First Things -- 3635 East Paces Circle, Unit 1414, Atlanta, GA 30326
Searching for Truth About Origins
One Preacher’s Experience
In 2010, I was preaching at a small country church in Madison, Georgia. My work began as a part-time ministry, but had developed into more of a half-time ministry. With the church work and other responsibilities, I had little time to spare. Searching for the truth about origins was not a priority to me.
Then one day I heard or read that the scientific community had elevated Darwin’s theory of evolution to the level of established fact. While still referring to evolution as a theory, scientists revealed that the scientific community does not define the word “theory” the way nonscientists do. My understanding of the word “theory” had always been something that might be true, but had not been proven to be true. While recognizing that most people agree with me, the scientific community hinted that the problem was not that they used the wrong word, but that nonscientists were not privy to an understanding of scientific jargon.
While I had not spent a lot of time studying the latest “proof” for evolution coming from the scientific community, I had reviewed various theories about the Genesis account of creation to a degree where I did not feel, as many do, that the text leaves room for billions of years. To me, the Bible is an “all or nothing” book. If it is God’s message to us, it is vital that we can rely on it. The view that some take that the Bible contains God’s message to us but that certain parts of the Bible are not God’s word is meaningless in my view. If we have to decide what is and what is not God’s word, we are our own ultimate authorities. The Bible becomes more a book of suggestions that we get to rule on. In reality, we may as well take a clean sheet of paper and sit down and write our own Bible for all the good that the Bible is doing for us in revealing truth. With that thought in mind, I have been an “all in” Christian.
That being said, my reaction to the scientific community’s claim that evolution had been proven true was that, if they were right, the Bible was wrong and I needed to stop preaching that it was God’s message to us. I determined to make a study that would be as unbiased as I could make it. I knew that would be difficult because I had been preaching and teaching that the Bible is true for many years. Nevertheless, I was determined to find out if the scientific community had proof that the Bible is false and, if they did, to accept it.
Living in a time where so much information is available on the Internet, I did a search to determine which books to read and ordered several. I wanted the latest information, so I read reviews to try to determine where to find that information. I also read magazine articles, watched documentaries from the scientific community, and watched videos where scientists presented the latest theories and where scientists who do not believe in God argued that science has proven there is no need for a God to explain the existence of our world and of our universe. Not only did I hear that was is not needed, but that God is not wanted because believing in God is detrimental to scientific research.
Interestingly enough, it was while doing this research that I learned there are four forces in the universe without which scientists tell us the universe could not exist. I had not heard about that before. Since then I have asked many people if they were aware of the fact that there are four essential forces in the universe. I can think of one person who had. There may have been one more, but it was clear to me that I was not the only one who had not heard that there are four essential forces in the universe. The existence and importance of these forces was, in my mind, critical in my search for truth about origins. I go into more detail about that in my section on the four essential forces.
The main point that struck me as I did my research is that scientists do not have credible answers for what I refer to as “first things” issues. These are foundational to what they believe about origins. I have used the an illustration I call, “If I had a billion dollars.” When I was growing up, anyone who had a million dollars was considered fabulously rich, Inflation has changed that. Today you need to be a billionaire to be considered rich, so I used billion instead of million. Did you ever think what you would do if you were fabulously rich? Many people like to think what they would do if they won the lottery which can be millions of dollars, but what if you had a billion dollars? What would you do with it? I can sit and think about what I would do with a billion dollars, but it is really an exercise in futility because I will never have a billion dollars.
In a similar way, scientists build theories on how this developed and how that developed, but they cannot explain how they got the raw material required for their theories. If they could explain the source of all the matter in all of the universe in a seed form that is essential to the big bang theory, the big bang theory would have a credible foundation. The truth is that they cannot explain where all the matter in all of the universe came from or how it got here. Most people have never spent any time thinking about the origin of matter, but it is a big issue. Again, I have a section on the origin of matter, so I will not go into detail here except to say this is a very big problem for the “natural causes” community and they know it.
The third foundational issue that scientists cannot explain is the origin of the very first life form essential for Darwin’s theory of evolution. Despite years of study by brilliant scientists, the truth is that recent revelations by the scientific community have made the concept of a spontaneous initial life form exponentially less credible than it has ever been. You can find more about that in my section on the origin of life.
These three issues have convinced me, beyond a reasonable doubt, that no “natural causes” explanation for the existence of our world and of our universe will ever work. There is much more to be said, some of which you will find here and some of which I will save for another time in order to avoid the “too much information” problem.