds legitimate. Yes or no. And I mean you believe I mean why wouldn't you. You know. But maybe you've never heard the other side of the story. And so I'm giving you an opportunity because it's just standard I mean if you're going to read a general biology textbook you're going to it's going to begin with evolution and then it actually gets into science after that but very interesting Lee There is another side to the story we've been looking at that we've looked at house there are certain things like Darwin's finches still just had beaks and in change in the thing else and by the way the larger big birds went back to smaller big birds when the weather changed. So didn't actually create anything different. We looked at the peppered moths and we find out that they actually don't live on tree trunks in you know out in the open on tree trunks that the scientists have not discovered that that was a faulty study. We have found that the embryology was actually based upon a fraud openly I mean it was it was it was proven to be a fraud back in the one nine hundred twenty S. And you know so this is I mean in the scientists. Yeah we've known since the twenty's this was untrue but it's still in textbooks and so you hear one side of the story but nobody told you. Hey it's been almost one hundred years scientists have known that this is not true that this is not prove evolution. The reason I repeat all this is to say for someone who is new in. Is that you may feel as you go to school in your presented these things as you watch Discovery Channel History Channel What have you. You may think this is solid and the poor Adventists have never looked into it to find an answer my ignorance parents my ignoring grandparents blindly follow these these cute ideas of a God who created all things the science proves otherwise. But I'm here to share with you that the reality is actually I believe there's more persuasive evidence for creation. But either way it takes faith and that's what we're going to see right now. So without further ado now we're actually going to get into the message. So some years ago. Time magazine came out with in a cover story that asked the question is gone dead. Now this is the kind of cover story that can you know bring shudders into the souls of Serbs in individuals who are struggling with their faith is there enough proof out there now that God doesn't exist that I really shouldn't believe this is the fear. Well let's look into it you know. Bertrand Russell who was a British mathematician and infill loss of for. Someone asked him so he was a great skeptic by the way also. Someone asked him if you meet gone after you die. What will you say to him to justify your unbelief. He said I will tell him he did not give me enough. Evidence. Now is he right now I would ask this question also is it true that there is so much evidence for evolution and so little evidence for creation now you've come this last week one of the things we talked about is we talked about dinosaur bones that smelled like rotting cadavers with soft tissues tissue inside of them. Right there. They claim these are hold sixty eight to eighty million years old and yet they smell like a rotting flesh rotting human being. That died very interested in the scientists say this is impossible. How could there be. How could there be soft tissue in something that's sixty eighty million years old and the answer is there could but they had to come up some so like I said it is probably because there's you know in in you know bone marrow there's iron and iron is a preservative but come on eighty million years and that's quite a preservative right. But you have to come up with something you know and so that's that's kind of the the answer but the reality is this is the evidence is pointing to the fact that these things are actually young like the Bible said. So he said God didn't give me enough evidence. Let's think this through. This is something I've shared with some of you but for those of you who are new the Bible says and in Romans Chapter five verse twelve where four as by one man sin entered into the world and death by sin. And so that death passed upon all men for that all have seen. So get the idea here in the Bible says that man brought about seen in sin brought about what brought about death. So according to the Bible. Did death or man come first. MAN CAME FIRST MAN brought about death now according to evolution which came first man or death. Death. Can you harmonize the theory of the evolution of humans from lower life forms can you harmonize that was scripture yes or no impossible. You cannot do it and some creationists try to do that they call it the a stick of illusion because they see some of the evidence they may have not heard the whole story or maybe they have they're just not persuaded by it and as a result they try to make the Bible fits with the theory of evolution. We've got to be honest it doesn't it just doesn't. And you say it's been Chad you know you know beaks on birds change. Nobody's deny. Beaks on birds get smaller and bigger over time and by the way they went bigger and smaller and they just like that right. Some of you have bigger noses some of you have smaller noses but we're all still human and so it doesn't actually change you into another creature and actually that's what the scientists are saying they're saying it doesn't actually promote speciation that it just you know yes things can fluctuate but the genetic material was already there for that. No new genetic material was at it. So let's ask the question. About faith. What is see now I want to ask you is faith a religious or a secular word. It's a religious word right I mean. And if it's a religious word maybe we should get a religious definition. Right so there'd be nothing wrong since it is a religious war let's get a religious definition the best one I know is that he was eleven one now. Faith is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things not seen. So faith is believing that you have evidence for something you have never seen. And can now. For instance I believe there is a god. I believe I have evidence for that I have but I believe there is evidence in archaeology I believe there is evidence in history. I believe there is manuscript evidence in the Bible. I believe there is prophetic evidence for God being who he says he isn't in there's various lines of reasoning that can bring you to the conclusion there is a God I believe I have evidence but in the end. Have I seen GOD YES or NO NO. So that means I believe based upon. Faith very simple. I I can't deny that I mean that's that's what the Bible sounds right that we base it on faith not a funny thing is at least one person said they saw God Moses claimed