Participants: David Asscherick, James Rafferty, Jeffrey Rosario, Ty Gibson
Series Code: TT
Program Code: TT000037A
|
00:00 [Music]
00:10 [Music] 00:23 in which the evolutionary theory is pervasive in all of western 00:30 culture and it's pervading the whole world. 00:32 We happen to be four individuals, sitting around this 00:37 table, who are creationists. 00:39 The question that we want to tackle right now is can we take 00:44 the biblical account of creation seriously? 00:47 Because, increasingly, our culture does not take it 00:50 seriously, and for many people, the very idea is laughable. 00:53 You really believe that God created the world in which we 00:59 live? 01:00 Certainly, Darwinian evolution is unimpeachable. 01:05 It is the way we came into existence. 01:07 And then, we've got this strange place in between where we have 01:11 creationists on the one hand who believe in the existence of a 01:15 God who created, we've got materialistic evolutionists on 01:18 the other hands who say, there is no God, there was no 01:21 creation, it's all natural selection and survival of the 01:25 fittest, and then, we have all of these individuals in the 01:29 middle who are saying, we believe in God, we also believe 01:34 in evolution and evolution is the mechanism, the means by 01:39 which God, that's called theistic evolution. 01:42 So, we are increasingly in a minority of thinkers who reject 01:50 Darwinian evolution as the large idea that explains the existence 01:58 of the universe, the world, and ourselves. 02:02 >>DAVID: Well, not so much the existence of the universe, but 02:03 the existence of the origin and the diversity of life, of 02:07 biology, and you were exactly correct, Ty, in what you said 02:10 there. 02:12 I read a book a number of years ago that suggested, correctly, 02:14 that evolution is the most influential idea ever produced 02:20 by science. 02:21 Now, that's a big claim to make. 02:22 You think about the various scientific theories from 02:25 eutonian physics to Einsteinian physics to the theory of 02:29 electromagnetism, et cetera. 02:30 There've been a lot of scientific ideas that have been 02:33 brought to bear and many of these have given us things like 02:36 iPads and iPhones and cars that can drive, et cetera. 02:39 But this book that I was reading said that all of those ideas 02:43 have to take a backseat in terms of just, not even prestige, but 02:48 influence to Darwinian evolution because it is not stayed safely 02:54 ensconced within the biological discipline of, or within the 02:58 academic discipline of biology. 03:00 It's, there's evolutionary psychology, there's evolutionary 03:03 sociology, there's evolutionary cosmology, even, there's 03:07 evolutionary theology. 03:08 >>JEFFREY: And it becomes a wide explanatory scope into every 03:12 field. 03:13 >>DAVID: Well, it's suggested that it has a wide explanatory 03:14 scope, and to be fair, it is a reasonably compelling way of 03:19 viewing the universe. 03:20 In other words, if you take God out of the picture, if you say 03:22 at the outset, you know, what's called, as a presupposition, 03:28 that there is no God. 03:29 As you make your presupposition that the universe is Godless 03:32 -- >>TY: How are you gonna explain it? 03:34 >>DAVID: Exactly, and this is where evolution and the various 03:37 evolutionary influenced academic disciplines become very 03:41 persuasive because you need some means to create biological life, 03:45 to create social structures, to create the world that we see 03:49 around us and the Darwinian model is reasonably persuasive. 03:52 It's compelling. 03:54 >>TY: Yeah, one example, David, would be, you mentioned 03:57 evolutionary psychology. 03:59 I subscribe to a magazine called Psychology Today and one of the 04:04 things I've noticed over and over again in this magazine is 04:07 every once in a while, 2 or 3 times a year, it looks like to 04:11 me, there is an article that is trying to pose the question, and 04:17 one of them, very blatantly pose the question, why do men cheat? 04:20 >>DAVID: I think you leant me one of those articles and I read 04:23 it. 04:24 >>TY: Yeah, why do men extramarital affairs, and over 04:28 and over again, the answer boils down to, well, we're 04:32 evolutionary animals and the urge to reproduce is so strong 04:37 that expecting a man to be faithful to marriage vows is 04:41 simply not reasonable. 