Let's say you like the Alphabet Soup solution to origins and development of life, and think the random word generator over at http://www.RandomMutation.com/ is a viable illustration of "undirected" evolutionary progress.
With regards to origin of life questions, you're still stuck with this question: "Who created the randomizer?". (After all, it is impossible to imagine that a random word generator could exist without a designer, and yet this is the very analogy that darwinians dish up to us, the great unwashed, to explain origins and development of life.)
Atheists hit a wall of what are called "brute facts". One of them is the natural laws that exist in the universe. They just are. They have, and require, no explanation.
Theists have a more satisfactory belief. Since there is no rational reason why either a universe, let alone this universe, or natural laws, let alone these laws, must exist, we rationally conclude their existence is contingent.
But upon what (or Whom)?
Atheists just stare into space, or, maybe, drooling, say, "just is. just is. just is."
Christians gaze into the face of God, and, in response to the atheist's sneering demand, "who created God?", reply with confident assurance, "Just Is! Just Is! Just Is!".
Atheists run into the unfeeling, uncaring, wall of the "just is". Christians run into the loving arms of the "I AM".
No disrespect intended here to respectful, thoughtful atheists who regularly comment at this site -- just the drive-by sneering ones.
And that's the way the designed Ball bounces.
2 comments:
Understanding how life arose within our universe would be extremely useful to the health and well being of that life. (Ie, us.) That question is not really related to the one about how the Universe got here in the first place. You are assuming it is, but you don't know that. I think your reasoning might go something like, "Since I'm the centre of the Universe, and I'm alive, then the Universe must have been created specifically to grow life." Joking. But I think you are making the assumption that life is actually significant to the Universe in some way, and we don't know that.
If you keep asking and refining your questions, eventually every honest person -- theist or scientist -- has to say, "I don't know." If you ask a biologist (who studies life) a cosmological question like, "how did the conditions that allow life arise?" you will get an "I don't know" much more quickly than if you ask a cosmologist. But both questions are on the fringe of our understanding.
If you ask a question like, "Why does this creature have no eyes when its ancestors do?" a biologist can tell you. If you ask a question like, "How did the environment that produced this eyeless creature itself come into being?" a geologist can tell you. Of course, as your questions get bigger and more general, the answers also get more general and vague. Very quickly you will outstrip human understanding. But it will take you much longer than it would have one hundred or even twenty years ago.
The site you link does not attempt to address any cosmological questions like the ones you pose. You're sort of using a straw man to launch off of here.
GeekWad: Check out the Sept. 11 post for the context.
Post a Comment