to have seen God. So something nobody's seen him but I just haven't seen. So I have to believe based upon faith. So let's go forward with this. There's a fallacy amongst the evolutionists they say we have science and. You have seen. Well is that actually true and I'm here to at least report that evolutionists have plenty of faith plenty of it and not to put them down. This is not being projected of this not being insulting. I mean it would feel insulting but I'm not meaning to be insulting. It's just a reality. Because if the definition of faith is believing that you have evidence for something you've never seen. Let me ask you a question. So I haven't seen God so I have faith because I believe in him. Has anyone seen the big bang. Yes or no. But do evolutionists believe they have evidence for it. Well sure they do right. But they believe they have evidence for something they've never what seem so according to the definition of faith do evolutionists have yes or no. Clearly right. But we're going to go forward and you're going to actually see that it takes much faith. We're going to look at the evolution of some of the greatest evolutionists and see what they specifically have to say so do evolutionists have faith. The answer is yes we're going to begin here with Discover magazine from a number of years back in the cover story ask the question where did everything come from and down at the bottom here you see this box and to blow it up so you can see it a little better. This is what the caption reads it says the universe a person is something from absolutely nothing zero nada. And as it got bigger. It became filled with even more stuff that came from absolutely nowhere. How is that possible. Ask Alan Guth his theory of inflation helps explain everything. Now. Just to let you know the actual theory of evolution teaches that everything came from nothing. Now. Do you think it takes any faith to think everything came from nothing. Because have you ever. Seen Nothing become something. No you've never seen that has anybody ever seen nothing become something you know so to believe in something like that. I actually think it would be easier to believe that a divine being could create something out of nothing than nothing. Making something out of nothing and that makes us so it takes place. So the foundation the bedrock of where evolution begins and it begins at the Big Bang. The foundation of evolution begins with what. Faith. And in think about this now where does the beginning of the belief in the Bible in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth does it take faith to believe that. Yes it does and Hebrews chapter eleven actually tells us by faith we believe that the worlds were formed right. We believe that by faith Yes I don't do I believe we have evidence I do believe we have evidence for that. But once again because I didn't see it happen. It takes faith for both of us so evolutionism creationists begin on a foundation of faith but only one group recognizes they have faith but the other when they're open and honest will recognize the very same thing. And will go forward. So this is taken from New Scientist Magazine September fourteenth one thousand nine hundred sixty now within this NG In this article. Just so you know this is a secular periodical this is not some kind of like you know Adventist journal or something like that. This is a secular secular writing and notice what we read here and this is specifically speaking of the Big Bang. I literally just took a picture of it. I went from the magazine at the Chicago library and massive massive library in downtown Chicago and noticed if you can read it in the back of the can see it that far back but it up at the top as what is the big deal in a like with the Big Bang the biggest deal of all is how do you get something out of nothing. So here's secular you know secular scientists looking at this is a how on earth do we get something out of nothing. But notice what it goes on to say. Don't let the cosmologists try to kid you on this one. They have not got a clue either. Despite the fact that they are doing a pretty good job of convincing themselves and others that this is really not a problem. In the beginning they will say there was nothing. No time space matter or energy then there was a quantum fluctuation from which won't stop right there you see what I mean first there is nothing then there is something and the cosmologists trying to bridge the two with a quantum flutter. Do you see that honest scientists see when it's written in the textbooks. It sounds like it is just a scientifically proven fact that we know actually we know how nothing could become something. So if you read it as a child and as you read it as a high school student. It's very persuasive because they just tell you it's true then you get to college and they still tell you it's true but once you graduate. Once you actually get your Ph D. and maybe have some time to actually start reading some of the periodicals yourself you begin to realize that the scientists don't believe all of the things that are purported as evolutionary facts in the textbooks the top guys really don't believe it all. It is the lower level people. It is the initiator the uninitiated these students in the lower all of the grades actually who are taught these things but then men at the top just say come on let's be honest. Guys we have no clue how this could happen. We have no clue. And the thing is how could you ever have a clue how nothing could become something you could never prove such a thing. I mean it is impossible if it were possible we could make things come out of nothing. All the time especially with intelligence. Mind you. And we have intelligence so that's like something making something out of nothing right. So very interesting. Let's go forward. So I ask you the question is the big bang science or faith. Really is faith. Now there may be portions of science that help them come about with this faith but ultimately it takes faith and just you know there are some chairs. If anybody wants there's a few chairs up here in the front that you're welcome to come up. But let's go forward to our next point. Taken from New Scientist July of two thousand and three and we look here it's a target article called Born lucky by Paul Davies And you know this we can just read it here it says nobody knows how a mixture of lifeless chemicals OK let's back up. So OK let's just say the Big Bang took place which I don't believe for a second. Did I believe that God created the heavens and the earth by his voice. The Bible says in Psalms thirty three verses six and nine by the word of the Lord were the heavens made and all the host of them for the by the breath of his mouth