The Aesthetic Argument for the Existence of God by Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

 https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=5451

 The Aesthetic Argument for the Existence of God

by	Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

The Aesthetic Argument for God’s existence is sometimes considered to fall under the design argument for God’s existence (the Teleological Argument). The argument highlights the fact that beauty exists, and more specifically, the ability to appreciate beauty exists. Atheism cannot adequately explain this appreciation in the diverse forms it is found, because that appreciation, by-in-large, has no evolutionary advantage. So, the argument says that the existence of beauty proves that a God must exist Who cares for His Creation and wishes to give us joy and pleasure.

Charles Darwin recognized the Aesthetic Argument as a threat to evolutionary theory. In the Origin of Species, he said, “Some authors believe that many structures have been created for the sake of beauty, to delight man or the Creator…or for the sake of mere variety….  Such doctrines, if true, would be absolutely fatal to my theory.”¹ Why? Because naturalistic evolution cannot explain why something would become beautiful for the sole benefit of others. According to Darwin, “Natural selection cannot possibly produce any modification in any one species exclusively for the good of another species…. But natural selection can and does often produce structures for the direct injury of other species.”² Evolution is “survival of the fittest” and “the strong survive.” It is the selfish, bloody battle of the strong for survival. It is not about benefitting others. So if naturalistic evolution (i.e., atheism) is true, evolving a trait must have a selfish benefit—not for the benefit of others.

So Darwin conceded, “If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection.”³ In the same breath, however, he made a critical admission: “I fully admit that many structures are of no direct use to their possessors.”⁴ In other words, contrary to evolutionary predictions, “many structures” are possessed by creatures which are not useful at all to them! His response to the “problem” of beauty was to blindly conjecture that beautiful features must have just accidentally happened or perhaps were useful to a creature in some way at some point in the past, though not today.

Atheists today seem to acknowledge that Darwin’s response to the Aesthetic Argument was not satisfactory. They often respond to the beauty “problem” by claiming that beauty evolved accidentally in various creatures and then remained in those creatures because it helped them personally in getting mates—sexual selection. Those beautiful creatures would tend to reproduce more often, keeping the “beautiful” genes “alive.” Darwin, however, disagreed with this reasoning. He said, “The effects of sexual selection, when displayed in beauty to charm the females, can be called useful only in rather a forced sense…. [M]any structures now have no direct relation to the habits of life of each species.”⁵ In other words, Darwin recognized that, while sexual selection might help explain some cases of beauty, it does not even nearly explain all of the examples of beauty we see in the animal kingdom. And that admission highlights the fact that atheists still have not adequately answered the Aesthetic Argument.

Besides that fact, consider: sexual selection attempts to explain why beautiful animals would tend to “stick around,” but should not the opposite also be true? Should not the “ugly” animals have died out since they were less “pleasing to the eyes”? Why isn’t the animal kingdom more beautiful all around, after “millions of years” of tweaking? According to the fossil record, many “ugly” creatures have existed since they originally came onto the scene and have not changed—in many cases, over “millions of years,” according to the evolutionary time line. They have not changed, and yet they have not died out, as evolution would predict they should. Bible believers can explain why “ugly” things would exist (e.g., the effects of sin, Genesis 3:18; on-going genetic entropy as a consequence of being banished from the Tree of Life, Genesis 3:22-24). But would not evolution predict much more beauty in the animal kingdom if sexual selection is the powerful, beauty-generating mechanism it is espoused to be?