04:43 Men are made for mating with the strongest of the genetic options 04:51 around them in order to produce progeny. 04:54 So, don't expect your husband to maintain marital fidelity, it's 04:59 just not gonna happen, we're evolutionary animals and there's 05:02 really nothing of a moral nature about it, so get over it. 05:07 >>JEFFREY: And that makes sense if the foundation was true, that 05:09 makes perfect sense, it's a logical sequence. 05:13 >>JAMES: I just read a, not only read a blog, but I actually put 05:16 it on my facebook page that was written by, I think his name was 05:20 Matt Walsh, and he wrote a blog titled Is Monogamy Natural? 05:27 Is Monogamy Natural? 05:29 And the blog that he writes is in response to a professor 05:33 that's taking issue with him, he's a Christian, he's a 05:37 believer in various moral standards that go along with 05:40 Christianity and even 05:42 creation, including, but not limited to, monogamy, and in 05:44 this particular blog, a university professor has written 05:48 to him and said, this is an antiquated idea, exactly what 05:50 you're saying, it's an antiquated idea, it's 05:52 unrealistic, monogamy doesn't work, it's known to not work, 05:55 you're living in the dark ages, catch up with the times. 05:58 And wow, in this blog, Matt Walsh just has his way, 06:04 logically, on an evidentiary basis, I mean, he really has his 06:09 way with this professor with the various arguments that the 06:11 professor made, and my take away from it was, as I put on my 06:14 Facebook page there, I said, I guess I'm living a myth because 06:18 I've been living in a happy, you know, connected, beautiful, 06:22 wonderful, mutually supportive marriage for almost 17 years 06:26 now, with my wife Violeta that has been truly and wonderfully, 06:29 blissfully, happily, monogamous. 06:33 So, here somebody's saying, hey that can't happen, that doesn't 06:36 work, that's not, whatever, and I'm saying, oh contraire mon 06:39 friar. 06:40 [Laughter] 06:41 >>TY: It's working for me. 06:42 >>DAVID: Quite the opposite, it's working quite well for us. 06:44 So, but the point here is this, is that the word that I've used 06:49 in the past is the word ubiquitous, it means it's 06:51 everywhere, it is absolutely saturative and evolutionary 06:55 thinking is like an acid that is eating away various academic 06:59 disciplines. 07:01 In other words, it's infecting those disciplines, whether it's 07:03 sociology, psychology, theology, biology, it's just everywhere, 07:07 it's ubiquitous, but here's a very interesting thing. 07:09 I read another book, a great book, I've actually read it like 07:13 5 times, it's just such a good book. 07:16 You've read it as well, The Devil's Delusion by David 07:18 Berlinski. 07:18 Highly recommend it. 07:20 But in that book, one of the things that Dr. Berlinski brings 07:24 out, he's a secular Jew, he's not writing from a Christian 07:27 perspective, he's not even writing from a religious 07:28 perspective. 07:30 He's just basically saying, yeah, this scientific, allegedly 07:34 scientific atheism doesn't get the traction that, it doesn't 07:37 deserve the intellectual prestige that many are giving 07:39 it, the Dockins's and the Harrises and others of the 07:41 world. 07:43 Well, here's the point that he makes, he says, in the case of 07:45 evolution, there has never been a scientific theory that has 07:48 been so widely touted and accepted by the scientific 07:51 community and so widely disbelieved by everybody else. 07:56 There are still huge swaths, particularly in America, but all 08:00 over the world, who deny, if you ask them two questions, number 08:04 one, did God have his hand in it, there's an overwhelming 08:07 percentage of, for example, especially in America, in other 08:11 countries, it's similar, not all countries, but did God have a 08:15 hand in it? 08:15 Yes. 08:16 I don't know, it's like 60-70%, it's very high. 08:19 And then, you say, has, was the earth created recently, say in 08:23 the last 50,000 years? 08:24 Depending on how exactly they word the question, and in 08:27 America, the statistics that are associated with that, even 08:29 lately, 2010, 2011, 2012, is still close to 50%. 