Why I Believe in Creation

The Big Bang: Fact of Fiction?

Ex Nihilo

“Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.” - Stephen Hawkings

Can something create itself from nothing?

This concept is known as ex nihilo - “out of nothing.” For those that deny an eternal Creator, this is the only option. Even if they claim that all of the matter that exists today is eternal, they have no true cause for the beginning of the universe.

Ex nihilo, nihil fit - “out of nothing, nothing comes”

If there was ever a moment when there was absolutely nothing (no matter, no energy, no time, no space, no God, no anything), there would always be absolutely nothing.

Self-Creation

What about self-creation? Could the universe have simply created itself?

The concept of the universe simply creating itself violates the law of noncontradiction. This law serves as the very foundation of scientific discovery, yet it is ignored when considering our beginning.

The Law of Noncontradiction: “A” cannot be “A” and “non-A” at the same time and in the same relationship.

The universe cannot be nothing (A) and something (non-A) at the same time. Nothing, anytime, anywhere, can create itself because if this were true, the universe would have to be nothing and something at the same time and in the same relationship. When boiled down to simple terms and no longer obscured by big words, any claim of self-creation or spontaneous generation is illogical.

Chance

What about chance? Was the universe caused by chance?

When pressed, atheists will often revert to the argument that the universe was simply created by “chance.” Again, this argument is illogical. Chance isn’t a cause, it is term that describes mathematical probability. While probabilities can help us understand how often a thing might happen, it certainly can’t be considered the cause of what happened.

If we flip a coin, we say that there is a 50% chance that it will land on heads. When the coin lands on heads, was this effect caused by chance? No! It was caused by flipping the coin. Arguing that the universe was created by chance violates the law of causality (cause and effect).

The Law of Causality: Every effect has an antecedent cause.

Simply stated, for there to be an effect (a coin on heads or the existence of a universe), there must be a preceding cause (flipping the coin or an agent that instigated the universe’s beginning).

Self-Creation

What about self-creation? Could the universe have simply created itself?

The concept of the universe simply creating itself violates the law of noncontradiction. This law serves as the very foundation of scientific discovery, yet it is ignored when considering our beginning.

The Law of Noncontradiction: “A” cannot be “A” and “non-A” at the same time and in the same relationship.

The universe cannot be nothing (A) and something (non-A) at the same time. Nothing, anytime, anywhere, can create itself because if this were true, the universe would have to be nothing and something at the same time and in the same relationship. When boiled down to simple terms and no longer obscured by big words, any claim of self-creation or spontaneous generation is illogical.

God: The Uncaused Cause

Don’t these arguments against self-creation also work against our understanding of God as creator?

No - Christians do not argue that God must have a cause because we don’t claim that He is an effect. We hold to the aseity (self-existence) of God. God has the power of being in and of Himself. He is eternally self-existent, He is not an effect, He is in fact an “uncaused cause.”

The claim that there must be a self-existent being of some sort, somewhere, or nothing would or could exist does not violate the law of noncontradiction of the law of causality.

Evolution: Fact of Fiction?

Is evolution “settled science” or simply an alternative theory of our beginnings?

Thanks to the theory of evolution, naturalism is now the dominant religion of modern society. Less than a century and a half ago, Charles Darwin popularized the credo for this secular religion with his book The Origin of Species. Although most of Darwin's theories about the mechanisms of evolution were discarded long ago, the doctrine of evolution itself has managed to achieve the status of a fundamental article of faith in the popular modern mind. Naturalism has now replaced Christianity as the main religion of the Western world, and evolution has become naturalism's principal dogma. 

Every mode of thinking requires belief in basic presuppositions. Science, in this respect, is no different than theology. Those basic presuppositions are themselves unprovable, but they set the trajectory for every thought that follows. The dominant mode of scientific investigation within the academy is now based in purely naturalistic presuppositions. And to no surprise, the theories and structures of naturalistic science affirm naturalistic assumptions.

Thanks to the theory of evolution, naturalism is now the dominant religion of modern society. Less than a century and a half ago, Charles Darwin popularized the credo for this secular religion with his book The Origin of Species. Although most of Darwin's theories about the mechanisms of evolution were discarded long ago, the doctrine of evolution itself has managed to achieve the status of a fundamental article of faith in the popular modern mind. Naturalism has now replaced Christianity as the main religion of the Western world, and evolution has become naturalism's principal dogma. 

Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District (2005) was the first direct challenge brought in the United States federal courts testing a public school district policy that required the teaching of intelligent design.

How are Christians to respond to those with an evolution/naturalism worldview?

If you’re an evolutionist, if you believe there’s nobody out there, that has immense implications, because you don’t have any future, you don’t have any meaning, you don’t have any purpose. There really is no value to your life. That’s sad.

The court ruled that intelligent design is not science, and permanently barred the board from "maintaining the ID Policy in any school within the Dover Area School District, from requiring teachers to denigrate or disparage the scientific theory of evolution, and from requiring teachers to refer to a religious, alternative theory known as ID."

Now we believe in God who is Creator, Sustainer, and Savior. He’s given us His Word, and because of that we have a standard to live by, and we know how to fill our lives with meaning and purpose. We know how to maximize the present in the light of the future. We know how to prepare for the future so that we can live forever in the glories of eternal heaven. We know what the responsibilities of family are. We know what’s involved in parenting. We understand relationships. We understand that others matter more than we do. We understand that all around us people are dying and going to an eternal hell, and they will be there without God in punishment forever. And we’ve been given the responsibility to communicate the saving message of Jesus Christ to them.

Science or Suppression?

Is modern science truly morally neutral? Is this a question of scientific inquiry or suppression of revealed truth?

Romans 1:18–23 ESV

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

Romans 1:18-

As Christians, we do not believe that man is not morally neutral, simply seeking the truth of the universe. God has revealed in His Word that sinful man suppresses the truth of God clearly revealed in nature.

We see this every day - claiming to be wise, the intellectual elites of today become fools, exchanging the truth clearly revealed in nature for a lie that is the foundation of moral relativity.

Does It Matter?

Does our interpretation of -3 really matter?

YES - If Adam was not the literal ancestor of the entire human race, then the Bible’s explanation of how sin entered the world makes no sense. Moreover, if we didn’t fall in Adam, we cannot be redeemed in Christ, because Christ’s position as the Head of the redeemed race exactly parallels Adam’s position as the head of the fallen race: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive” ().

Genesis 1:1 ESV

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

The opening chapters of Genesis are not up for debate, nor are they negotiable. The academic credibility of our faith is meaningless if we’re so quick to sacrifice the meaning of Scripture at the altar of public opinion. Better to be counted a fool for the sake of God’s Word than to be embraced for our willingness to compromise it.

Where did the universe come from?

Genesis 1:1 ESV

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.

This verse is the foundation of our belief regarding creation. The universe did not create itself ex nihilo; the Triune God, who is in and of Himself eternal and self-existent, created the universe ex nihilo.

How does our willingness to defend the Biblical account of creation affect our ability to defend other Biblical claims?

Genesis 1:27 ESV

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

If we are quick to compromise on the Bible regarding , how can we defend the claims made just 26 verses later regarding male and female?

Genesis 1:27 ESV

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.

We must not repeat the mistakes of the past. Compromise on this issue simply leads to further confusion. In schools today, self-creation and macro-evolution are taught as “scientific fact.” In ten years, gender as an oppressive social construct will be taught as a “scientific fact” as well.

Christians must stand firm on truth as revealed in Holy Scripture.