A Rationale for Belief

In “Rational? Or Irrational?” it was shown why atheism is an irrational choice.  But that’s not enough for some to assume that faith must be the rational alternative. The last sentence of that article states, “The rational approach begins with the assumption that there is a God.” It’s time to dig a little deeper into that concept.

The search for the origin of the universe and everything in it either takes you to a place where there is a supreme being who is the originator and creator, or it takes you to a place where there is no supreme being. You either begin with God, or you begin with inanimate matter. It is important to realize what is missing when there is no God.

It’s interesting to note how atheists insist there is no God involved in anything that has ever happened in this universe and then seem to explain everything as if there is a God working behind the scenes.  This is something they would never admit, and consciously speaking they are correct. The problem is that they show no awareness of what is missing if God is missing.

God is a source of knowledge. He is a designer. He is a moving force. He is a guide. He has purpose. He has a plan. When He is present, all those things are present with Him. When He is missing, all those things are missing as well. If we want to understand correctly what it means for there to be no God, we must remember that every single item listed above is absent.  With that in mind, consider only the progression of the earth from its theorized initial state to the present.

Imagine going back in time to an atheistic evolutionary world where there are primitive sightless animals with no eyes. There is no God, so no knowledge, no guide, no purpose, no plan. What would happen over thousands (millions?) of years to make these animals have eyes. Do they wish they could see? The concept of sight has never occurred to them. If they wanted to, could they grow a little spot on their head that billions of evolutionary changes later they could turn into eyes? You’re much more advanced. Can you grow a spot of any kind anywhere on your body because you will to do so? If they could (they couldn’t) over many generations grow a spot, could they count on the next thousand generations evolving that spot into something closer to an eye?

But wait. Do you see how we’re counting on there being a plan, a purpose, a design and there are none of those things if there is not God. If one generation gets a spot, the next might lose it. They don’t know, and have no ability to put a plan into action if they did.

Unfortunately, too many believers in God let themselves become overwhelmed by all the scientific knowledge and facts that they don’t know.  Scientists by definition will know more about the various theories pertinent to their field than will the believer.  Scientists may ridicule you, but that is not an argument. It is more often an attempt to keep from having to make an argument. Why would that be your choice if you have the winning argument?  Consider some of the things that had to happen and how they had to happen over time in order for a newly formed earth to become what we live on today.

Most preposterous, there had to be one instant of time when there was no living creature on earth, and the next instant there was life.  This idea is tossed about as axiomatic, but Louis Pasteur is famous for disproving the theory of spontaneous generation, the idea that something that is not living can become living. Immediately, the non-believer has had to accept a position which has been disproven in order to accept what he wants to believe.

I don’t normally get into details in order to make these arguments, but here is one that is interesting and easily understood.  There are over 100 proteins, complicated chemical structures, that must be present for life to exist. These proteins must be perfect in their structure or they won’t be able to perform their function.  So we have over 100 complex proteins that must all be gathered together in perfect condition in the same infinitesimally tiny place in order for life to begin.  They have to be the right proteins, not just any group of over 100 proteins, and guess what.  There is no reason for life to begin.  Something has to be the catalyst and it has to act in a very short time frame, because whatever brought these proteins together will very soon move them apart.  Some say a spark occurred, but would that cause the proteins to come to life?  This experiment has been performed under perfect conditions many times and has never resulted in a living cell.  But here’s the real issue.  Proteins are manufactured by living organisms.  So before there were living organisms there were no proteins.

But even if the first cell came to life, it had to be able to eat and eliminate waste, and to reproduce. If it didn’t come with those capabilities it would not survive (or be alive.) Then it had to become a two-celled organism (on its way to being multicellular.)This would be an event just as amazing as coming to life. Over time it had to produce tissue and organs.  This process had to split into many paths to produce all the living organisms that now exist on the earth. This had to occur with no plan, no design, no purpose, no guiding hand.  If you can believe that the billions upon billions of events that had to occur so that there would be grasshoppers with legs, wings, eyes, muscles, exoskeletons, etc, could occur with no guiding force causing each successive change to bring the organism closer to a grasshopper each time a change occurred, and there was no plan for doing this, and there was no design that was being followed and there was no reason nor purpose (and the same thing for frogs, and antelope etc.) then maybe you should think a little deeper.

If you had a box in which were all the parts necessary for a mechanical watch to function and you shook that box and checked the results you would not find a functional watch in that box. No matter how many times you shook it, or how gently or how violently, or how long or short the time frame, every time you stop shaking and check the results you will find a collection of watch pieces in haphazard array, no closer to being a functioning watch than when you started.  The only difference would be that the pieces were in a different orientation.

If a watch maker began working on the pieces, every time he made a change the result would be closer to being a functioning watch than it had been. The watch maker sees the design. He has knowledge and a plan. There is a purpose and a reason for the changes he makes and when he has finished there will be a functioning watch. That is the difference God makes in the existence of the world we know.  If you want to believe in evolution, you still need God to get it done.

Beyond that, the biosphere contains plants that deer eat, and other plants that panda bears eat, and other plants that hippopotamuses eat, and lions that eat gazelles, and foxes that eat rabbits, and vultures that eat dead animals, and ants that eat the things ants eat, etc.  Don’t forget the water cycle.  Include the earth revolving around the sun and spinning on its axis, providing sunshine and dark, and winter, summer, spring and fall.  The same birds always build the same nests.  The same spiders always build the same webs.  All ant lions build cone shaped holes in sand to trap ants.  In every case above (and so many more that aren’t mentioned but could fill volumes, in fact have filled volumes) the young are never taught any of these skills by the adults.  The young are programmed with the knowledge and skills.  And where there is a program there must be a programmer.  Where there is design there must be a designer.

There are so many situations that, as mentioned above, actually have filled volumes of books.  There is not time nor space to mention even a small fraction.  We have briefly discussed the impossibility of a single cell coming to life, a single cell becoming a two-celled organism, a process of evolutionary change, no, multiplied billions of changes, just to produce a grasshopper, and the same process for any other organism in existence, the circular food chain, the “programmed” instincts of animals, and all of these things are absolutely impossible in a world in which God did not either guide along the design according to His purpose to fulfill His plan, or else simply create it ready to go. (I’ve already discussed in another article why immediate creation makes more sense than God guiding evolution.)

You are left with an impossible world without God.  That being the case, and since the world definitely does exist, and your only other option being that God exists, the only rational conclusion that can be drawn is that God exists and He created the world and the universe that contains it. 

To beat a dead horse: you have a binary choice, there is no third option.  The idea that this earth has become what it is without God’s hand in it is ludicrously ridiculous.  Rational thought process leads you to take the only other option available.  I understand. It is difficult to even imagine that one individual could have so much knowledge as would be needed to create a full grown universe and the power to bring it about, but God is that individual.  However, it is much more difficult to believe that this full grown universe and all that is in it could come into existence on its own without God.