08:34 So, you have this disconnect between what we're being told 08:38 from the ivory tower, the intellectual elite, scientific 08:43 elite, and what the average person, you know, down here is 08:46 saying. 08:47 That doesn't, I don't think I'm a monkey. 08:49 I don't think I'm an evolved monkey, I don't think my 08:51 children are evolved monkeys, there's something about 08:53 evolution that is, and I think you'll appreciate this, that's 08:57 irreverent. 08:58 Now, what I mean by that is, it's not just electromagnetism. 09:02 It's dehumanizing. 09:04 It's not just electromagnetism, it's not quantum physics or any 09:08 other such thing. 09:09 It is saying, in fact, you're a naked ape. 09:12 In fact, there is only a difference of degree, not of 09:16 substance, not of, it's not a qualitative difference between 09:20 you and any other animal in the animal kingdom. 09:23 >>TY: Which immediately puts us in the realm again of morality 09:27 because it's absolutely inconsistent to truly subscribe 09:34 to the evolutionary theory and all it implies and then to have 09:39 some kind of advocacy of morality 09:43 -- >>DAVID: A high morality. 09:44 >>TY: A high morality, there's no way that the evolutionary 09:48 theory can actually put forth and consistently maintain even 09:53 the idea of altruism. 09:55 Does a man love his wife? 10:00 Does a wife love her husband? 10:03 Evolutionary biology, evolutionary science can only 10:06 reach so high as to say, the best thing that's happening 10:10 there is that it's in his best interest 10:13 -- >>JEFFREY: Propagation of his... 10:15 >>TY: Yeah, it's in his best interest to be in relation to 10:17 her. 10:18 If you wanna call that love, call that love, but really, it's 10:20 just a sophisticate form of selfishness. 10:23 >>DAVID: We had a whole conversation where we talked 10:25 about the herd mentality and the difference between the kind of 10:29 morality in a best case scenario that evolution could give us and 10:33 biblical morality and you'll recall that the difference was, 10:35 in the best case scenario, evolutionarily speaking, it 10:40 would be, I will do something good for you because, in some 10:43 way, either directly or in some circuitous way, it redounds to 10:48 my benefit. 10:49 Where biblical morality is, I will do something for you to 10:53 benefit you. 10:54 >>TY: That's the whole point of Richard Dawkins, I think, his 10:57 first best seller, and the title of the book itself tells us a 11:01 lot, the book is called The Selfishness Gene. 11:04 >>DAVID: The Selfish Gene. 11:05 >>TY: The Selfish Gene, and the point of the book is basically 11:07 to say that human beings operate the highest law that is 11:12 operatable in human experience and in all of living creation is 11:21 self-preservation. 11:22 That's as high as it goes. 11:23 There's nothing beyond that, whatever looks like love beyond 11:28 that 11:29 -- >>DAVID: Or altruism. 11:30 >>TY: Altruism, whatever looks like it is just that, it looks 11:32 like it, but it's not, it's just a more sophisticated expression 11:37 of survival of the fittest. 11:39 That's all it can be. 11:41 >>JEFFREY: Another expression or articulation of this is Ravi 11:44 Zacharias, I guess, popularized this whole sequence between 11:49 origin, meaning, morality, and destiny, but the concept there 11:55 is, what we're getting at is origin denotes value, right? 12:00 Something's origin determines its value. 12:04 I always think of, if you're in the mall and you're walking 12:06 around in the mall and you see a shirt, you may think, that's the 12:09 ugliest shirt I've ever seen in my life, and you go look at the 12:11 price tag. 12:13 >>JAMES: David was wearing one of those the other day. 12:15 [Laughter] 12:18 >>JEFFREY: I didn't wanna say that, I just wanted to imply it. 12:20 >>DAVID: Hey, I'm ready for a picnic, I got the tablecloth, 12:22 I'm wearing. 12:23 >>JEFFREY: You are and I don't know what the label here is, but 12:25 with this kind of shirt, if you saw it in the mall or some other 12:29 kind of shirt, you'd be blown away when you see the price tag 12:32 and you'd think, who in their right mind would pay that much 12:36 money for that shirt? 