Part of the appeal of the New Age movement is linked to rejection of organized religion. New Agers commonly reject organized religion because they reject past attempts by governments to mix religion and politics to control or abuse others. New Agers often feel that the Western application of science, reason, and religion are responsible for most of the wars in the last 200 years and they reject science and the Christian religion in the name of personal and societal peace. Again, the important quest by the New Age movement is for harmony and not for facts or truth or God. A way of life that provides harmony with self, others, and the earth (environment) is the only "truth" of importance.
Modern Psychology and Eastern Religion
A strong connection often exists between the practice of psychology and Eastern religions. Many psychologists are New Age believers. That is because the goal of Eastern religion focuses on behaviors that help people cope with pain and isolation and bad feelings about themselves rather than on objective reality. Therefore, the goals of Eastern religion and psychological counseling or often similar.
This is not to say that we do not have a lot of Christian psychologists and psychiatrists. Christians in those fields are not pantheists but believe God is a real person and that Jesus through his death on the cross has paid for all our sins. Of course, a lot of personal problems are tied to one's personal history and how he or she was brought up. That is, a lot of our problems often are psychological in origin as well as sometimes physical.
The Jews and Christianity
Abraham and Isaac and Jacob experienced God as a person who actually existed. God to them was not the trees or moon or wooden idols or a feel-good feeling inside themselves. He was their Creator who thought and planned and programmed and made things and loved the people he had made. God was a person with will and mind who lived as an individual. He had purpose and was perfect and creative.
In Judaism and Christianity, although God is a person who cares about people getting along, he, himself, is the focus of existence, not created people and their personal goals. How people feel nor the practicality of getting along are the tests of what is real. What is fact and real and true is what matters. As Jesus said in John 8:32: "You will know the truth and the truth will set you free."
Judeo-Christianity holds to the truth that the person of God is real. We also believe that God is perfect and that he alone determines or defines what is good and what is evil. God and pleasing God is the focus of our desires to live the meaningful life. There is little room for self-pride when one focuses on what God desires instead of on one's self.
What Science Says about the Nature of God
Pantheistic Eastern religions say that everything that exists is god and that we are god and that some mysterious, mindless, blind force is responsible for the existence of everything. However, the Bible says that God is a person who has will, mind, and purpose and who loves us dearly as individuals. The question is: what picture of God do we get from science and history? Is God some blind, vague force that includes all matter and energy and the laws of nature or is he a person with will, power, purpose, planning, and programming as portrayed in the Bible?
The Anthropic Principle
Physicists in the 1960s revealed that certain constants in the universe are fine-tuned for the possibility of human life to exist. Behe et al. (2000:57) stated:
Even very slight alterations in the values of many factors, such as the expansion rate of the universe, the strength of gravitational or electromagnetic attraction, or the value of Planck's constant...ratio of neutron mass to the proton mass, the strong nuclear force... would render life impossible" (Behe et al.:2000:57).
The "dials" for these constants are so precise that "the impression of design is overwhelming." That is, the fine-tuning of the constants in the universe overwhelmingly support the picture of God as a person who plans and programs and willfully carries out his plans with precision. Blind chance cannot account for such perfect coordination of the physical constants required to allow life to exist in our universe.
Complex Molecular Machines in Living Organisms
"Molecular machines are incredibly complex devices that all cells use to process information, build proteins, and move materials back and forth across their membranes" (Behe et al, 2000:66). Bruce Alberts, President of the National Academy of Sciences, introduced this issue with an article entitled, "The cell as a collection of Protein Machines". In his article Alberts stated:
We have always underestimated cells...The entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of a set of large protein machines...Why do we call the large protein assemblies that underlie cell function protein machines? Precisely because, like machines invented by humans to deal efficiently with the macroscopic world, these protein assemblies contain highly coordinated moving parts.
In like manner, Behe et al. (2000:67) discussed the whip-like flagella of certain bacteria. He noted that the ion-powered rotary engines that turn the flagella include a rotor, a stator, O-rings, bushings, and a drive shaft. To operate, the mechanisms require the coordinated interaction of some forty complex protein parts. Behe noted:
Yet the absence of any one of these proteins results in the complete loss of motor function. To assert that such an "irreducibly complex" engine emerged gradually in a Darwinian fashion strains credulity.