for he spake and it was done he commanded and it stood fast the Bible says that God spoke the world into existence. That's what the scriptures reveal. And let's let's just say let's just let's just say for the evolution for the sake of the evolutionist for a moment. OK the universe started and it acts the teaching is that basically what happened. The nothing that became something initially shot off a bunch of things like hydrogen and helium and they went. They just began to shoot off into the cosmos no wind that would happen in a vacuum. What would gases normally have a tendency to do in a vacuum. It would just dissipate when it would just continue to dissipate but not with the Big Bang. They began to gather together in clusters of star us. Does not seem kind of unusual. Why would they do that. But has anybody seen the big bang right. You know right now. I mean there's in there's no question about that. And so let's just say though let's go even further. So let's say that they gathered together they made stars those stars over time began to shoot off other elements they made things like planet Earth. And as they made planet Earth over a long period of time we just had water and rock. And you know obviously very various minerals and things like. And so the question is how did life come about from non-life and we already read that Charles we read that or not. Charles Richard Dawkins says we have no idea. He says we really don't know how life could have come about from non-life this year. Taking from Paul Davies He says nobody knows. How a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organize themselves into the first living cell and then interesting. He says nobody knows because think about it. That first living cell. It would be one thing to make a cell. Let's say scientists could make a cell meaning make something that was not alive. But if you made it initially it would probably be a dead cell. But even if it were initially be able to be made it would be it would have to actually be able to replicate itself immediately. What it would have to be able to actually replicate itself. Right. So it has to have all of the information there at the very same time. Now that's an interesting form and we see that Richard Dawkins said the same thing he said We know that must have happened but nobody's ever seen it happen so to believe it means you have what. Faith so to believe that the universe could come from nothing takes faith. To believe that life could come from non-life takes faith. And so let's go forward. Sir Fred Hoyle he was the man who coined the term the Big Bang. He's the guy who coined that in it's interesting because he was very skeptical of the idea that lower life forms could have come about by random chance and he wasn't creationists by the way he wasn't a creationist but he was very skeptical that Darwinian evolution could have slowly produce lower life forms into something like higher life forms maybe like human beings and speaking of that oil said that the mathematical probability that would happen would be. Something like ten to forty thousand power one in ten of the forty thousand power and speaking of that this is what he said he says the chances of higher life forms emerging this way. Is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing seven forty seven from the materials they are in. So he's saying that. That life not life coming about from non-life but higher life forms being able to do this is similar to you know a tornado sweeping through a junkyard and making an airplane but I would go even further than that. This airplane must then also have the ability to replicate itself. Yes or no it would have to be able to. And that's something to think about and it's one thing to think about the possibility the possibility of the tornado being able to do that but for it to replicate itself is a whole nother issue. So he also went on to say of adherents of biological evolution and this is not coming from creationists respected by the way over here in some biological evolution. Lucian Hall said he was at a loss to understand biologist widespread compulsion to deny what seems to me to be so obvious he said I don't I don't get it. It's obvious that this just could not happen. But let's go forward. Now we know that you know everything about the origin of Earth we read is a mystery and it seems the more that is known the more acute the puzzle get the puzzles get. In in Darwin's day the idea of simple life forms like a cell. Obviously to Darwin they were very very simplistic very simplistic. We now know much more because of you know imaging devices that we have today. And today powerful technologies reveal elaborate microscopic worlds world so small that a thimble full of cultured liquid can contain more than four billion single celled bacteria each packed with circuits assembly in stride. And miniature miniature machines the complexity of which Charles Darwin would have never imagined meaning we know so much from so much more than Charles Darwin didn't here's a you've probably heard this is this is nothing new here but Darwin's Black Box is a book that came out years ago. And it gave the idea that the interesting thing is that. Some of the cells or not cells but some of the. You know various things that would be something like an organ have to have various aspects to them various proteins that all have to be there at the very same time. Meaning they couldn't have slowly evolved. And you know they had to be there all at the same time so they couldn't progressively change through slight modification and so we see this you know we see he gave the example you may have heard this all told there are about forty protein parts in what's called the flagellum It's like a it's like a motor. You can imagine it being a motor but it's basically like a tail on something like a bacteria that can spin and this this this motor can spin at one hundred thousand revolutions per minute. So every minute. It's going one hundred thousand circles up to that. Anyway. Scientists else that's extremely fast. The amazing thing about it is it can stop on a quarter turn. Can you imagine it spinning one hundred thousand times per minute. And yet on a quarter from it. Can it can stop. I mean this is amazing in so all told in this motor there are about forty protein parts which are necessary for them to work and if any of those parts are missing then you either get a flagellum that doesn't work because it is missing or the hooker is missing the driveshaft or whatever or doesn't even get built within the cell. Richard Dawkins they've come up with an idea to try to answer this objection. And what he came up with is he said. Actually if you look at eight of the proteins that are