The scientist's name is Joshua
As far as I'm concerned, the origins debate is at least halfway settled before you even begin to examine the Christian faith. Irreducible and specified complexity make it literally impossible for Evolution to have occurred, and, as far as we know, only intelligent design could create even a single living cell, much less the habitable planet on which the overwhelming majority of those cells live.
But Evolutionists think they have the answer to this obvious and major problem for their worldview. By simply pointing out that living organisms reproduce, rather than having to be re-created by the Creator every time, they think they have rescued their models. But this "solution" is no better for Evolution than a poisoned pellet is for a rat. The rat may think it has received enough nutrients to sustain it for a short time, and in a sense it is right, but that is because its very life has been cut short.
I want you to imagine a colonisation effort of Mars. As it stands, and I believe as it will always stand, Mars is inhospitable to human life. However, robots can "live" there quite comfortably. So, let's imagine a great scientist wanted to send a bunch of robots to Mars. But there's a problem: He lacks funding. So, in order to cut costs, he doesn't hire a single employee, nor does he build a factory. Instead, he creates a few sets of robots, and sends them off into space.
These robots, being very few in number, land safely on Mars. But the scientist has been very clever. Knowing his dilemma, he has designed the robots for a few specific purposes. First, they are to gather whatever resources they can, even if, in some cases, it means salvaging such resources from each other. Then, they begin to assemble robots similar to themselves, and repeat the process.
But of course, much like Earth, Mars isn't uniform all over, and unfortunately, the robots are not designed to be all-purpose vehicles. Thus, the scientist also frontloaded them with adaptation programming. Each time they self-replicate, the robots may decide to alter their own design slightly, enabling their "offspring" to survive on other parts of Mars that are, perhaps, less than ideal for themselves.
Hundreds of years later, the scientist is long dead. But he has left his mark on Mars. Finally, one fateful day, a NASA rover happens across an interesting phenomena. Footprints! But rovers don't have feet! These footprints did not come from anything NASA has sent there, and as far as they are aware, no other organisation has sent probes. So they have the rover follow the tracks, and lo and behold, a thriving robot community is discovered.
These ones are relatively peaceful, and pay no mind to the rover, and so NASA send it to investigate. The robots are fascinating. Many of them appear human, and they have even set up a human-like settlement. Their homes are constructed from Mars rocks, and they have created a mine from which they gather materials to repair themselves and build their offspring. They have domesticated other robots, which are observed self-replicating, and sometimes, the human robots salvage these robots for more materials. For lack of better term, they appear to be a farming community.
Fascinated by this phenomenon, NASA sends more rovers, hoping to find out if there are more robots on Mars. And there are! Further north, larger robots, similar to the domesticated robots, mine the ground for resources. NASA doesn't find out too much more about these ones, as their rover swiftly becomes a suitable target for salvage by the bovine bots. On the South side of the planet, NASA finds yet more robots, also similar to the livestock. And there is another settlement for humanoid robots here, too. But these have not domesticated anything. Instead, they have invented high-tech weaponry with which to capture and salvage the wild versions of the bots.
The origins of these bots is a mystery. It's been centuries since the first Mars rover landed on the red planet, and it has never shown any signs of life at all. It's just a giant red rock floating through space. Now suddenly there are large populations of robots here? Why?
NASA observe the way in which all the robots search and compete for resources on Mars. Almost all of them dig for, and refine, the very materials that are used to maintain themselves, and create new versions of themselves, though some of them have ceased to do this, instead relying on other robots to do it for them, then salvaging them. NASA also note the similarities between robots in some regions. They have already found two different versions of humanoid robots, and even the livestock domesticated by group 1 resembles the robots in regions 2 and 3. They have adapted to the climate, but they still appear to be fundamentally the same.
After observing the robots, NASA conclude that thousands of years ago, some kind of Earthquake must have shaken loose some metals, which combined in some way or another to form the first ever naturally occurring Mars robot. This robot, being both physically capable of reproducing, and programmed to do so, began to do so, mining for resources in order to help it. Over time, this robot diverged into several robot kinds.
This theory, however, is complete hogwash, and eventually, the great grandson of the original scientist reveals his journal. Here, we find the truth about the origins of the Mars robots, how they got to Mars, and what they were designed to do there. The journal even shows that the whole purpose of the humanoid robots is to terraform the planet and ensure all the other robots survive.
NASA do not like this idea. Aside from the fact the Mars robots are significantly different from anything they've ever built, they're still quite annoyed that one of their rovers was salvaged by one of the Mars robots, and they insist no human being would ever design something so grotesque. No, the earthquake story makes so much more sense. After all... the Mars robots do reproduce!
