S

ome people do not believe in God, Christ and the Bible because they have not seriously considered the alternatives. They have considered the evidence. They have heard the arguments. And they are not convinced. It just seems too incredible to believe that there is a Being who is without beginning and without end and who has the power to create the universe and the power to create life. They think, “That’s just beyond belief. How could that possibly be?"

N

ow, with all candor, we must admit that the Biblical explanation for the universe and life in the universe is incredible. It’s incomprehensible. But so is any other explanation! Consider the alternatives. If God is not the Creator then we must believe the universe (or matter) materialized out of nothing. And then we must believe that matter sprang to life spontaneously by chance.

f you think it’s hard to prove the existence of God to an atheist, just try to prove either of the two alternatives to anybody! If you have ever felt foolish in trying to defend the truth that the living God is eternal, how do you think you would feel if you tried to defend the idea that lifeless matter is eternal? Or that something can come from nothing?

he idea that the universe (or matter) is eternal is not only incredible and incomprehensible; it’s demonstrably false! For example, if the universe were infinitely old there would be no hydrogen left in the universe, because hydrogen is being steadily converted into helium throughout the universe and this conversion is a one-way process; that is, hydrogen cannot be produced in any appreciable quantity through the breakdown of other elements. If matter were infinitely old, the universe could not consist chiefly of hydrogen as it does. It was evidence of this kind that drove Fred Hoyle, the British astronomer and atheist, to believe in “continuous creation” (creation of matter out of nothing).

oyle suggests that matter is being continuously created out of nothing in the empty spaces of the universe. He argues that “continuous creation” must be true because it’s the only alternative to an infinitely old universe (see chapter 6 in Hoyle’s book, The Nature of the Universe). Of course, he refuses to consider God. He cannot believe that everything came from God, but he has no trouble with the idea that it all came from nothing! But the fact that this nonsense is coming from the mouth of a scientist does not make it any less nonsense. The idea that something can come from nothing is not only incredible and incomprehensible; it’s lunacy!

hilosophically, there are three possible explanations for the existence of the universe and life in the universe. But, as a matter of practical reality, there is only one: God.

s there any evidence at all to suggest that the universe (or matter) is eternal? No. But there is abundant evidence to the contrary.

s there any evidence at all to suggest that something can come from nothing? No, there is none at all. Is there any evidence at all to suggest that lifeless, dead matter has ever spontaneously generated life? No.

ut there is compelling evidence that God created the heavens and the earth. And there is compelling evidence that God created all living things and that He created man in His own image.

hinking through the “alternatives” ultimately brings any honest person to the realization that there really are no alternatives. There is only God. Anyone who thoughtfully considers the vastness of the universe, the existence of life in the universe, the complexity of living things, the orderliness of nature, and the moral sensibility with man must conclude that it couldn’t just happen. The evidence of design all around us, and within us, makes it obvious that there is a Designer.

he creation provides abundant evidence of the Creator, and every honest person intuitively understands that there is a Creator. Matter is not eternal. And something cannot come from nothing. And we all know it.&

OF WHAT WERE THEY IGNORANT?

Bob Myhan

hile hanging on the cross, our Lord and Savior prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they do” (Luke 23:34)..

his is often used as an example of a prayer for a sin of ignorance. But the Jews knew that they were condemning a man unjustly! We know this to be true for at least three reasons.

irst, they knowingly accused Jesus falsely. “And they began to accuse Him saying, ‘We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to pay taxes to Caesar, saying that He Himself is Christ a King’” (Luke 23:2). “And though they found no cause for death in Him, they asked Pilate that He should be put to death” (Acts 13:28).

econd, they solicited false witnesses against Him. “Now the chief priests, the elders, and all the council sought false testimony against Jesus to put Him to death” (Matt. 26:59).

hird, they conspired against Him. “When morning came, all the chief priests and elders of the people plotted against Jesus to put Him to death” (Matt. 27:1).

ourth, even Pilate knew that they were motivated by envy. “For he knew that they had handed Him over because of envy” (Matt. 27:18).

hat was it then that they did not know they were doing? Of what were they ignorant? They were ignorant of at least three things.

irst, they did not know that they were crucifying the Lord of glory. “But we speak wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom which God ordained before the ages for our glory, which none of the rulers of this age knew; for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (1 Cor. 2:7,8).

econd, they did not know that they were killing the Prince of life. “But you denied the Holy One and the Just, and asked for a murderer to be granted unto you, and killed the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses…. Yet now, brethren, I know that you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers” (Acts 3:14-17).

hird, they did not know that they were fulfilling the prophets. “For those who dwell in Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they did not know Him, nor even the voices of the Prophets which are read every Sabbath, have fulfilled them in condemning Him” (Acts 13:27).

n response to the apostles’ teaching on the crucifixion, “the high priest asked them, saying, ‘Did we not strictly command you not to teach in this name? And look, you have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this Man’s blood on us!’” (Acts 5:28).

his is interesting in view of their statement to Pilate about the guilt of Jesus’ blood. “When Pilate saw that he could not prevail at all, but rather that a tumult was rising, he took water and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, ‘I am innocent of the blood of this just Person. You see to it.’ And all the people answered and said, ‘His blood be on us and on our children’” (Matt. 27:24,25). &