Posted on 12/02/2012 1:41:16 PM PST by Bill Russell
GOD’s SUDOKU (Part 1)
Deriving the presence of God in our World and Lives
I have been struck by the growing number of people who are publicly proclaiming that God does not exist. From the well known atheists like Christopher Hitchens, Michael Dawkins, and Penn Gillette, to lesser known groups who like to refer to themselves as “free thinkers.” While their arguments range from high minded intellectualism to wanton pleasure seeking, they all boil down to the simple premise that we cannot prove that God exists anymore than we can prove unicorns or fairies exists. They then point to the plethora of differing religions which all claim to be the one true religion and then argue that none can be true.
I enjoy working Sudoku puzzles. They can be quite challenging. Their design so simple: a block of numbers, nine squares by nine squares, divided into nine blocks of nine blocks each, requiring the arrangement of the numbers 1 through 9 in each row, column, and block so that all nine numbers appear without repeating in each. This simple puzzle requires exercises in logic, eliminating possibilities, identifying possibilities, and using inductive and deductive reasoning to finally arrive at the only answer and number which can fit. In many ways, finding God by arriving at the conclusion that He exist is like finding the number which fits into a particular block on a Sudoku puzzle. And figuring out how he fits into the rows, columns, and blocks of our lives becomes clearer when we learn to understand and appreciate the progression and logic of where and how He fits in.
One of the major premises of Atheism is that it takes a scientific approach to all aspects of life, including how life came into existence. Scientific Atheism believes that all life has occurred by random chance and natural selection. It supposes that science has somehow proven that God as Creator cannot exist. Or, at the very least, scientific method requires that we must scientifically “prove” God exist before we can acknowledge him.
So, let’s do some math.
Molecular biologist, Dr Doug Axe, points out that it takes at least 250 proteins for the simplest life form to function. Each of these proteins would require the sequencing of at least four amino acids. He gives the probability of this happening randomly for a single organism, in a given pool of primordial soup, at 1 in 1 trillion6 (that’s 1 Trillion x 1 Trillion x 1Trillion x 1 Trillion x 1Trillion x 1 Trillion). It is important to note that this is the probability for the line-up for these amino acids for a single organism in a perfect environment. But it would take at least two to reproduce. The probability of those two organisms reproducing and then evolving into the millions of plant and animal species we have on earth today, all living within their perfectly balanced ecosystems, with their multitudes of sensory capabilities, and finally developing the human species capable of learning and creating great technological developments and societies, capable of acts of reason, kindness, and cruelty beyond all other animals, is even more incalculable.
But even this part of the equation is incomplete: let’s also consider the probability of the occurrence of the environment in which that perfect primordial soup could exist to support the creation of that first simple organism and its multiplication and evolution into the current form of our species on this earth. In looking at the billions upon billions of solar systems in the universe, what is the probability of a single planet, achieving the perfect mass and gravitational size and rotation to hold its perfectly composed and balanced atmosphere and perfect orbit around a perfectly situated star with the perfect balance of mass, gravitational pull, heat and stability to hold that planet at the perfect distance to provide the constant temperature ranges and variables to support life? In pondering this question, we must also consider the probability of that planet having the perfect rotational spin to provide the perfect mix of daily light and wind speed to provide a perfect range of moisture, oxygen, and climate for an environment that would nurture life and not destroy it. If the earth’s rotation were any faster, the winds on the surface would become so fast they would scour the earth’s surface, eroding the top soil and permanently clouding our atmosphere with dust. If it were any slower, our earth’s surface would experience extremes of temperatures from prolonged days and nights which would destroy the daily and seasonal stability required to support life as we know it.
We must also consider the perfect rotation of our single moon around this planet we call home and the environmental stability it provides. If we had multiple moons, our ocean tides and atmospheric conditions would be thrown to minimums and extremes totally changing our environment. When the moons were are on opposite sides of the planet, there gravitational pulls would create daily tsunamis and sand bars. When the moons align, their combined gravitational pull would cause massive global tsunamis and could rip our precious atmosphere away from the earth and into the vacuum of space. If we had no moon, our oceans’ tides would be much more stagnant, preventing the necessary churning of oxygen and temperature variables necessary to maintain our environment.