in the in the flagellar motor it can be put together to make some you know maybe on some bacteria this kind of like poison dart. Yeah but meaning you still have to go from eight to nine to ten to eleven to twelve and so you have many men. A many many steps that have to be put in there before you get to what is called the flagellar motor and what would it be between them. What would it be between it actually might be just something that would actually cause destruction to the cell rather than the benefit to it. So let's go for it just gives you kind of a picture an idea of what it looks like and you know you have all these different things. You know you have the L. ring the rod the P. Ring the C. ring you have the filament all of these different things and there you know you have the the body of the cell here and you have the actual motor that spins around very rapidly. And Howard Berkes. From Harvard said that the flagellar motor is the most efficient to machine. In the universe. And it's interesting because we now recognize that it couldn't have been made through slight successive modifications that you needed all of these things together to make this thing at the very same time not to mention you have to have you know it needs to be there on this on this bacteria so the bacterial has to be all be there together at the same time and or formerly at least and it's interesting because Darwin himself said in The Origin Of The Species. If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed through numerous successes slight modifications. My theory would absolutely break down but I can find out. No such case is that interesting. He couldn't find a case because he couldn't look very clear. I mean again you know. Yes they had you know they could look through you know they could they had imaging devices that helped a bit but not to the degree that we have today we haven't you wouldn't have seen any of these things and you see I mean go read the book yourself we have multiple things that are clearly could not have been made through slight successive modifications and by Darwin's own admission his theory would absolutely break down if you could find one and we don't just have one we have several various ones. And so what I find interesting is so back to the issue of faith. It takes much faith to believe in evolution I'm persuaded that. Takes more faith to believe in evolution to believe that nothing could become something then that something could make something. And so thinking about this. If I will still says we walk by faith and not by sight. I believe we have evidence for what we believe I believe we do. But I want you to think about this for a moment. Francis Crick anybody ever heard of Francis Crick before anybody remember who he was. Yeah he helped us find to understand the structure of D.N.A. He was one of the coldest discovers of the structure of D.N.A. And I I really I really find it interesting. What he said notice this. I believe he was a great man of faith even though he didn't believe. By faith in the Word of God at least didn't seem to because he said this biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not design but rather what evolved. Now why do you think he said you need to constantly keep in mind that the thing that you're looking at was not design. Because it looks like it's what. Design So he's saying don't believe what you see gold by. Faith in the theories of men. Yes or No that's exactly what he said one hundred percent. So he had the very same foundational ideas toward evolution that a Christian has toward the Word of God. That we say listen we walk by faith not by sight we believe we have evidence he says yes we believe we have evidence and he said you're going to constantly look at living things and they're going to look like they were designed but you can't believe them. You just can't believe it. Believe the theory of evolution. I find that fascinating. That this man was a great man of faith. And so he may not look at it that way but it is true according to the definition of what faith is. So let's go for one of the arguments that Richard Dawkins himself as Jews was what some called the infant monkey theorem. That's not a monkey. That's a name. I took a picture of such a great picture I threw at him but it's actually should be monkey but we. It could be an A But Wolf will say it but it is the infinite monkey theorem. And the way it works is like this you see many many people who believe in God They say the idea that life could have come about from non-life and so complex to put all of that D.N.A. all of the information in there right in the beginning that the idea that would happen by random chance is nil it's impossible. And so the evolutionists had to come up with something that is not science is just see if a loss of you called the infinite monkey theorem that if you had an infinite number of monkeys typing on keyboards randomly they don't know what they're typing because they're monkeys. But they're randomly typing on keyboards if you had an infinite number of monkeys that by random chance they would type out one of Shakespeare's plays if you give them long enough time. This is this is this is this is an actual theory. It's not a theory it's a complete hypothesis but it's called the infinite number the infinite monkey theorem. Now the good news is someone actually tried and tested this out. The the British National Council of Arts tried it. They tested it and it wasn't this this is just somebody must have put this. This is an old picture but this is not the actual test and so what they did. Obviously they could not get in an infinite number of monkeys. They pick six and OK that's not enough to be an infinite number but they they tried they tried to see how many words you could get the monkeys to type. So they gave them six computers are one month and one computer to six monkeys and they gave them a month just to see how many words not how many plays they typed out by the way right now it's interesting what happened was after that month. They had fifty pages in the Now I want to ask you out of the fifty pages they literally they did type out fifty pages within that one. I know that's not a long enough time when. Not expecting a ship. You know a Shakespearean play or even a sonnet for that matter but so the question is how many were just gas. How many words individual words they typed out on those fifty pages guess. So he said thirty three. The answer is. Zero you think what did they miss I did they miss a I mean those are the. You know the short the shortest words in the English language are and I but the only way you get an A in an eye. Is if you have something on either either side of those words which is what a space meaning