The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel student edition
The Quantum theory states a space vacuum sometimes spits out objects for a brief amount of time then it is destroyed. The Kalam cosmological argument states these three things: every thing that begins to exist has a cause, the universe began to exist, and the universe has a cause. Experiences suggest that the first part of the Kalam argument is true. A research professor William Lane said, “The subatomic particles the article talks about are called ‘virtual particles.’ They are theoretical entities, and it is not even clear that they actually exist as opposed to being merely theoretical constructs.” Still we have to answer where the quantum vacuums came from. It appears step one of the Kalam held up. Early Christian Scientist used mathematical reasoning to show an infinite past is impossible. Imagine you have an infinite number of marbles and you gave me an infinite number of marbles. This would leave you with zero marbles. Infinity minus infinity equals zero. Or you only gave me the odd-numbered marbles. This would give both of us infinity. Infinity minus infinity equals infinity. Or you could give me all the marbles numbered four and higher leaving you with three. Infinity minus infinity equals three. An infinite number of things lead to contradictory results. Because in the first case infinity minus infinity equals zero, in the second case infinity minus infinity equals infinity, and in the last case infinity minus infinity equals three. Infinity was always subtracted from infinity but each time a different answer came up. The logical conclusion is that science confirms what the Bible says a Creator brought the universe into being. There can’t be a scientific explanation of the first state of the universe. In 1990 a biologist named Tim Berra stated if you compare a 1953 and 1954 Corvette side by side it is becomes obvious there has been descent with modification. Unknowingly he opened the door for the possibility for Intelligent Designer rather than undirected evolution. Henry Gee said “To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story – amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.” Jonathan Wells said, “I believe science is pointing strongly toward design. To me, as a scientist, the development of an embryo cries out ‘Design!’ The Cambrian explosion – the sudden appearance of complex life, with no evidence of ancestors – is more consistent with design than evolution. Similarity across species, in my opinion, is more compatible with design. The origin of life certainly cries out for a Designer. None of these things make as much sense from an evolution perspective as they do from a design perspective.” Wells also said “When you analyze all of the most current evidence from cosmology, physics, astronomy, biology, and so forth – well, I think you’ll discover that the positive case for an Intelligent Designer becomes absolutely compelling.”
2006-12-07
02:47:04
·
11 answers
·
asked by
tribes777
1
in
Physics