There are those who consider the idea of an intelligent designer of our ecosystem and life to be unscientific. Many wish to view the development of life as a random occurrence for which only science can provide answers and are of the belief that scientific discovery eliminates the need for, and even the possibility of God. But scientific discovery and math point to the literal impossibility of life occurring anywhere in the universe without the presence of a highly intelligent creator.
To argue that life on earth was created by random chance without the presence of a Creator is akin to arguing that it is possible for a single person to win a dozen of the world’s national lotteries on the same day without some sort of fix. (The probability of winning the Power Ball lottery is calculated to be 1 in 175 Million.) Would any self-respecting scientist make such an argument?
The Creator is real, and he speaks to us. His presence can be felt, and He reveals His identity to us. But each of us has to work through His Sudoku puzzle to make it all fit together in our lives.
More blocks in this puzzle to follow……
this is exactly what you and I were discussing today ping!
Correction. . .Christopher Hitchens USED to be an atheist.
When I was in nursing school (a thousand years ago) I studied physiology. It was my first spiritual experience. The more I learned about the way our bodies work and function the more I understood the unspeakable intelligence in and through all living beings. I had what I would call glimpses of God- that utterly changed my perspective.
Many years later I took cell biology and had a similar experience only it was more profound because I had years of living to see more of God’s handiwork. I’ve always wondered at the division between science and religion- to me it’s all a matter of language and words- and of course we all come to these discussions with preconceived beliefs.
Still- it seems clear to me that science is just a way to describe God- which turns out to be an impossible task- and yet worthwhile.
Well worth the read. Thanks.
Life simply cannot come from dead matter. Time does not matter. The Big Bang sterilized all matter and all matter was dead. God is the only solution to the existence of life on earth that has any plausibility.
for later
That there are a "plethora" of differing religions claiming to be THE one true religion doesn't prove that none can be true. It proves that only one COULD be true and the rest are counterfeits and lies. There had to be truth before there was a lie. Lies are lies because they oppose the truth. The false religion that claims ALL religions lead to God (the spokes of the wheel argument) cannot be true either because most religions are mutually exclusive and, if one is true, its opposite cannot also be true. That is why I KNOW that Christianity is the truth - because it is set apart from all others in that it is not what man must do to bind himself back to God but what God has done to bind man back to Himself. "For by grace you have been saved by faith and not of yourselves."
Thanks for the thread article. The numbers you gave are truly astounding. Some atheists believe in evolution only because the alternative is creation and a Creator.
One could ask if they believe if there is life on other planets? If so, what do they base their conclusions on? How about could there be other dimensions that we cannot see in which ghosts appear from time to time?
It never ceases to amaze me that the people who claim to be atheists would readily by faith believe in life on other planets or believe in ghost sightings. Yet you tell them there is a spiritual world and they simply refuse to entertain the notion.
They also love to talk about luck or fate.
Luck, IMHO, is nothing but a description of a statistical occurrence.
Fate is a force that somehow drives events. Evidently fate is an active force of some sort. can't quantify it, just lean on it as a force that drives the events of man.
It's amazing how many atheists seem to express belief in these two "phenomena."
They also love to talk about luck or fate.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Karma is a another frequently used word by atheists.
That too!
I am on another board and they loooove to talk about Karma.
...
It's amazing how many atheists seem to express belief in these two "phenomena."
Just the old Babylonian gods of gad and meni (Isa 65:11).
I find it more amazing that Wiccans will deny God, but firmly believe in spirits. Go figure.
If we can build machines that function in space and on other planets, why didn't God create life that can do the same?
They confuse themselves. mankind would be worse off without "religion". They deny this, while living in nations in which the very idea of human dignity for all, arose from cultural philosophy greatly informed by Christian mindset, thinking they can cut entire [generally peaceable] societies off from the cultural roots, and somehow things will get better. Just look at them they say, "we are not bad people" --and we "don't believe" in God, so ta~da! They are proof!
Hey, years ago my wife and son put the following on my birthday cake.
I've kept it and have it prominently displayed in the kitchen. Recent we had someone over who say these trolls were suppose to bring good luck. After they left I told my wife that somehow in my wildest dreams I never imagine my troll would turn out to be a false god.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.