these monkeys could not and what's interesting is sharing this with you that there was a debate going on between Anthony Flew before some time before Richard Dawkins was the foremost philosophical atheist on the planet. And he was debating a man by the name of John Lennox who is a very kind you know teddy bear of a professor at Oxford University. And as they were debating the John Lennox is not a known that it was not it was you know it wasn't it wasn't John Lennox it was another fellow in his name is slipping my mind that we're going to see John Lennox debated. Richard Dawkins in just a moment. It was another man who is debating him and Anthony Flew who is this philosophical atheist. He is the one who tells the story he tells it himself and I'm actually show you the words that he wrote down so the atheist response to this. So after seeing that I mean the idea of them shaping you know typing out a play is just not possible. This is what actually went on and this comes from Anthony flues book called there is a God a man who is going to see more about him in just a moment. So he was debating Schroeder there it is so he's debating Schroeder and Schroeder says to him in this debate all sonnets are the same length because he said listen the idea of them typing out a play is just infinitely impossible infinitely impossible but let's go away. Further And let's just drop. Down and see if monkeys by random chance could type out a sonnet. This is what he says all the sonnets are the same length there by definition fourteen lines long. I picked the one I knew the opening line for Shall I compare the two and a summer's day so there's only fourteen lines this isn't like you know a hundred pages or something. He says I counted the number of letters and there are four hundred eighty letters in the sonnet. What's the likelihood of hammering away and getting four hundred eighty eight letters in the exact sequence as shall I. Compare the two a summer's day. What sort of a question mark to us what you end up with is eight is twenty six multiplied by itself four hundred eighty eight times or twenty six to the four hundred eighty eighth power. Or in other words in base ten ten to the six hundred ninety of power. So the chances of doing this are one in ten of the six hundred ninety S. Now once again you hear a number like that you like it means nothing to me that means nothing to anybody and it could mean nothing because it's so large. But to give you a little idea of what ten to the six hundred ninety of power looks like. Scientists and I have no idea how they could come up with this with this of a scientists theorize scientists theorize that there are ten to the atoms in the entire universe. Not in our galaxy but in the entirety of the universe. And so meaning if you were to try to one in ten to the eighty of power. Let's say you wanted someone to you know win the lottery and they had one in ten to the eighty of power they would have to go blindfolded into the entire universe and let's say there was only one yellow atom in the entire universe and blindfolded they would have to say well that's the one and on their first try it would be one in ten to the eightieth power. That's at least theoretically that's what scientists seem to believe so. The interesting thing is though the chance is of monkeys hammering out a sonnet is not intended that eightieth power. It's ten to the six hundred ninety of power. You see. Meaning it is infinitely harder to randomly timed out the information in a fourteen. Long. You know pom. What you have no idea of this. I don't know if in Cuba included spaces in there or not I'm not actually sure but the point is either way. Right. I mean just the idea is is that it is infinitely harder and so as they're debating and this man the skeptic is the one who tells the story. Afterward and after he says after hearing Schroeder's presentation this great skeptic said I told him that he had very satisfactorily and decisively established that the monkey theorem was a load of rubbish because he's a Brit rubbish and I mean to him he came to the conclusion. Yeah I would believe something like this because it's a good philosophy. It's not good science but it's a good philosophy and once again it takes faith to think of these kind of thinks it takes much faith. And so this is not being once again is not being produced or it it's being honest in this man. Anthony Flew being one of the greatest skeptics on planet earth said the same thing is OK I recognise that. So what we end up reading in it is he said in his book you never get a sonnet by chance if the world just thinks the monkeys can do it every time. So what I find interesting is that later. You know after this experience. I watched a debate with Anthony Flew as he was and actually it's interesting because he was debating a man who was once again very kind to him it was it was not like a heated angry debate. And as we were debating. I was actually thinking about Anthony Flew us thinking. I don't think he believes what he's arguing. I think he's a man convicted there is a god. I think he is just saying this because this is what he said for fifty years. Because he was the foremost philosophical atheist for fifty years and I was sitting there thinking I think he really doesn't believe what he's saying and guess what ended up happening later on he wrote a book called there is no God and he crossed out the no and there is a god. Notice what he says these are his words this. Gree skeptic he says my departure from atheism is that he used to be an atheist was not occasioned by any new phenomenon or argument over the last two decades. My whole framework of thought has been in a state of migration. This was a consequence of my continuing assessment of the evidence of what nature he said nature began to make me believe there had to be a God and that interesting. He didn't want to believe there was a god but he said I couldn't lie to myself about what I was saying. He said I saw the evidence in nature. He went on to say when I fancy finally came to recognize the existence of a god it was not a paradigm shift because my paradigm remains as Plato in his Republic script it is. SOCRATES To insist we must follow the argument wherever it was he said the evidence leads to a gone. If you will just look at nature just like we saw. We've seen that scientists over the years. Like I know a scientist who is here and he told me one of the things another one of the things in the textbooks of the evolution of the whales the idea that we've all been given of them coming out on to the land becoming mammals and going the mammals going back on to the into the ocean and then becoming whales. Now scientists have discarded that theory. You know it's