Further, keep in mind that sexual selection cannot work until beauty exists in the first place. Darwin was not able to provide a mechanism through which an animal would “grow” a new trait that would make it beautiful. Random mutations, for example, cannot generate new genetic information—and new genetic information is necessary to explain beauty where there once was no beauty. In other words, even if his response to the Aesthetic Argument could explain why beauty exists in the animal kingdom, he did not explain how evolution could create beauty in the first place. He attempted to explain how beauty would be in harmony with “survival of the fittest,” but he did not explain the arrival of the fittest in the first place. Although we are now some 150 years removed from Darwin, evolutionists still have no answer to that pivotal question.⁶

Also notice that modern atheists only attempt to respond to one “finger” of the Aesthetic Argument—namely why some of the beautiful animals exist. Sexual selection does not adequately explain why an orchestra playing Johann Pachelbel’s Canon in D Major is so beautiful that it can create an emotional response; why certain things that are not inherently good for you (and are sometimes even bad for you) taste good or smell good; why some things feel good—again, even when they are not always beneficial to you; why looking at a sunrise, waterfall, or ocean can give us such pleasure. Such examples of beauty highlight a more fundamental component of the Aesthetic Argument. Atheists scramble to try to explain why various creatures are beautiful, but the underlying question is, why do we perceive something as beautiful in the first place? Even if a beautiful trait could accidentally evolve in one creature, another creature, simultaneously, must also evolve an appreciation of that beauty. Even if natural selection could adequately explain why something beautiful tends to survive, it does not explain why we would see that thing as beautiful in the first place. Though “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” and therefore everyone differs somewhat on what constitutes “beauty,” nevertheless, everyone possesses the inbuilt faculty that causes them to conceptualize the characteristic of beauty.

Why does beauty exist? Because an omnibenevolent God exists Who wants to give His children good things, as any decent parent would; Who wants humans to experience joy and pleasure. So, He has “made everything beautiful in its time” (Ecclesiastes 3:11)—things “pleasant for the eyes” (Ecclesiastes 11:7); people that have a “pleasant voice and can play well on an instrument” (Ezekiel 33:32); things which are “sweet to your taste” (Proverbs 24:13) and “give a good smell” (Song of Solomon 2:13); things that make a “joyful sound” (Psalm 89:15). “Oh, taste and see that the Lord is good; blessed is the man who trusts in Him!” (Psalm 34:8).

Endnotes

¹ Charles Darwin (1998), The Origin of Species (New York: Grammercy), p. 146.

² Ibid.

³ Ibid., emp. added.

⁴ Ibid.

⁵ Ibid., emp. added.

⁶ Jeff Miller (2013), Science vs. Evolution (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press), revised edition.

 

Telling People What to Think by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

 https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=941

Telling People What to Think

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

Dan Barker, the ex-preacher who deconverted to atheism, is most famous for his book Losing Faith in Faith: From Preacher to Atheist. In this treatise against God and religion, Barker discussed a book that he wrote for children that contained these words: “No one can tell you what to think. Not your teachers. Not your parents. Not your minister, priest, or rabbi. Not your friends or relatives. Not this book. You are the boss of your own mind. If you have used your own mind to find out what is true, then you should be proud! Your thoughts are free!” (1992, p. 47). Noble sentiments indeed!

But, as one digs deeper into Barker’s book, it quickly becomes clear that those sentiments do not find a willing practitioner in the person of Dan Barker. In his chapter on prayer, Barker wrote:

Don’t ask Christians if they think prayer is effective. They will think up some kind of answer that makes sense to them only. Don’t ask them, tell them: “You know that prayer doesn’t work. You know you are fooling yourself with magical conceit.” No matter how they reply, they will know in their heart of hearts that you are right (1992, p. 109, emp. in orig.).

From Barker’s statement about what should be “told” to those who believe in prayer, it is easy to see that he does not necessarily believe his previous statement that “no one can tell you what to think,” or that a person should use his own mind “to find out what is true.” In fact, what Barker is really trying to say is that a person should only think for himself if such thinking will lead him to believe that there is no God, or that prayer does not work, or that all religion is nonsense. If thinking for himself leads a person to believe in the efficacy of prayer or the existence of God, then that person should be “told” what to believe.

In truth, the Bible demands that each person weigh the evidence for himself or herself. First Thessalonians 5:21 states: “Test all things; hold fast what is good.” Among those things that should be tested are the writings of skeptics like Barker. When blatant inconsistencies pepper their pages like so many spots on a Dalmatian, then those writings should not be “held fast.”