12:39 And then, when you see the label... 12:41 >>TY: Origin. 12:42 >>JEFFREY: Armani Exchange or whatever, right? 12:44 So, basically, the point there is, by looking at the label, by 12:48 its origin, you can determine the value of a thing, right? 12:52 So, just translate that into social Darwinism, translate that 12:57 into society and with the world view of our origins as being 13:04 descended from lower life forms and so forth and so forth. 13:06 You run into a huge wall when you now try to deduce from that 13:11 any sense of meaning or inherent value, or like you're saying, 13:17 morality, yeah. 13:19 >>DAVID: And then, destiny is off the table. 13:21 >>JEFFREY: Yeah, if you stripped the foundation upon which all 13:23 sense of meaning, purpose and all that is 13:26 -- >>DAVID: All sense of the things that we humans take for 13:28 granted. 13:29 >>TY: Right. 13:30 >>DAVID: Every culture, religious inclinations, moral 13:34 inclinations, a sense of purpose, of meaning, of destiny, 13:38 of being part of something larger, what we would call 13:42 broadly religious ideas, have arisen spontaneously in every 13:47 culture in human history. 13:49 In other words, we have a sense, you look out at the stars, you 13:54 have a sense, you stand at the ocean and you see the waves 13:57 breaking, the beautiful sunset, there is this sense, and this 14:01 isn't just an American modern sense. 14:05 Cultures are almost unanimously theistic. 14:10 Whether it's a polytheism or it's a pantheism or it's a 14:14 monotheism, whatever. 14:16 >>JEFFREY: It's theistic nonetheless. 14:17 >>DAVID: It's the sense that there's something else out 14:18 there, there's something bigger, there's something more and this 14:21 is why I used the term earlier about evolution being somewhat 14:24 irreverent, because what it does is it lays the axe to the root 14:26 of that tree. 14:28 Let me just say it this way, if evolution is true, if Darwinian 14:30 evolution is true, in the biological realm, therefore, it 14:34 would also begin to be true in these other realms, in other 14:36 words, these would be legitimate applications, then what we're 14:39 doing here at this table would be a waste of time. 14:42 Talking about the bible, talking about God, talking about Jesus, 14:45 talking about a higher meaning, a higher purpose, all of that, 14:48 this is, this is balderdash. 14:51 >>JEFFREY: Because there's no purpose. 14:52 I always throw at our students at Arise the question, with a 14:56 show of hands, how many of you have ever brushed your teeth 15:00 with a hammer? 15:01 Nobody raises their hand. 15:03 >>DAVID: That would be most of them. 15:04 >>JEFFREY: And then I'll say, conversely, how many of you have 15:07 ever nailed a nail to the wall with your toothbrush? 15:10 It would never occur to you. 15:12 And I ask the question, why? 15:14 Because a hammer wasn't created or designed or made for that 15:20 purpose. 15:21 In other words, you can determine whether something's 15:24 being used rightly or wrongly by looking at it from what was it 15:33 created for. 15:34 You see what I'm saying? 15:35 But if there was no purpose for which it was created, you could 15:38 never say, you're using that wrong. 15:40 You're using that wrongly. 15:43 To which I would say, what do you mean? 15:44 So, if we've descended from lower life forms, how can 15:50 somebody say, you're living wrong, your action was wrong. 15:53 >>TY: You shouldn't have raped that woman, you shouldn't have 15:56 abused that child. 15:56 >>JEFFREY: I would say, why? 15:57 I would say, why? 15:59 >>TY: On what basis do you hole be accountable for anything 16:01 >>JEFFREY: The word should've implies an ought and that 16:03 implies that there was some kind of intention or purpose outside 16:09 of myself behind my creation. 16:11 And so, that's where I think it meets, right there. 16:14 >>TY: I think what we're saying so far in this conversation is 16:19 that we have, basically, two stories that are being told in 16:23 our world, basically two stories, there are variations, 16:25 but two stories that are being told. 16:28 There is what we could call the creation account of reality and 16:32 there's the Darwinian evolution account of reality. 16:36 The creation account of reality naturally equates to human 16:42 dignity. 