actually it's still new textbooks. Just like Haeckel's embryo's have been in there for ninety years even though we've known for ninety years they're not true because I understand it takes some time to get the text books up to date but none of the arguments are ever taken out even if they're even if they're proof for ninety years to be false by some not not creationists. But by the evolutionists who talk about it in themselves they just don't come out of the textbooks and the question is why I'm persuaded because there's no better evidence because when you just put the better evidence in if there was a better evidence than holding on to the old evidence right so let's go for it. Now it's interesting. Anthony Flew. Says nature. As he looked in studied need. Sure each came to the conclusion there must be a god there has to be. And you know the Bible says that and Romans Chapter one Verse twenty. For the invisible things from the creation of the world are clearly seen. Being understood by the things that are made. Even his eternal power and Godhead so that they are without excuse the Bible says we are without excuse. It's interesting I read a quotation to you from Richard Dawkins as he was as he was being asked by Ben Stein. This Jew he would he asked the question we read it yesterday. Ben Stein asked him what do you think the chances are that we're going to we're going to see that maybe there's evidence within nature of the designer. And Richard Dawkins Finally he said yeah you know he said it might come about. Like this. Maybe there were highly highly intelligent beings in other parts of the universe. We would call them aliens probably even call them that but they would be called aliens and and they were extremely highly intelligent and they formed they created this this you know some maybe a bacteria or maybe single celled critters whatever it is and Richard Dawkins said and maybe they seeded it into the universe and if we would study. You know it is we're studying you know these organisms that we look at in nature. He said we might begin to see the the there. The fingerprints of their design in them. You see it as saying that maybe if we. And I think this is just personal opinion I don't know. But I'm wondering if Richard Dawkins in his own mind is saying I'm starting to see the fingerprints. I'm starting to see the fingerprints. Of maybe struggling to accept it and so it may be those fingerprints that he's looking at and thinking like Francis Crick look it looks like it's design. But it can't be trust the theory. Right so you're looking at and you see the evidence of design and. And so Richard Dawkins is saying maybe we'll find that there is design within it. But that just proves that that aliens came about from Darwinian evolution somewhere else and then they made us. Wouldn't that be intelligent design. That's intelligent design. Which is very interesting. Now the Bible says we are without excuse. Doesn't it say that that we can see in nature. There has to be a god. Antony Flew came to that conclusion. I'm persuaded that Richard Dawkins maybe move that moving that direction. Not that he said it per se but the evidence of what he said gives me evidence that he's beginning to believe that at least he's convicted that's true. And I'll show you why I'll show you why. We go even further. So this is the debate between Richard Dawkins in John Lennox Richard Dawkins is the foremost atheist today for most atheists today and I don't say any of this to put him down. From what I've read. I feel bad for him because something terrible happened to him in a child in a church and if what happened to him in a church is what Christianity were all about. Then I wouldn't want to believe in God either. And so I've prayed for him. Not just get converted kind of thing but I feel bad for what the guy went through. I fully understand why you feel that way doesn't why is fighting with a ferocity. I understand to him. Religion is an ugly thing and rightly so. But even though there may be evil people within church though we all make mistakes myself included. There's a God in heaven who doesn't. And he loves us and he hates to see his children pained and suffered in abuse here on earth especially by people within the church. But we've all been hypocrites at times right. And Lord help us to not be here. Chris each other but as John Lennox he's the big teddy bear of a guy from Oxford. I was over at Oxford earlier this year. You know as they were debating. John John Lennox asked Richard Dawkins one of the strangest questions I can ever imagine asking the greatest evolutionists on the planet the greatest atheist on the planet and of his greatest evolutions the greatest atheist on the planet. He asked the question Don't you ever feel the desire to worship God. And might what would you expect. Richard Dawkins to say use pregnant say no that's ridiculous. I'm an evolutionist I know it's not true. But I want you to be this is word for word the response that Richard Dawkins gave he feels like Anthony Flew. You know the Anthony fluke it feel to same way and it but then he came out and he said listen evidence is there but notice what Richard Dawkins says I think that when you hear in response to do you feel the need to worship. I think when you consider the beauty of the world and you wonder how it came to be what it is. You're naturally overwhelmed with a feeling of awe a feeling of admiration and you almost feel a desire to worship something I feel this. I recognize that other scientists such as Carl Sagan feel this Einstein felt. We all of us share a kind of religious reverence for the beauties of the universe for the complexities of life for the sheer magnitude of the cosmos the sheer magnitude of geological time. So he said when I look at nature it makes me want to worship is that powerful remember Dr Remember Paul said every human being knows there's a god deep in their heart though they may have been told over and over by their professors by their teachers by their parents by anyone. They may fight it because terrible things happen to them by wicked religious people and I feel for them. But deep. Now there's something that tells us there is a god. Richard Dawkins himself. He says I feel the US But you know he goes on to say. He goes on to say basically But I believe in the theory of evolution. So I squash it. So notice what he sees leads him to a conclusion. But if Fieri is put above what he sees. For we walk by faith. You know maybe we walk by faith and not by sight is a statement of fact for all humanity no matter what. What if that's true that all humanity humans walk by faith and not by sight. It could happen in relationships young ladies with a guy who is a bomb terrible guy. Everybody