REFERENCE

Barker, Dan (1992), Losing Faith In Faith—From Preacher to Atheist (Madison, WI: Freedom from Religion Foundation).

 

"THE GOSPEL OF MARK" The Betrayal Of Jesus (14:43-52) by Mark Copeland

 

 

 

 

 

 

 "THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

The Betrayal Of Jesus (14:43-52) 

 INTRODUCTION

1. Certainly one of the saddest moments in the life of Jesus was His betrayal by Judas...
   a. One of Jesus’ closest disciples, even one of His twelve apostles - Mk 14:43-46
   b. Followed by being abandoned by the rest of the apostles - Mk  14:47-50
   c. And possibly Mark; many think he was the young man that fled naked - Mk 14:51-52

2. But our focus is on Judas:  What led him to betray his Lord and
   Savior?  How could one who had been with Jesus...
   a. Seen His miracles, heard His teachings
   b. Betray Him with a kiss?

3. And what about us, who claim to be Jesus’ disciples today...?
   a. Could we be guilty of betraying Jesus in some way?
   b. Are there things that misled Judas that could have a similar effect on us?

[What might we learn from "The Betrayal Of Jesus"?  Lest we follow the
same path of Judas, let’s reflect for a few moments on what we can glean
from the Scriptures...]

I. JESUS WAS BETRAYED BY A CLOSE FRIEND

   A. JUDAS WAS NO STRANGER TO JESUS...
      1. As already mentioned, he was one of the apostles - Mk 3:14-19
      2. He was among those whom Jesus loved - cf. Jn 13:1
      3. Yet as prophesied, Jesus was betrayed by "a familiar friend" - Ps 41:9

   B. BEING CLOSE TO JESUS IS NO GUARANTEE...
      1. Just being His disciples is no assurance we could not betray Him
      2. Like several of the churches in Asia Minor, we could...
         a. Leave our first love - Re 2:4-5
         b. Begin to tolerate false doctrine - Re 2:14-16
         c. Permit false teachers to spread their doctrines - Re 2:20
         d. Fail to perfect our works, and not be watchful - Re 3:1-3
         e. Become lukewarm - Re 3:15-16
      3. Yes, we can betray Jesus by denying Him who bought us - cf. 2Pe  2:1

[Therefore we need to heed Jesus’ admonition to be "faithful unto death"
(Re 2:10), and not assume that close proximity to Jesus in the past
guarantees faithfulness in the future.]

II. JESUS WAS BETRAYED BY A LOVER OF MONEY

   A. MONEY WAS A PROBLEM FOR JUDAS...
      1. He often pilfered from the money box of the disciples - Jn 12:4-6
      2. The opportunity to make some money led him to betray Jesus - Mt 26:14-16

   B. MONEY CAN BE A PROBLEM FOR US...
      1. The deceitfulness of riches can render us unfruitful - Mk 4:19
      2. The desire for riches and the love of money can lead us to
         stray from the faith and drown in destruction and perdition - 1Ti 6:9-10
      3. The Laodiceans’ preoccupation with wealth made them lukewarm - Re 3:16-17

[Could we be guilty of betraying Jesus by our desire for riches, letting
such things take precedent over our service to God and His church?]

III. JESUS WAS BETRAYED BY A SHOW OF AFFECTION

   A. JUDAS BETRAYED JESUS WITH A KISS...
      1. He could have pointed...perhaps he sought to soften the blow of betrayal - Mk 14:44-45
      2. Jesus noted the obvious contradiction - Lk 22:48

