THE CREATION OF EVERYTHING
Prepared by Dr. John E. Marshall
for September 5, 2004, AM
Genesis 1:1c “. . . created . .”.
In other words, God made everything out of nothing. He “calls things into existence that do not exist” (Romans 4:17).
“The heavens were made by the word of the Lord, and all the stars, by the breath of His mouth” (Psalms 33:6). He gave existence to what before was not.
Where did life come from? The answer affects our understanding of ourselves and where we look for meaning in our lives.
With regard to origins, the “God” debate is far from new. From ancient times, only two theories have ever been put forth on the origin of life.
The first theory is intelligent design. We exist not due to fortuitous motion or the random conjunction of atoms (Gill).
Only God, “in whom is life” (John 1:4), can produce life. An effect demands an adequate cause.
We are here because of God, not blind chance. He planned the Universe and us, and then energized the plan. Darwin’s goal was to destroy this idea.
The second theory is spontaneous generation. Nothing made something. Blind chance acted on dead molecules.
The first living cells developed from nonliving matter. Ever since, things have made themselves, plus other, different things.
Substance came from substance, which came from substance, which came from substance, unto infinity. This theory makes substance itself eternal.
Some try to offer a third speculation, life came to Earth from outer space. Even if true, this only explains the appearance of life on earth, but provides no clue to the origin of life itself.
Life either was created by a Higher Power (intelligent design) or emerged from simpler substances (evolution). The two fiercely contested theories are totally incompatible, diametrically opposite.
A Supreme Being either did or did not create life. Evolutionists often understand this better than Creationists do.
The whole purpose of true Darwinism has always been to show there is no need for God anywhere, anytime, under any circumstance, not at the first, middle, or last. Evolutionism seeks to relegate God to as inconspicious a role as possible.
Darwinism led to a God AWOL. By the end of the nineteenth century, Friedrich Nietzsche declared God was dead. Humanity seemed finally freed of God.
Lee Strobel expressed the sentiments of many. For him, being freed from God offered him freedom to sin without guilt. The door was opened wide to hedonism. He lived totally for self, free from fear of having to answer someday to a Judge.
Others also embraced the absence of God, but with less happiness. Atheist Bertrand Russell sadly intoned, “Only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair can the soul’s habitation henceforth be safely built.”
Either way, hedonism or despair, evolutionism sends God packing. He’s gone. Carl Sagan, on his “Cosmos” PBS TV series, asserted, “The Cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be.” Richard Dawkins, Oxford evolutionist, says, “The more you understand the significance of evolution, the more you are pushed away from an agnostic position and towards atheism.”
God is not welcome in evolutionism. Harvard geneticist and Marxist, Richard Lewontin, wrote, “We cannot allow a Divine foot in the door.”
Darwinists embrace a backward creation. They believe people created God, not vice versa.
Sir Julian Huxley, Darwin’s staunch ally, said, “Gods are peripheral phenomena produced by evolution.” In other words, people evolved the idea of a Creator.
To a Darwinist, talk of God is distasteful, except to shame His imagined methods of creation. Evolutionists are quick to say God would not have created things the way they exist.
How ironic! A person can be an agnostic, skeptic, or atheist regarding one’s belief in God’s existence, yet at the same time hold strong opinions about the way God should act.
Evolutionism yields no quarter to God. It theorizes all living things rose by a slow, naturalistic process from a single living source which rose by a naturalistic process from a dead, inanimate world, with no God intervening, or some would say interfering, anywhere.
The theory is all inclusive, atom to Adam, particle to people, fish to philosopher, molecule to man, or as someone quaintly quipped, from goo to you through the zoo. You truly are a monkey’s uncle!
Creationists, on the other hand, accept the Bible’s version of creation as logical and reasonable. Everything sprang from God. “What is seen has been made from things that are not visible” (Hebrews 11:3).
Genesis 1:1d “. . . the heavens and the earth.”
This explains the beginning of our cosmos. God created all. “The Heavens and the Earth” was the Hebrew way of referring to the whole Universe. They had no single word for the concept. Today we would say, “In the beginning God created everything.”
God created time. It began and flows from the One who is, whose name is “I am.” Prior to Genesis 1:1, there were no heavenly bodies to observe, thus no way to measure duration or assign dates.
God created space, stretching it outward, as an echo to His own infinity. No limits. No restrictions. Celestial bodies race through space with dizzying, accelerating speeds. It’s as if God wanted Hubble and others to look through their telescopes and hear God say from the outer reaches of space, “Look at this, boys!”
God created energy, the ability to do work. The cosmos vibrates with the emissions of His own living essence.
God created matter. “Heavens” denotes everything connected with our atmosphere, the solar system, and outer space. “Earth” bespeaks everything relative to the globe.
Time, space, energy, matter ( these are not eternal, and did not start themselves. They had a definite beginning, and a Beginner.
God made them all for us. The Universe is a perfect home for humans. God made it to be amazing to us and enjoyable by us.
Elohim rolled out the red carpet for us. As Physicist Freeman Dyson said, “The Universe in some sense must have known we were coming.”
The traits of God are reflected in His creation. Its apparent old age reflects His being the Ancient of Days. Its loveliness reflects His beauty. Its variety pictures His artistry.
Its hugeness pictures His vastness and omnipresence. Its order denotes His intelligence. Its majesty points to His greatness.
Its many stars bear witness to the infinitude of God’s power and ingenuity. Their sheer number staggers the mind. Their ever increasing acceleration of speed, their maddening race through the expanse, bespeaks the force with which God flung them into existence.
The telescope is an instrument of faith for any willing to see and believe. “The heavens declare the glory of God” (Psalm 19:1).
The astronomer Herschel said, “The undevout astronomer is mad!” The heavens in every direction cry out, “Creation!”
Allan Rex Sandage, considered the world’s greatest observational cosmologist, prepared to step onto the platform at a 1985 conference in Dallas on science and religion. The discussion would be about the origin of the universe, and the panel would be divided among those scientists who believed in God and those who didn’t, with each viewpoint having its own side of the stage.
Few scientists were as widely respected as this one-time protege to legendary astronomer Edwin Hubble. The New York Times dubbed Sandage the “Grand Old Man of Cosmology.”
As he approached the stage, there seemed to be little doubt where he would sit. Sandage had been an atheist since childhood. His seat among the skeptics was a given, but the unexpected happened. Sandage set the room abuzz by turning and taking a chair among the theists. He had become a Christian.
The Big Bang, he told the rapt audience, was a supernatural event that physics cannot explain. Science had taken us to the First Event, but it can’t take us further to the First Cause. The sudden emergence of matter, space, time, and energy pointed to the need for transcendence. He claimed, “It was my science that drove me to the conclusion that the world is much more complicated than can be explained by science. It was only through the supernatural that I can understand the mystery of existence.” (Story told by Lee Strobels, “Case For a Creator,” pp. 69-70.)