From our everyday experiences, we regularly observe that complex machines are the product of intelligent design, in our case by human ingenuity. Living cells are far more complex than any man-made machine, and therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that the mind of God designed complex molecular machines found in living organisms.
The Complex Specificity of Cellular Components
The cell requires information to function:
In the case of DNA, the complex but precise sequencing of the four nucleotide bases adenine, thiamine, guanine, and cytosine (A, T, G, and C) - stores and transmits genetic information, information that finds expression in the construction of specific proteins...DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software we've ever created (Behe et al. 2000).
Because of the lack of attraction or repulsion among the four nucleotide bases, there is no accounting for how A, T. G, and C line up along the DNA molecule's phosphate backbone to provide information translated into amino acid sequences for the production of functional proteins. Neither chance nor chemical and physical necessity can explain the origin of this information system.
One may ask how a functional protein first appeared on the earth. To function the living cell requires the production of numerous functional proteins. But even a relatively simple functional protein requires the specific lining up of around 150 amino acids. Physical and chemical necessity could not line up the amino acids correctly because, though differential bonding affinities exist among certain amino acids, they do not determine "the specific sequences of amino acids that actual proteins now possess" (Meyer 2009:236). Thus, there are only two other ways the amino acids could align themselves up to produce a "simple" functional protein: pure chance or intelligent design.
Of course, the right amino acids have to be available and that is a problem. But even were the right amino acids available in some ancient sea, what would be the probability of their lining up by chance? According to Stephen Meyer (2009:206-207), that likelihood is about 1 blind chance in 10195; that is a 1 followed by 195 zeros. That probability is small, considering that there are 1065 atoms in our galaxy. These are not good odds for the chance hypothesis for the accidental appearance of a relatively simple functional protein. So imagine what the chances are for the accidental appearance of a more complex protein of some 250 amino acids and much more so for that of a whole functioning cell.
Because in our own experience, information is a product of mind and will, we are led to conclude that mind is behind complex information and subsequent functions in the DNA molecule. This arrangemen
t cannot be the work of some mindless pantheistic force nor do the observed facts point toward some mystical ideas that we are gods. Instead, we see exhibited in scientifically confirmed functions carried on in our own bodies - the work of superior intelligence beyond ourselves.
Big Bang Theory
Physicists who use math to study the origin and structure of the universe are called "cosmologists". Cosmologists at present believe the entire observable universe had a beginning at a point. By definition, a point has no dimensions. Thus, these physicists believe that the universe has not always existed but had a beginning and that our universe came from nothing. This theory matches well with the origin of the universe as stated in the Bible.
From the Muslim tradition comes the "kalam cosmological argument" (Strobel (2004:97-100): "No thing comes into being from nothing without a cause." That cause, and not the preexisting nothing, is the person of God.
Because pantheistic Eastern religions believe that everything that exists is God, the pantheistic god cannot be eternal because that god, being the universe and all its matter and energy, had a beginning in the "Big Bang". By contrast, the Person who produced the Big Bang from nothing is eternal...just as stated in the Bible. The Big Bang theory is based on mathematical calculations/conclusions and the observation that all matter in the universe is moving away from a common point of origin. If correct, this cosmological idea points to a Creator who exists as a person with mind and will and power.
Darwinian Gradualism is Dead
The fossil record shows that species appear and disappear abruptly. The fossil record also reveals the pattern that the bone structures of species remain unchanged (except for some microevolutionary changes in size) as long as the species remains in existence. Nor does the fossil record provide evidence of the numerous intermediate steps required of Darwin's vision for the gradual evolution of species. Note that natural selection has not demonstrated the ability to change species morphology (bone structure) over the existence of the species.
A good example of the non-Darwinian appearance of new species occurred at Lake Victoria, Africa. According to carbon-14 dating, the lake was bone dry 12,400 years ago. Since the time the lake was dry, 300+ new species of cichlid fishes appeared in the lake. This eruption of new species parallels the production of new genetically unique antibodies by the human immune system rather than the gradualist, materialist view held by Darwin. The programming of information for the rapid appearance of numerous new species looks like planning and programming by a Creator. No blind pantheistic nor materialist forces can account for the rapid speciation of 300+ new species of cichlid fishes in Lake Victoria in just 12,400 years.
