God, Amputees, and Love

“Why won’t evolution heal amputees?” was the question I asked the other day to counteract the new atheist ‘gotcha’ question, “why won’t God heal amputees?” I did not reverse the table in order to refute evolution so much as to demonstrate how empty a question like that is. As I have stated in that post, Christianity is a faith, and as such, many questions will go unanswered until eternity. Nonetheless, unanswered questions do not negate truth. 

My argument is, if there’s a worldview that must account for the pain and suffering in the world, and lack of healing for amputees, it has to be the one that teaches progression and greater complexity. That system is evolution. Christianity has consistently taught that we live in a fallen state, and sin is the cause of all the world’s ills. Regenerating limbs would be great evidence for evolution, wouldn’t it?

So it is demonstrable that the question at hand is not good for either side. It does not prove nor disprove Christianity or evolution. But as pointed out in the comments, it may have a more stinging effect on certain types of Christianity. Perhaps charismatic faith-healers would benefit from pondering such a question. In fact, as I pointed out, I believe this is the kind of argumentation that conservative Christians have been throwing their way for years.

But there’s another problem that must be addressed. The question might not disprove the existence of God, but does it do harm to the concept of a loving God?

God, Amputees, and Evolution

Continuing in the discussion about amputees and God, I’d like to posit the question toward those who believe in a naturalistic world view. One definition of evolution says that it is a “process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state.” Biologically, socially, and individually, we use the term “evolution” to denote this sort of change – a progressive, better change.

The Bible, on the contrary, teaches us a worldview that is consistent with what we see. It is well known that the Bible speaks of a curse that came upon all the world as a result of sin. The sin nature that is inherit in every individual plays out in society with effects such as rebellion and disease. All around us is suffering of the worst sort – and for the Christian, this is all coincides with what is read in the Word of God. The Bible teaches the exact opposite of evolution: de-evolution, or degeneration.

So what’s the problem?

A Message from Ken Ham

We’ve all heard the adage “In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.” But, how often have we seen it? I have personally seen it lived out in its truest sense on a few of occasions, but none so honest, precise and Christ honoring as last night.

I attended a meeting in which Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis (AiG), was the keynote speaker. The meeting was held at a fundamentalist college that is known for its King James Only position amongst other “typical” positions that are popularly associated with fundamentalism today. To my knowledge, Ken Ham has never expressed any specific relation to fundamentalism nor to any denomination, for that matter. Yet, he brought a message that was more important than any denominational barrier. He overlooked whatever differences he had with the hosting school, as did the school with him, and a vital challenge was brought to the direct attention of God’s people.

As I watched, a vital challenge was placed before me.

A Little Lower than the Animals (part 2)

I would like to suggest a few reasons for the austere view of humanity and humanity’s achievements that is a direct result of the naturalistic worldview. I believe there is a process of thought that leads to such a devaluation of humanity. I realize, of course, that there is a world of scientific and philosophical ideas behind all of this. However, I am keeping in mind that this is a blog and not a collegiate periodical.

A Little Lower than the Animals (part 1)

This past Christmas, my wife and I received the DVD edition of the Discovery Channel series, Planet Earth. To my surprise, after seeing only a couple episodes, we were hooked. The cinematography in the series is absolutely phenomenal and many of the shots and scenes are unprecedented. The biggest surprise, however, was that comments about evolution from a naturalistic worldview were, for the most part, few and far between.

The filming and the efforts to present such a massive project in such a presentable medium are very much commendable. That kind of glimpse at nature is priceless. Plants, birds and animals that one would otherwise never know existed are seen in their natural habitat. But, of all the creatures that are included in this series, there is one “creature” that is for the most part left unnoticed.