   B. DISPLAYS OF AFFECTION DON’T ENSURE FAITHFULNESS...
      1. Many people are very emotional in their religion
         a. As displayed in their worship
         b. Believing it to be evidence of being "Spirit-filled"
      2. Yet emotions alone are not a reliable guide
         a. They can easily mislead us - cf. Pr 16:25; Jer 10:23; 17:9
         b. They are often present in the unstable believer - cf. Mk 4:16-17
      3. This is not to discount the place and value of emotions
         a. We are to love God with all our heart and with all our mind - Mt 22:37-38
         b. The Spirit does produce fruit in our lives that affects our emotions - Ga 5:22-23
         c. But we must keep them in the proper order:
            1) Our emotions must come from faith, not faith coming from emotions
            2) Otherwise we are led by emotionalism, not faith
      4. True faith comes from the Word of God - Ro 10:17; Jn 20:30-31

[If we believe that displays of affection in our religion can make up
for our failure to heed God’s Word, we deceive ourselves and betray Jesus in the process!]

IV. JESUS WAS BETRAYED BY A MISTAKEN DISCIPLE

   A. JUDAS MISTOOK THE CONSEQUENCES OF HIS ACTION...
      1. He evidently didn’t think Jesus would be condemned - Mt 27:3-4
      2. This has prompted some to think that Judas was motivated by more than money
         a. That perhaps his betrayal would force Jesus to act, show His true power
         b. That in such a way it would demonstrate who Jesus truly was

   B. WE CAN BE GUILTY OF MISTAKEN SERVICE...
      1. Thinking our service is acceptable, when it is not - Mt 7:21-23
      2. Thinking we can improve on God’s way, when His ways may not be ours - Isa 55:8-9
      3. We need to head the Preacher’s advice - cf. Ecc 5:1-2
         a. Come to hear and do what He says
         b. Not presume to know what pleases God and offer what we think is best

[In our zeal, we may be guilty of acting based on mistaken knowledge
(cf. Ro 10:1-3).  Dare we possibly betray Jesus by presuming we know
what is according to His will and plan?]

V. JESUS WAS BETRAYED BY AN OVERWROUGHT FOLLOWER

   A. JUDAS REACTED TO HIS SIN THE WRONG WAY...
      1. He was overcome with grief - cf. Mt 27:3
      2. He took the wrong course of action by hanging himself - cf. Mt 27:5

   B. WE CAN REACT TO OUR SINS THE SAME WAY...
      1. There are two kinds of sorrow - 2Co 7:10
         a. Sorrow of the world that produces death
         b. Godly sorrow that produces repentance
         c. The first sorrow is preoccupied with self; the second is
            sorrow for sinning against God
      2. It is natural to be sorrowful for our sins
         a. But we should not wallow in our grief
         b. But repent, as did Peter who denied Christ
      3. Paul is another example of one who did not let sins of the past
         hinder service in the present
         a. He focused on God’s grace which gave him another chance - 1Co 15:9-10
         b. He directed his attention on striving for the upward call of God - Php 3:12-14

CONCLUSION

1. While Jesus was betrayed by all these things, let’s not forget the influence of Satan...
   a. Satan used Judas to betray Jesus - Lk 22:3-4
   b. Satan put it in Judas’ heart to betray Jesus - Jn 13:2
   c. For this reason Jesus referred to Judas as "a devil" - Jn 6:70-71

2. Yet how did Satan influence Judas?  By some of the very things we’ve noticed...
   a. Through his love of money
   b. Through his emotionalism
   c. Through his mistaken ideas
   d. Through his preoccupation with self
   -- Even Peter was influenced by Satan through some of these things (cf. Mt 16:23)

And so while we may decry the treachery of Judas, we should humbly learn
from his mistakes, taking to heart the words of Peter:

   "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks
   about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.  Resist
   him, steadfast in the faith, knowing that the same sufferings
   are experienced by your brotherhood in the world." - 1Pe 5:9-10
 

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

 

Overcoming Adversity by Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

 

https://thepreachersword.com/2016/02/25/overcoming-adversity/#more-8525

Overcoming Adversity

Some of the world’s greatest men and women have been saddled with disabilities and adversities but have managed to overcome them. I’m not sure of the origin of this piece, but it expresses this thought well.