The God of the Bible
Though science favors the concept that God is a person, we still would like to know more about him. In his book Case for Christ, Lee Strobel interviewed Louis S. Lapides (Strobel 1998:171-187). Lapides, an ethnic Jew, came to trust in Jesus Christ as God and Savior because of his reading about the Jewish Messiah in the Old Testament. Lapides noted:
Isaiah revealed the manner of the Messiah's birth (of a virgin); Micah pinpointed the place of his birth (Bethlehem); Genesis and Jeremiah specified his ancestry (a descendent of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, from the tribe of Judah, the house of David); the Psalms foretold his betrayal, his accusation by false witnesses, his manner of death (pierced in hands and feet, although crucifixion hadn't been invented yet), and his resurrection (he would not decay but would ascend on high); and on and on.
Lapides stated that the Old Testament provides more than four dozen major predictions about the Messiah. Interestingly, Jesus fit them all.
Lapides further reported that there was no chance that Jesus was not the Messiah foretold and described by the numerous Old Testament predictions. He noted that the odds are so astronomical that they rule that out. Peter W. Stoner (1888-1980) mathematically calculated the odds and figured out that the probability of just eight prophecies being fulfilled by any one person is one chance in a hundred million billion. "That number of millions of times is greater than the total number of people who've ever walked the planet!"
Lapides continued:
He (Stoner) calculated that if you took this number (a hundred million billion) of silver dollars, they would cover the state of Texas to a depth of two feet. If you marked one silver dollar among them and then had a blindfolded person wander the whole state and bend down to pick up one coin, what would be the odds he'd choose the one that had been marked? The odds would be... the same odds that anybody in history could have fulfilled just eight of the prophecies.
Furthermore, Strobel (1998:183) reported that mathematician Peter W. Stoner computed that the probability of fulfilling 48 prophecies by Jesus was one chance in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion.
Therefore the odds are good that Jesus as reported in the Bible is the Jewish Messiah and God and creator of the universe.
The Character and Purposes of God
One of the earliest church creeds declared the basic beliefs about Jesus and his ministry. Paul recorded this creed in 1 Corinthians 15:
For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, and then to all the apostles.
Craig L. Blomberg, PH.D, is one of the country's foremost authorities on the four gospels. Dr. Blomberg is professor of New Testament at the Denver Seminary. He said that Paul was given the above creed about A.D. 35. The creed had already been put together and was being used in the early church before Paul received it. Dr. Blomberg stated:
Now, here you have the key facts about Jesus' death for our sins, plus a detailed list of those to whom he appeared in resurrected form- all dating back to within two to five years of the events themselves! (Strobel, 2000:35).
The recording of the fundamental or core beliefs of the Christian faith within two to five years of the resurrection of Jesus is important. That brief period left no incubation time for the production of religious myths. At the time of their recording, the facts of Jesus' life, death, and reappearance were still affirmed in the minds of numerous eye witnesses.
Why did Jesus Die on the Cross?
Jesus suffered and died on the cross because he so loved us. Andy Stanley encapsulated John 3:16 to the basic message of God's plan:
God loved; God gave.
We believe; we receive.
There you have it, RJ. The memo above barely scratches the surface. But those are some of the reasons we study the Bible at church instead of the writings of Eastern or other faiths. In conclusion, the odds are good that if you put your trust in Jesus, you will have done the only reasonable thing. We love you.
Literature Cited and/or Source References
Behe, M.J., W.A. Dembski and S.C. Meyer. 2000. Science and evidence for design in the universe. Ignatius. San Francisco. C.A. 234 pp.
Behe, M.J. 1996. Darwin's black box. Touchstone. New York. 307 pp.
Denton, M. 1986. Evolution: a theory in crisis. Adler & Adler. Bethesda, MD. 368 pp.
Frydland, R. 2002. What the rabbis know about the Messiah. Messianic Literature Outreach. Columbus, Ohio. 146 pp.
