In Defence of God

That God exists should be obvious to any design engineer.  Two of a multitude of examples should suffice.

Our best mechanical designs produce products that require constant maintenance.  For example, our best valves, even when used exactly as designed, still leak over time, and leak more frequently with use.  Yet, once we do not misuse our bodies, our lips do not leak water when full, and we do not leak urine or stool.  This is similar for every animal.  The ‘valves’ in every species of every animal were designed and made perfectly from the very beginning.

When design engineers, with significant research and development funds, design a car, cell phone, or any other manufactured product, then it is normally hailed as the most elegant design imaginable.  Yet, within approximately 5 years, it appears clumsy and crude when compared with the new current model.  We can be sure that today’s model will appear similarly crude 5 years hence.  Why is that?  Because their designs were not perfect, and we can normally detect an improved design.

We never seem to tire of the perfect designs of plants and animals as we do the imperfect designs of manufactured things.  Neither have we been able to improve natural designs.  We have tried to emphasize specific traits by grafting plants and selectively breeding animals.  However, these practices have not improved the pure-bred species.

Why don’t we get bored with nature?  Why do we continue to be amazed at each new discovery of natural things.  Because we appreciate perfection, and they were created perfect from the very beginning.  Actually, there is absolutely no evidence of any imperfect natural design anywhere on earth.  Put another way, there is no evidence of an imperfect natural design that evolved into a perfect or improved one.  All designs were made perfect from the beginning.  The only imperfect designs in the archaeological record  are man-made.  That is amazing!

God is perfect, and everything that He created was perfect, including us.  We had, and still have the perfect capability to choose to see His handiwork and acknowledge Him, or continue to believe the myth that life evolved across species – with no supporting evidence except the faith of blind ideologues who avoid any discussion on the issue.

Advertisements

9 responses to “In Defence of God

  1. Psalm 139:14 says: “I will praise thee for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; marvellous are thy works,…” No evolution process here! And again in Genesis, after each day of creation,….”and God saw that it was good.” How refreshing to see such an article in a newspaper. Not here in Canada. Keep on defending.

  2. Jimmy hoffa

    Why would god need defending? If he is what you claim he is what makes an old primate like yourself able to defend such a being? You are not defending god sir. You are defending your childish belief in the god of your parents. Grow up. This is just pseudo intellectual nonsense. Grow up man.

  3. Thanks Christine.

    Best regards,
    Grenville

  4. Dear Jimmy:

    This type of response does not facilitate a discussion. It merely serves to discourage people from investigating.

    I do not want to spend the one life that I have believing or following a lie, and neither should you. We determine the Truth through honest investigation and discussion, and everyone must investigate the Truth for themselves. Please do not discourage them.

    Perhaps the most tragically irresponsible activity in life is to simply declare something to be false without ever having examined contrary evidence. Please be guided accordingly.

    Best regards,
    Grenville

  5. Jimmy Hoffa

    not seeing my response here. don’t even remember what it was… certainly can’t facilitate a discussion if its not allowed through by the moderator…
    but based on what you are saying here goes. Once again what you are saying makes no sense.. its what some people call a deepity – sounds grand in prose and delivery – but makes no sense when though of for more than 30 seconds.

    Have you investigated the thousands of gods that man has invented over the millennia ? How do you know you have not missed the one true god?

    Is your god the god of your parents ? – I won’t assume but lets say it is… does that not make you suspicious ?

    How does one “Investigate the Truth” what does that even mean in english. Sounds to me like “Truth” is already settled a priori before the “investigation” begins.

    This concept of “Truth” you all bandy about… Can this truth be different for other people ? Sure seems that way.. So for example… if “water is wet”… can my “Truth” be “water is dry”? If so wouldn’t that be a misuse of the word “Truth”

    You intimate that i am discouraging people from seeking this truth for themselves… Why do you assume everybody else needs you as a their daddy? Suppose no one else is interested in your brand of truth or any brand of truth… If anything, aren you encouraging them not to hear a competing point of view ?

    How do you know i have not previously “examined” your brand of snake oil before ? Its not exactly new or innovative you know.. This nonsense was peddled for generations, and in every culture (although the central character is different), you just warmed it over and presented it with this air of nuance and knowing that is bizarre to say the least…

    Someone one said that Religion is arrogance masquerading as humility. He nailed it.

  6. Dear Jimmy:

    You have not addressed any of the arguments in the article. Please re-read it and let us discuss your concerns.

    Best regards,
    Grenville.

  7. Jimmy Hoffa

    I have read it. It makes no sense. Actually, i take that back. It makes as much sense at your fellow believer that says above that she is “fearfully and wonderfully made” What does that even mean in english ? How about you address some of mine since you have it all figured out and i am the one who is lost… lead my example for a change…

    Regards
    Jimmy

  8. Dear Jimmy:

    Truth can be objectively determined, as it always has – through the scientific method of analysis. This involves honestly searching for and examining contrary evidence, and verifying, as much as possible, the assumptions on which the interpretation of evidence was based. The level of effort in finding contrary evidence, and the level of verification of assumptions determines the level of confidence placed in any conclusions reached.

    Evidence based researchers commonly use this method and typically engage in honest discussion. Ideologically based researchers do not engage in honest discussion, but ideologically driven debate, where they refuse to honestly examine contrary evidence.

    In my experience, I have found both types of researchers in every field of study, and I try to coax the ideologically based onto a more rational path. Since I refuse to spend the one life that I have pursuing error, I have adopted the evidence based approach in my pursuit of Truth.

    Since the ‘perfect design’ argument in the article makes no sense to you, and since you are unwilling to discuss it at this time so that you may understand it, then you may return whenever you are ready.

    Farewell,
    Grenville

You are encouraged to present your opinion.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s