sees it. But the girl doesn't want to see it. He's such a good guy. I'm the only one who understands him. And she's walking by faith what she wants and not by what she sees with their own eyes and I'm not saying that to put the girl I'm just saying human beings we do this. But God is saying every one of you. The Bible says every one of us has been given a measure of faith. So we all have faith in evolution is the creations. I'm persuaded the evolution is has more faith and I have. Meaning. I'll tell you I saw the thing like friends as I was raised going to church every Sunday. Every Sunday. I didn't want to leave that anyone leave my friends my family all those things I buy I saw these things. I saw what it said but but I didn't really do really want to but I couldn't lie to myself I had to trust in the Word of God. We all will either trust the word of men men who have something seen nothing. They've never seen The Big Bang. We already saw that when replicated. We saw they did a study one hundred different studies and psychological. Experiments and found that about sixty six percent about two thirds of studies are do not turn out the same when someone replicates them. We saw that in some problem maybe those are just psychologists that's not solid science so they replicate it with medical science and they found was even worse seventy five percent of studies seventy five percent of studies that were done that were replicated did not turn out like the original scientists said they worked out. So potentially upwards of seventy five percent of scientists can be dishonest anyway. And actually they found out they said fifty percent of scientists acknowledged to selectively using information and avoiding other information fifty percent. They acknowledge themselves and ten percent of them openly acknowledged lying within their scientific studies. So could it be that something that led to a person to doubt God was actually a whole for long. Why could that be possible that a scientists knew it to be a lie and we've already showed you that some of the ape men were known to be lies they were literally in a you know ape lower jaw bone with a human skull cap put together to prove man evolved from apes like creature. And in him. People see this and I think how many thousands of Christians probably lost their faith because of their sight. Right. But the interesting thing is some people like interesting enough. Richard is sensing his need to follow God Anthony Flew actually gave his life to go. Actually I can't say that he totally gave it but he did become a believer in God but he in the end of the book like this and I don't know what happened right before he died but I read his book some years ago he finished the book like this because he hadn't totally given his life to God yet but he was he was what we call a deist at that point. Meaning a believer that there is a divine maker but then he said. So where do I go from here. This is how you finish this book. He said Where do I go from here. He said In reality when I look into it. There is no religion in the world with a. Philosophical genius like the apostle Paul and there is no religion in the world with a charismatic charismatic leader like Jesus Christ. That's how he ended his book. He said We'll see what happens and my hope is that he gave his life to Jesus before he passed away. I don't know but he's passed away now. But I want to share with you some things that are just something to look at something that might make Richard Dawkins want to worship God. Here's planet Earth. And these are some of the other planets that are near the same size as a planet obviously not the same in these are their relative sizes. So you have Venus Mars Mercury and you go on and we back out a little and there's planet earth again in the other planets we just look down and then you look at some of the larger planets in our in our galaxy and you start to realize planet Earth is kind of what small and we've gone even further. Let's look here are the big planets and there's a planet earth right there. And this is our sun. Now you realize we're was very small. But let's go to the next picture the next picture Earth is too small to see you can't see our planets because our sun is the dot here right. And you've got regal up above Arcturus down below and then right here you have something called Beetlejuice. So you start to realize I mean we're really really tiny you go further. Here's our sun. It's literally one pixel. Looks very Because on this projector it is but the original slide was literally one pixel it's more than one here though. And this right here is and tear a six. Now what's interesting the next picture our planet is to our plan our sun is too small to see. So the next picture will just show you and Tara is. And this big one is something called Move Cepheid you realize our sun can even be seen in this picture because it's too small. Let alone planet Earth. And so we are so tiny. We are so miniscule that it boggles the human mind so much so in here's the thing and this isn't to put anybody down. I think many young people today don't feel the same need to worship as Carl Sagan Einstein. Richard Dawkins and Anthony Flew because many of us don't think about the grand scope of the universe. We don't think of what what Richard Dawkins says was the complexity of life. The sheer magnitude of the cosmos in his words he says when you look at all these things you just think these is amazing and something in the core of his soul wants to worship the creator and as he has that he thinks about that. And another man who is no creation is by any stretch of the imagination. One of the most intelligent men on planet earth who is stricken with a disease a my intro foot lateral sclerosis a man by the name of Stephen Hawking. This man when when he speaks the world listens though he cannot use his body anymore and I feel bad for him all he can use is his Something like it's pointer finger and with that he writes some of the deepest books on astrophysics when he speaks the world listens. And you see he looks off into the cosmos and when he looks off in the cosmos I want you to notice what he thinks. He thinks about God. We are such insignificant creatures on a minor planets of a very average star in the outer suburbs of one of a hundred billion galaxies. So it is difficult to believe in a god that would care about us or even notice our watch. So he looks out of the universe is like man how could God care about us if he's not a believer but you know as God still comes to. Mind you see that. So these these great evolutionists when they think about science God comes to mind. They cannot help it. They can't help but talk about it. They can't help but write about