16:43 It's a high view of the human being, created in the image of 16:48 God. 16:49 The Darwinian evolution view, that storyline is demeaning to 16:57 human dignity, it's an insult to human dignity because it offers 17:02 no basis for a human being rising above, merely operating 17:08 by animal instincts and doing whatever it is that the 17:12 secretion of chemicals in the body dictates that you should 17:18 do. 17:18 We're just highly evolved animals. 17:20 Think, for example, of Darwin's book on the origin of species. 17:23 We know that book by the title, On the Origin of Species. 17:24 Not a lot of people, and you can't even hardly buy it, 17:29 nowadays, with the full original title that Darwin gave to the 17:32 book. 17:36 The book had a really long title that was expressive of the 17:37 theory in all its glory. 17:41 >>DAVID: Philosophical significance. 17:43 >>TY: Yeah. 17:44 And the title of the book was On the Origin of Species or, and 17:50 the title goes on to say, the Preservation of Favored Races in 17:57 the Struggle for Life. 17:58 So, there's something going on in Darwin's thinking. 18:02 What's going on there? 18:03 He's essentially saying that species have evolved through a 18:08 process of natural selection, and some races, that is, certain 18:13 categories of life, not just humans, but at all levels, 18:17 certain races or categories of living organisms are favored 18:23 above others, so there's a favoritism going on. 18:27 There's a self-preservation that's going on. 18:29 And you come all the way up to the human situation, and this is 18:32 fascinating, Darwin's cousin, Sir Francis Gulten, is the 18:37 father of what is referred to as eugenics. 18:41 Eugenics is a Greek word that means well born, or high born, 18:45 and it was from Darwin's theory of evolution that postulated the 18:50 idea of inequality, essentially, that there are favored 18:57 -- >>DAVID: Races. 18:58 >>TY: Races or favored, favored aspects of life, I don't know 19:05 what the word I'm looking for is, those favored aspects of 19:09 life are to be eliminated by the stronger. 19:15 So, then you have eugenics, and then you have World War II where 19:19 the Nazi scientists and physicians take the eugenics 19:24 idea, which hails from Darwinian evolution and they develop their 19:28 Arian view that, well, yes, indeed, there are higher life 19:33 forms, there are favored races and it's perfectly okay for the 19:38 higher, perceived higher races to eliminate the lower in order 19:44 to lead the human race to higher and higher and higher levels of 19:48 evolution. 19:49 So, the idea is completely to contrary to human dignity. 19:54 It's difficult to imagine treating others with true 19:59 dignity within a strict evolutionary framework of 20:06 thinking. 20:07 We have to take a break, but when we come back 20:09 -- >>DAVID: James, you were loud in that one. 20:10 Did you say anything? 20:13 >>JAMES: I didn't get a chance to. 20:14 >>DAVID: No, I did hear you twice, you said, mm. 20:17 And I appreciated that. 20:18 >>JEFFREY: Let's take a break, Ty. 20:19 >>TY: When we come back, we'll get James. 20:21 [Music] 20:27 [Music] 20:28 a.com. 20:31 I am so excited about this website because you're about to 20:35 discover a powerful new way to share life transforming messages 20:39 and videos with your family, friends, and anybody else on the 20:43 planet who has access to a computer. 20:47 Digma is a Greek word. 20:48 It basically means, to show or to reveal something by means of 20:52 a pattern or an example of some kind. 20:54 It's the second half of the word paradigma, from which we get the 20:58 English word paradigm, as in paradigm shift. 21:02 And so, what you're going to find at digma.com is a growing 21:06 library of short videos and transcripts dealing with 21:09 paradigms and fundamental questions. 21:12 What's the meaning of life? 21:14 What is our origin and destiny as human beings? 21:18 What happens when we die? 21:20 Does God exist or are we alone in this vast universe? 21:24 Why is there so much evil and suffering in our world? 21:29 An estimated 70% of Americans have a computer right in their 21:34 home and stay in touch with family and friends by email, and 21:38 more than 400 million people are active on Facebook, and 5 21:43 million new users are signing up every week. 21:48 We are literally in the midst of a communications revolution of 21:52 massive proportion. 