Cripple him, and you have a Sir Walter Scott. Lock him in a prison cell, and you have a John Bunyan. Bury him in the snows of Valley Forge, and you have a George Washington. Raise him in abject poverty, and you have an Abraham Lincoln.

Subject him to bitter religious prejudice, and you have a Benjamin Disraeli. Strike him down with infantile paralysis, and he becomes a Franklin D. Roosevelt. Burn him so severely in a schoolhouse fire that the doctors say he will never walk again, and you have a Glenn Cunningham, who set a world’s record in 1934 for running a mile in 4 minutes, 6.7 seconds.

Deafen a genius composer, and you have a Ludwig van Beethoven. Have him or her born black in a society filled with racial discrimination, and you have a Booker T. Washington, a Harriet Tubman, a Marian Anderson, or a George Washington Carver.

Make him the first child to survive in a poor Italian family of eighteen children, and you have an Enrico Caruso. Have him born of parents who survived a Nazi concentration camp, paralyze him from the waist down when he is four, and you have an incomparable concert violinist, Itzhak Perlman. Call him a slow learner, “retarded,” and write him off as uneducable, and you have an Albert Einstein.

I believe that God has placed within humankind seeds of strength, resilience, and fortitude. We can tap into an indomitable spirit to overcome adversity.

For Bible believers there are some keys to help us cope when life is hard. When the challenges seem insurmountable. And when we not sure where to turn.

(1) Live in God’s Presence. James said, “Draw near to God and he will draw near to you.” Jesus promised “I am with you always even to the end of the world. Mt 28:29.

When we suffer adversity, we can know that we are in the presence of God. What a great encouragement, comfort and consolation.

One man said, where was God when my son died?” The answer is: The same place he was when His son died. If you feel forsaken, Jesus knows how you feel. God is not a spectator of our pain, we are in His presence.

(2) Learn from God’s Promises. The Psalmist affirmed that God would be with us. That he is “our refuge and strength, a very present help in time of trouble.” God promises help. Comfort. Hope. He says, “I care. And I will care for you.” (I Pet. 5:7). He feels our pain. And will supply our every need.

(3) Lean on God’s Power. When Sennacherib, king of Assyria invaded Judah, the king stood up and said. “Be strong and courageous; do not be afraid nor dismayed before the king of Assyria, nor before all the multitude that is with him; for there are more with us than with him. 8 With him is an arm of flesh; but with us is the Lord our God, to help us and to fight our battles.” And the people were strengthened by the words of Hezekiah king of Judah” (2 Chron 32:7-8).

Finite strength is undependable and expendable, but God’s infinite power is sufficient for every need. Indeed we are “kept by the power of God” (1 Pet 1:5)

(4) Look For God’s Purpose. God’s purpose is not to make you miserable. Paul said to “rejoice in the Lord” God does not send pain, problems and pressures. God is the giver of good gifts. (Jas. 1:18)

Why does adversity strike? Maybe it is because of the evil of other people. Sometimes it is the result of living in a natural world that is filled with sin, suffering and separation. It could be through our own poor choices (Gal. 6:7-8) Or maybe the Devil is trying to trap us (1 Pet. 5:8).

So what is God’s Purpose for me in adversity? To walk by faith and not by sight (2 Cor 5:7) To Use adversity to make me stronger (Jas 1:2-3) To focus on the eternal plan in Jesus. (Eph. 3:11) To claim victory through his love, grace and mercy. (Rom 8:30-31).

We all will suffer adversity in this life. Sometimes extreme tragedy will befall us. Yet, whatever the trial or trouble, there is help and hope. There is God.

–Ken Weliever, The Preacherman

INSIGHT INTO BIBLE PROPHECY #71 Did Jesus Use the Wrong Examples? by David Vaughn Elliott

 

http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2016/11/insight-into-bible-prophecy-71-did.html

INSIGHT INTO BIBLE PROPHECY #71

Did Jesus Use the Wrong Examples?

by David Vaughn Elliott

Do you remember when Jesus said: "as it was in the days of Elijah, so shall it be when the Son of man comes"? No, you don't--for the simple reason that the Bible records no such thing.  

