Book 2 of Musings The Fanciful and the Realistic

That a mature adult male, with the nearly incredible complexity of his reproductive system, could evolve from protozoa, does not appear to be a reasonable hypothesis.

Even if such took place, in order to reproduce himself, the male must have available to him a mature adult female, having an equally complex reproductive system radically different in several respects from the male.

That male and female reproductive systems could evolve from protozoa at the same time is quite beyond reasonable probability, no matter how long a period of time is allowed.

It has been stated that if there were enough explosions in a print shop, given enough type, there finally would appear the text of the Encyclopedia Britannica. This is fanciful rather than realistic thinking. Such a composition never, never would take place. I do not know enough about probability mathematics to be able to state the equation that would confirm what I have stated; but an intelligent appraisal suggests there is a boundary between that which is realistic and that which is fanciful. The probability would reach zero and stop there.

Thus it is true that to speculate a mature adult male and a mature adult female could evolve from protozoa at the same time, making it possible for them to reproduce their kind, is fanciful. It could not occur in all of geologic time.

I do not know a great deal about scientific information; but I cannot think of a comparable theory, a theory based on an improbable supposition rather than observable data, that is used as though it were established law. The development of the universe also has its explanations; but I am not aware that any group of scientists have come forth and stated "This is the way the universe came into being." Rather ideas are presented and discussed.

This is not so with the fanciful hypothesis termed evolution. It is treated as established fact, as inviolable law. Artists portray the evolution of protozoa to ape to man as though there were clear evidence of such progression.

Since it is evident that the development of the mature male and female human could not possibly evolve by chance, why is evolution presented in the public schools of America as though it has been proven beyond doubt?

Certainly the hypothesis of intelligent creation is as reasonable an explanation as is true of evolution.

To claim that we cannot see God and therefore there is no God is not defensible. A great part of the history of mankind to the present day has to do with metaphysical phenomena. The simple idea in the heart of man that there is a God is certainly more substantial than the wild idea that somehow protozoa developed into two humans who could reproduce their kind.

Why should we ridicule the idea of there being a God when so much of the universe appears to be the result of creative thinking? There is an order to things that can be described mathematically. It seems to me this would not be the case if nature was a random creature.

I think we have been educated beyond our intelligence!

It would seem to me that a totally unbiased person, with no education, if he were shown the physical world in which we live, and asked if he thought the world was the product of random forces or was created by an intelligent being, would respond that it is more likely there is a creator than not. Wouldn't you say so?

If such seems reasonable to you, we must ask ourselves why would such a large segment of our population, many of whom are intelligent, educated people, insist that the universe, and the earth and its inhabitants, came into being through random actions of molecules coupled with adaptation to environment?

I think the answer is simple. The idea of an intelligent God raises the question of accountability for our actions. It is one matter to think of physical death as being the dissolution of our body, after which there is nothing. It is another matter to think that after we die we will stand before God and give an account of our behavior on the earth.

Let us take, for example, a divorced college professor of biology. Let us say he wants to bring a female student to spend the weekend with him on the beach. Is he going to favor the point of view that he will never answer for his conduct; or is he going to embrace the belief that after he dies he will answer to God for his conduct?

I actually believe this is the reason for the widespread support of the nonsense of evolution. I believe it is because people want to do as they please without having to answer to a god. I don't think the reason is any more profound than this.

But you know, this is something like turning your clock back two hours so you can get two more hours sleep and not be late for work. It really is not a sound approach to life.

I myself was not raised in a Christian home. When I heard the Gospel, I said to myself, "This is either true or false. I will give it a try to see if it works. What is there to lose?"

And so I did, some fifty-eight years ago. Because of my experiences since that time I am convinced beyond doubt that there is a God and Jesus Christ is His Son, just as the Bible states. There is no way in which the things I have experienced could have occurred randomly.

But let us say I am wrong. I die and dissolve into nothingness. I am no more. I am no worse off for having walked with Jesus all these years. He really has helped me have a rewarding life. I have the respect of my family and friends. I have remained faithful to them, largely because of my fellowship with Jesus. When we are tempted severely we need strong reasons to keep doing what is right, don't we?

But let us say I am correct. When I die (I am seventy-seven years old), I do not dissolve into nothingness but go into great peace and joy because I have obeyed the Lord. Jesus will be there to welcome me, and perhaps others whom I have helped during my lifetime.

Suppose you gamble that there is no God. So you take life as it comes, doing some things that you know were wrong and hurtful. You heard the Gospel of Christ and rejected it.

You die, and guess what? You pass into a place where there is a great mass of people wandering about. Yet no one knows or cares that you are there.

Soon you find out that the time will arrive when you will be called forth to stand alone before God and answer for your behavior. How would you like that experience?

I am a reasonably intelligent person with a doctors degree in education from a recognized secular university. My entire experience of life teaches me that I have had Divine guidance. Everything testifies to the validity of the Scriptures, Old and New Testament.

My choice in the beginning to gamble on there being a God has certainly paid off for me. Not only have I had help throughout my lifetime but I am looking forward to physical death just as I used to look forward to Christmas morning when I was a boy.

I am not really trying to influence your decision concerning evolution. Maybe you know something about the hypothesis of evolution that I don't-some findings or established principles that make this influential doctrine something more than a fanciful escape from reality.

However it is a sincere action on my part to suggest to you that you give some thought to what I have stated. I don't know you but I wish you well. Hopefully we both will discover when we die that our decision to do what Jesus commanded has prepared us for life after death.

Since the children have flesh and blood, he too shared in their humanity so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death-that is, the devil-And free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. (Hebrews 2:14-15)