A Frog to a Prince
by Phillip Goodman

(This article is in response to a self-proclaimed "atheist" who mocks the Bible and "ignorant" Christians who believe that God exists. The article was passed on to us from our good friend Terry James and was originally directed to www.raptureready.com, founded by our other good friend, Todd Strandberg, and for which Terry writes many informative articles on Bible prophecy.)

Dear Sir, thank you for making our point, and also that of the Bible. As a self proclaimed "Atheist," you have claimed to be absolutely certain that no God exists anywhere in the entire physical cosmos. Therefore, you have claimed to possess omniscience. You are all knowing, proclaiming that God is not anywhere in any corner of the universe to be found. How do you know that if you are not omniscient? Being all-knowing, you have reserved to yourself a basic attribute of God. Therefore, your omniscient declaration that there is no God is self-refuting. You have violated a fundamental law of logic--the Law of Non-Contradiction.

However, if you in fact are not claiming to be omniscient, and in fact cannot say with absolute certainty that there is "no God," then you are not an "Atheist," and God may be out there somewhere. If you are not absolutely certain, and are not possessing of an infinite (unlimited) knowledge, but still proclaim that there is no God out there, then you are operating on "Faith." You are making your "not-so-absolute" statement on the same basis as all faith claims, and thus you are very religious indeed. Very! Why? Because you have more faith than we do!

You see, we have more evidence for our faith than you do for yours. The material, molecular stuff, that makes up physical life has to arrange itself into specifically coded combinations (DNA informational packets) for the simplest form of life to emerge. Statistical calculations show this to be "10-to the Astro" (10 with an astronomical number of zeros behind it), or virtually nil, no matter how many billions of years you paste into the formula to make it sound plausible. The kind of "faith" that believes this is no different than the fairy tale of changing a frog into a prince, believing that such becomes believable when you insert 20-billion years into the fairy tale. That is, the children's nursery story becomes believable to the atheist-evolutionists-religionists when it reads like this: "One Frog plus 20-Billion Years Equals a Prince." Is this rational?

How many billions of years would you bet it would take for the wind-swept dirt to put the faces on Mount Rushmore? And those faces are still dirt. Will the same turbulent forces of nature put together a living person? Figure out how long that will take, and then reduce the time and tell us how long it will take for the wind and water to carve out Lincoln's face on Mount Rushmore. Remember, in your time-chance formula, you have to allow for the difference between a rock face and a breathing, thinking, feeling, seeing biological person whose single fingernail cell is vastly more complex than the huge Lincoln-Mount Rushmore dirt system. Lincoln on Mount Rushmore, of course, being an incomprehensibly simpler system than a living person, would take a much, much lesser time for 'chance' to do its work.' So how long? And why is it that we have not found one single chance-formulated face on a stone mountain, but we have six billion people and trillions of creature walking around? Here's a clue. The huge Mount Rushmore faces were designed. Nature had its chance, but couldn't put even one Mount Rushmore face together. Why not? Are you getting the picture of why "Atheism" is not only a faith-statement, but a baseless, irrational nonsense? Evolutionism's "natural selection" can't produce a single Mount Rushmore-face, but it can turn a frog into a prince?

Now, if that is true, and you are that man (prince), then your brain cells are no more than a chance arrangement of molecules. Therefore, what you think about God is simply the result of a chance arrangement of advanced dirt molecules, and cannot really say anything better than the self-contradictory statement that you have already made, that "It is absolutely true that there is no absolute truth," or "Possessing the omniscient mind of God I can say for certain that there is no omniscient God." Then, when you die, and pass from history, according to this faith-statement, your mental molecules will return to dirt, and simply won't matter any more. Of course, you may think that you have passed this faith on to your children. If so, their brain molecular material, which according to your 'faith statement," is all their mind is, will become dirt, ad infinitum to the grandchildren, etc. Your generations will simply be a cycle of nothingness, and so would mine be. Nothing any of you have ever said or done will ever have any more meaning than the 'chance-plus-time' molecular arrangement of dirt "reasoning" that your "faith statement" proclaims. What's the Point?

Meanwhile, our faith is based on evidence to the contrary. Just one strand of that evidence, that we have quoted above, that the laws of probability point in the direction of a Mastermind behind the unfathomable complexities of the universe, provides a far more reasonable explanation than the illogic of atheism, and ought to get one thinking in the right direction. The fact that this faith happens, as a side-benefit, to provide Hope that life is more than a 20-billion year mindless arrangement of dirt molecules, ought to be worth investigating with the mind that God gave you. Do it for your children so they can believe in something. (In essence, you have told them that "Your life, son, is 'a chance arrangement of dirt. Pass this on to my grandchildren.'") But at the end of life, and at the end of history, Jesus will be there. Let your children have Hope.
...................................................benny