21:54 This is granting the gospel direct and easy access to 21:59 millions upon millions of homes and hearts, and that's what 22:05 digma.com is all about. 22:07 It's a tool for leading our family and friends on an 22:11 exciting paradigm shift by revealing the truth of God's 22:15 creative power and his incredibly beautiful character 22:19 in contrast to our world's popular misconceptions about who 22:25 God is. 22:26 [Music] 22:38 [Music] 22:43 [Music] 22:44 ing 22:47 the two different storylines, the story of creation versus the 22:51 story of evolution and we saw or we at least began to explore the 22:56 idea that one communicates dignity, it invests the human 23:01 being with dignity and the other storyline doesn't even have the 23:07 raw materials from which to ascribe dignity to human beings. 23:12 And I think that one way we could think about this is with 23:18 the Declaration of Independence. 23:21 >>JAMES: I was thinking about it, and I'm glad you pointed to 23:23 me because David mentioned that I didn't say anything on the 23:26 last program, so this is great. 23:27 >>TY: So, James, could you say something? 23:29 >>JAMES: Well, this is what I like about the Declaration of 23:31 Independence, it is a stark contrast to the nation of power 23:35 that you mentioned earlier, which seemed to be an outworking 23:39 of Darwinism, the eugenics, the Nazis, the Germans, and I say 23:46 the Germans, I should say Nazi Germany because it's not the 23:48 Germans it's Nazi Germany. 23:49 It's the direction they took, which was based upon this 23:51 evolution model, and in the United States, you have a 23:55 completely different direction, and so you have really, in the 23:58 post of these two developments 1776, Declaration of 24:02 Independence and Darwinism, you have two conflicts that take 24:06 place. 24:07 It leads to two conflicting views and two conflicting 24:10 nations. 24:11 And the opposite is in these words, and these are just 24:14 beautiful words from the Declaration of Independence, we 24:17 hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are 24:20 created, emphasis, equal. 24:22 You listening, Jeffrey? 24:23 >>JEFFREY: I'm listening. 24:24 >>JAMES: I know you could speak this from memory, right? 24:27 I'm reading it. 24:28 And they are endowed by their creator, there it is again, with 24:30 certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, 24:37 and the pursuit of happiness. 24:39 There's no way I can say that without someone else saying it 24:40 also, because we're sitting here and we, our whole lives are 24:45 based upon this, and we know, I see it in the bible, it's in 24:48 Revelation, we have these 24:49 -- >>DAVID: That's a thoroughly biblical statement. 24:51 >>JAMES: Yes, these are lamblike principles, these are principles 24:54 that come, that find their origin in God. 24:58 >>DAVID: They find their origin in creation. 25:00 And I love the fact that when Jefferson's writing this and the 25:05 others are assisting in their, you know, sort of evaluation and 25:08 amendments to it before it's finally put to the, you know, 25:12 burgeoning new country, this inclusion of self-evident. 25:17 >>TY: Self-evident, yeah. 25:18 >>DAVID: I mean, that's the strongest possible way to say 25:21 that. 25:22 How else could you say that? 25:23 We hold these truths to be self-evident. 25:25 >>JEFFREY: You don't even argue it, it's intuitive. 25:26 >>DAVID: Yeah, that's right. 25:28 >>TY: We hold these truths because the footnotes belong 25:31 from, yeah 25:32 -- >>DAVID: To be self-evident. 25:35 >>TY: Self-evident means we know this. 25:38 >>DAVID: Created, created equal. 25:41 >>JEFFREY: Can I say something, guys? 25:42 >>DAVID: That's at exact odds with the eugenics thing. 25:44 >>JAMES: Endowed by a creator. 25:45 >>JEFFREY: But the word equal there, that's a fascinating 25:48 thing. 25:50 Everybody today, secular or not, especially, you know, we live in 25:55 the state of Oregon and it's activism for everything, you 25:59 know, and social rights, equality, all of these very 26:04 familiar notions and ideals that we know, we read about it in the 26:07 news all day, every day. 26:09 I just love that fact that you can't, I'll pose a question, 26:15 rather, can you arrive at any sense of equality among human 26:20 beings? 