If the popular rapture theory were true, Jesus would have used the examples of Elijah and Enoch. Elijah’s case is the more striking of the two. After the whirlwind took him into heaven, 50 men fruitlessly searched three days for him (2 Kings 2). Now that sounds like today’s rapture theory! The righteous disappear; those "left behind" are mystified; and daily life goes on. But there is a big problem here. Jesus never said, "As it was in the days of Elijah"!  

Jesus said, "As it was in the days of Lot… it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed." Jesus said, "As it was in the days of Noah... " Noah’s neighbors did not wonder what happened to him. They had watched him build his escape boat and gather in the animals. Life did not go on as usual. "The flood came, and destroyed them all." It was the end of that world. Jesus said His second coming would be like that! (Luke 17:26-30). 

Jesus compared His return to the days of Lot and Noah. Both involved the destruction of the wicked. No second chances. In the case of Sodom, it was not the end of the world; but it was the end of Sodom and Gomorrah. Those cities have never been found. Those people never had time to wonder what happened to Lot. There were no chariot wrecks. No search parties. Nobody was "left behind." Jesus said His coming would be like that. 

Jesus was not wrong; He did not use the wrong examples. It is today's popular novels that are wrong. Junk the novels. Believe the words of Jesus in the Holy Scriptures.

Wise Use of Time by Sandra F. Cobble

 

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Cobble/Sandra/Fontaine/1933/use.html

Wise Use of Time

Wise use of time does not mean we always have to be "busy." We live in a youth-oriented, "on the go," society. That, I think, has greatly influenced Christian thought. We back our thoughts up with a few Scriptures, but sometimes do not observe the overall picture. Jesus was not ALWAYS feeding the multitude or healing the sick or performing miracles. He and His disciples left the multitude at times. This is indicated by the fact that He could explain the parables to them in private. There was time for prayer to His father. And there was time for personal fellowship and social fellowship. He visited with Mary, Martha, and Lazarus. And when He was at the wedding in Cana there is no indication that this was an unusual event in itself.

The saying, "God first, others next, self last," is of merit, but it is not entirely Scriptural. We are commanded to love others AS ourselves. If we do, indeed, love God first, then love ourselves as He loves us -- enough to care for ALL our needs -- then we can properly care for the needs of others. And while spiritual needs are of primary consideration, man also has many other needs. God not only created man, He also created all things to meet his needs, and even a wife so he would not be alone, for "He saw that it was not good for the man to be alone."

There is a time to be busy about our Father's business. There is also a time to just sit and observe His handiwork and learn to love and praise Him more!

Sandra F. Cobble

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

That "Rainbow bridge" by Gary Rose

 

This picture was taken in Sweden. It is a bit unusual in that it is so near to the earth and quite special in that it appears just above a bridge. You might even call it a “rainbow bridge”.

This sort of thing has been on my mind lately because my dog “Pal” was basically given a “death sentence” 23 months ago. This past week the vet said he was doing great even though he still has the heart murmur. Looks like the CBD I have been giving Pal actually works.

Needless to say, I am very happy that Pal may not have to cross that “rainbow bridge” in the very near future, for we have grown very close to the little dog. June 3 he actually turns 13 (91 in dog years).

Pal is the most loving, dependable creature I have ever known and the longer I have known him, the more I would like to emulate those qualities. Why? Well, remember these words of Jesus…

Revelation 2 ( World English Bible )

10 (c) Be faithful to death, and I will give you the crown of life.

What will happen to Pal when he at last crosses that “rainbow bridge” is anyone’s guess, but I know that if I am faithful, I will be given a “crown of life”.

PS. I thought you might enjoy seeing a picture of Pal which I took a few years ago. Pal is the cream colored Miniature Poodle on the right.