it because God is speaking to their hearts and the Bible tells us that God has put eternity in our hearts. He's put it in their heart to meaning the desire for something more the desire to not just die. A friend of mine was an atheist. And he said. He hated the idea. He would just sit in Imagine what it would be like to go to become nothing after he dies it just it just troubles him because it's in our heart. If evolution were true when your loved one died you sort of leg or goes another but does anybody feel that way. The only way you do is if you're so horrendously abused by your family that you have no human love you know or for that individual. But normally within human beings at least someone who we cared for. It breaks our heart and it never feels natural when someone dies does it does it feel natural like I and others just when they died you know if heals like it wasn't meant to be. Because God put eternity in our hearts meaning we were supposed to live forever. So this man he says listen when I look at the universe. It's hard for me to believe in a God because it's so big and we're so all small but he thinks about God but I find this interesting that thousands of years ago. There was another man came of Israel who fought almost the exact same thing. As Stephen Hawking but he came to a different conclusion. When I considered I haven't noticed the same but it's as Romans as I don't know what I did here but it's you got it. It's eight when I I redid the slides for this presentations I'm sorry I made a mistake here when I consider the heavens. The work of Dai fingers the moon. The stars which thou hast ordained. What is man that are mindful of him and the Son of man that you visit him. It's not interesting that when people actually take the time they still come to that conclusion. We can't help but think about it even though we try to cover it up even though we try to deny it. Even though we try to get another theory to believe in it still comes to our minds it still comes to our it's that God is the creator that he loves us that he cares for us. And I've seen that many people have heard one side of the story and they've never looked they think my professor is very intelligent and I believe your press professor is very intelligent. I think Richard Dawkins is extremely intelligent. I'm not putting no I don't think he's a dummy no way the guys. He's way more intelligent than I am I don't doubt that. But the reality is intelligence doesn't make you more prone to accepting truth every human has a struggle with accepting truth. We don't like to find out where sinners. It we are sure and I thought I was a pretty good person. And then my heart was broken and I gave my life to Jesus Christ and I'm so glad that I did. Spend the best thing that ever happened to me and I would challenge you. Yes that you know they're in if you want to talk more after please come talk with me. I don't have all the answers I don't claim to I'm a documentary filmmaker and I'm not even a scientist but here's the reality there is plenty of evidence and the greatest evolutionist I can't even believe they've been so open with us to to reveal a window into their hearts. That they feel like you do that they feel like I do a need to worship and friends. I want to challenge you don't cover up the need. Don't fight the need don't fight that feeling within your heart is the power of the Holy Spirit. That is the Holy Spirit convicting you. I'm not here. It's not to me it's not like three let's just fight out these two No it's not like that. Richard Dawkins thinks about God all the time. So I write about him all the time. I don't believe in Santa Claus. But I don't devote my life to writing books that he doesn't exist. Because I really don't believe it's true and I never think about him until Christmas rolls around and I still don't believe in a man but I don't have this raging fire even though I think it's kind of silly to lie to your children. I wouldn't do it. Amen. I remember when I found out Santa Claus wasn't true that was the first time I realized I thought only children lied us like What. Parents lied to. Not a good idea. And I got off on that subject but I just want to challenge you open your heart to God. Open your heart to him. This is not just an issue of hey let's fight who is more intelligent who has better arguments. But who has the real answers to eternal life. God has and I don't. God has the answers he is a God who gave His Son to planet earth and I would challenge you. If something terrible has happened you in your childhood your you know family broke or this happened to you. Views this child you know all kinds of things. God didn't do these things if you really struggle with an issue like that come talk to my dog. I thought I'd like to I'd like to give something to. The friends I just want to close with a prayer and challenge you look into these things for yourself. I just touch on a few things. There's a number of good books out there and I'm not I'm not selling them I'm not trying to sell some one stab at the one that that helps. It's not mine at all but if there's a book called Icons of Evolution that might help establish the errors of much much of what you've been taught the book talks doesn't even mention gone just looking at the science Icons of Evolution. Jonathan Wells. Look into the sea and see if you've only heard one side of the story. Maybe you'd be well if you spent years in school studying the other side. Check out the other side. Maybe there's more out there than you've ever heard. Let's close with a word of broom. Heavenly Father. We just thank you so much for your laugh we thank you. That Richard Dawkins is feeling the promptings of your spirit along with every evolutionist who takes the time to think about the great things of life. I thank you. That Anthony Flew finally finally yielded to the conviction that I believe he had his entire life as the evidence became stronger and stronger. The further we get a nurse history the stronger it gets because the intricacies of your creation become even greater as we can discover more with the science that you've given us Father my prayers and we would draw each one of us nearer to you that we would fight the conviction that they would walk in you find the peace. The joy that we have in our Savior Jesus. I pray this is this message was presented at the G Y C twenty sixteen conference when all has been heard in Houston Texas. I see a supporting Ministry of the Seventh Day Adventist Church seeks to inspire young people to be bible based Christ centered and so winning Christians for other resources like this visit us online at W.W.W. dot G Y C Web dot com where Jean.

Share

Embed Code

Short URL

http://audiover.se/2jqsDsC