Johnson, P.E. 1991. Darwin on trial. InterVarsity Press. Downers Grove, Ill. 220 pp
Kaiser, W.C. Jr. 1995. The Messiah in the Old Testament. Zondervan. Grand Rapids, MI. 256 pp.
Meyer, S.C. 2009. Signature in the cell. HarperCollins Publishers. New York. 611 pp.
Stanley, S.M. 1998. Macro-evolution...pattern and process. 1979. The Johns Hopkins University Press. Baltimore, M.D. 332 pp.
Smith, H. 1958. The religions of man. Harper & Row, NewYork. 371 pp.
Strobel, L. 1998. The case for Christ. Zondervan. Grand Rapids, MI. 297 pp.
Strobel, L. 2004. Case for a creator. Zondervan. Grand Rapids, MI. 340 pp.
Wells, J. 2002. Icons of evolution...science or myth? Regnery Publishing, Inc.
Washington, D.C. 338 pp.
Woodward, T. 2006. Darwin strikes back...defending the science of intelligent design. Baker Books. Grand Rapids, MI. 222 pp.
Addendum - The Appearance of Necessity
All science is based on certain assumptions. These assumptions derive from cause-effect observations and a strong faith in what Emanuel Kant called "pure reason" (Zweig 1970). An example of "knowledge" based on pure reason would be the tautological discoveries of mathematics. Kant noted that math incorporates conclusions a priori to sensory experience and therefore, there exists no necessary connection between the numbers and the world we experience with our senses. Because math usually works, we assume that it works and fits material reality in every case.
Kant further stated that we cannot reasonably/logically know what will occur in every instance unless we have observed every event. This is because we make assumptions based on a sample of observed cause-effect events. In regard to faulty assumptions about cause-effect events, Kant said:
...everything which we call metaphysic would turn out to be a mere delusion of reason, fancying that it knows by itself what in reality is only borrowed from experience, and has assumed by mere habit the appearance of necessity.
Recall the old story about the flock of barnyard chickens that illustrated faulty assumptions about "appearance of necessity" based on the chickens' observations of causes and effects: A farmer bought a bunch of baby chicks and placed them into the chicken house. He put a cardboard box into the corner of the chicken house and placed soft wood shavings across the bottom of the box and suspended a naked 100-watt light bulb about five inches above the soft wood shavings for warmth. He also provided water and nutritious chicken food in the box. When the farmer introduced the babies into their new home, they peeped happily and ran about eating and drinking and socializing and performing other such chicken behaviors.
Several weeks past in this happy fashion and all but two of the baby chicks survived and sprouted white feathers. Because sickness and death was a rare event among their number and because they were young and life was warm and good, the chicks were happy and satisfied in the care of the farmer. They grew and prospered and when fully feathered, they were released into the bigger world of the fenced chicken yard.
In their bigger and exciting world, the chickens continued to grow and began to feel hormonal influences that broadened their desires beyond simple food and water and warmth and the acceptance of their fellows. They discovered sexual desires and a number of the young roosters began to express cocky behaviors that exuded confidence in themselves, their assumptions, and their rights to prominence.
They developed assumptions about all kinds of things. One assumption was that life was good and exciting and that they exercised considerable control in their areas of interest among their fellows. When the farmer appeared, they all ran out and completed about his feet for the milo and corn and oats he cast about for their consumption and pleasure. Cause-effect relationships had led them to believe that life was good and that the intelligence behind their good experiences was reliable. They had faith in the way things had always happened.
One day, following the farmer's mindful observation that the chicks had grown to a favorable size, he walked into the chicken yard carrying an ax.
About the Author
BOB KNIGHT BARSCH has a B.S. degree in Wildlife Management from Texas A&M University and an M.S. degree in Wildlife Ecology from the University of Arizona. Bob is retired after working thirty-three years in the field of wildlife biology and management with the Arizona Game and Fish Department and the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. He is the author of numerous popular essays, a number of which appeared in his first book Hunting and Gathering. He has received awards from sporting and professional organizations for outstanding contributions to the management of wildlife resources. The author continues to find investigations of controversial subjects a fun and fruitful hobby.
Thank you for reading books on BookFrom.Net Share this book with friends