As much as I enjoyed writing my little story, it obviously hasn't happened, but if it did happen, how well would NASA's reasoning hold up? Would it not be pure folly? Would it not be utterly insane to come across even a single colony of the most simple versions of these robots, and suggest they had no designer? You could bicker about who the designer is. Was it our hypothetical scientist, or is there some biological life form behind it that just hasn't been discovered yet? At this point in human history, I have little doubt that if any sign of life was found on Mars, atheists would soon turn it into a discussion about Climate Change.
But ultimately, the fact that the robots reproduce does not erase the simple fact that they are not the product of chance, but of a very deliberate act by a very intelligent human being. They were designed to reproduce, and even adapt. They were commanded to fill Mars and terraform it. The humanoid robots in particular are quite capable of dominating the other robots, using their resources for their own ends, just as we domesticate and hunt our animal companions. This process doesn't solve any problems for NASA, it just increases them.
When Evolutionists point to reproduction, they do not solve any problems for themselves. Instead, the simple fact that even the earliest cell in their narrative would have to be immediately capable of reproduction (at the very least) means that it simply couldn't have happened without some intelligence behind it.
This is where the Christian faith comes in. The origins of life must be intelligent, but identifying the source of that intelligence is a different kettle of fish. Of course, we could start with said fish, pointing out that those fish, while being just as well-designed to survive as we are, are nowhere near as designed to reason as we are. Or at least, so we think. Darwin said it best: "With me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind?"
So, already we see that if we are going to get anywhere in this discussion, we must assume we are capable of having it. This is an assumption that immediately dissipates when you take in silly ideas like Evolution. If we are not special creations, we are not special creations. That means we have no grounds to assume we can form true and reasonable worldviews. Dogs eat their own vomit, ducks rape each other, even the apes we are supposedly related to do and believe some very strange things. It is simply naive to believe, if we are descended from unreasonable creatures, that we should somehow be more reasonable than they are.
But it gets deeper than that, as ultimately, even if we could all sit down and agree that we must be special creations living in a well-designed world, one thing we can never do is confirm the accuracy of a pure guess. If the Creator does not reveal Himself, how are we going to find out about Him? In our robot analogy, NASA could have made any number of guesses, but they were never going to narrow down their list so far, they could find the very name of the scientist. I even initially gave him a name. Try to guess it. What did I intend to call the scientist? You might guess right. You'll never know unless I tell you. Or if you find the secret place it is hidden within this article. Have fun treasure hunting😉
But there is a greater treasure in that our Creator actually has revealed Himself to us. Much like our scientist, God left a "journal", given to us through His chosen Prophets and Apostles. But He didn't just put it behind a rock and wait for them to find it. They lived it. He appeared to them in various ways, talking to them in dreams, speaking through fire, manifesting as angels.
But God is not always spectacular. One of His greatest traits is His humility. Not only does He serve us, though He is far greater, but He actually did so by becoming incarnate as one of us. Born to a virgin named Mary, Jesus, the Son of God, grew and lived as a normal human being. And not even a rich one. He did not choose a queen to bear Him. Not a noble. Not even a rich family. Just a humble carpenter's fiancee. The life Jesus lived was literally perfect. He never did anything wrong, yet He died as if He was more evil than any other man. Why? Because we are all quite evil ourselves.
When God created our first ancestors (who were 100% human), the world was very different. And not just in the sense of having many more species which have since gone extinct. There was no such thing as death. Thus, all the things associated with death were absent, too. No disease. No suffering. No carnivory. We were shielded from all of these horrible things, because our relationship with God was ideal, and all His works are perfect (Deuteronomy 32:4).
However, God gave humanity some ground rules. The first was very simple: Fill the Earth and subdue it. But the other command, while also simple, had consequences: Do not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, or you will die. But they ate, severing the relationship between man and God almost completely. Death entered the world, and only one thing could reverse it: The death of the Son of God.
All of us sin. We all deserve God's wrath. But the word of God tells us "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him." (2 Corinthians 5:21). Thus, we are able to essentially "swap verdicts". We, who are guilty, may be treated as innocent, because Christ, who is innocent, was treated as guilty. The wrath God owed us, He gave to Christ. Thus, we may receive eternal life in a Kingdom far greater than if we could successfully colonise every planet in the universe.
But although this offer is open to everyone, it will not be received by everyone. Salvation is not automatic, and must be received as the gift it is. In order to be saved, one must confess Jesus as Lord, and believe in our hearts God raised Him from the dead. Sadly, those who do not do so will suffer a fate worse than Evolution.
Comments