26:21 Can you argue that human beings should be treated equally, that 26:27 we should all have equal rights from a purely evolutionary 26:32 perspective? 26:33 Because we're not 26:34 -- >>TY: Some would. 26:35 >>JEFFREY: But we're not equal, though. 26:36 Well, we're not all equal. 26:38 People differ in IQ, people differ in physical capabilities, 26:44 people differ in talents, in cultural development, in 26:49 occupation, economically. 26:52 >>TY: That kind of equality is not referenced in the 26:54 Declaration of Independence. 26:55 >>JEFFREY: Right, but my point is, the notion of even assuming, 26:59 that even assuming that human beings, innate equality, my 27:07 point is, you don't get that 27:09 -- >>DAVID: From biology, from science, from evolution. 27:11 >>JEFFREY: 27:12 --by leaving the biblical narrative. 27:13 The biblical narrative gives us the premise of equality and that 27:17 is that every human being, regardless of race, skin color, 27:21 intelligence, IQ, gender, what have you, was created in the 27:25 image and the likeness of God. 27:27 >>JAMES: Because they were created, yeah. 27:28 >>JEFFREY: So, that's the thing, the objective thing that we all 27:32 hold equally, and on the basis of that, we can argue for 27:36 equality, and my point is, if you remove that out of the 27:39 picture 27:39 -- >>DAVID: Where's the basis? 27:40 >>JEFFREY: And actually, there is, one of the leading political 27:46 legal philosophers, Joel Fienberg I believe was his name, 27:51 in the '60s, wrote on the concept of ethics from a secular 27:57 perspective and that's exactly the argument he posed. 28:00 He said, this is a legal philosopher, he said, we don't 28:04 really have a basis for equal rights, it just seems to be the 28:10 right thing to do. 28:11 But he says, at the very core, we don't have a basis for it, 28:14 and his argument for that was because we're not equal. 28:17 We're not equal from an evolutionary perspective, we're 28:20 not equal. 28:21 >>DAVID: Or financial perspective or an intelligent, 28:23 yeah, all that. 28:24 >>JEFFREY: I think that point doesn't get enough attention. 28:25 I think that's a huge point that, that's overlooked. 28:29 >>DAVID: Here's how I would say it, we conduct government, we 28:34 conduct law, we conduct the treatment of criminals, we do 28:40 life on the assumption of the creation story. 28:43 Like Ty was saying, there's the two stories, you have the 28:47 creation story and you have the evolutionary story. 28:49 The you were made in the image of God story or you've evolved 28:51 from lower life forms. 28:52 We don't do life based on this. 28:55 We punish people that do life based on this. 28:57 I'm gonna go into this room and I'm gonna take what I want, and 29:00 we say, okay, you're unsafe to society, we're gonna stick you 29:03 away. 29:04 Right, or in extreme cases, they'll shoot them. 29:05 We don't do life like that. 29:08 We do life like the writers of the Declaration of Independence 29:11 did. 29:12 That's not to say that they were all evangelical Christians. 29:14 They weren't, but there was this saturative idea that there is 29:18 some sense in which we have, as you said, innate dignity. 29:23 And where does that come from? 29:25 It has to be transcendent to us. 29:27 It can't come from among us, it has to come from outside of us. 29:31 It's investing Jeffrey equally with David, with James, with Ty, 29:34 with the cameramen, with the world. 29:36 >>JEFFREY: And the fact that we do life, I love how you said 29:39 that, we do life assuming that. 29:41 Another philosophy used the analogy of a borrowed credit 29:44 card. 29:46 So many people in the secular world, or whatever world that 29:49 are 29:51 -- >>DAVID: At odds with the creation story. 29:53 >>JEFFREY: Yeah, at odds with the creation narrative and world 29:55 view, live life on a borrowed credit card because they live 29:59 life as if that was true. 30:03 Yeah, they lived as if there was purpose and meaning and as if 30:07 individuals were valuable. 30:09 But, they're on a borrowed credit card. 30:13 They're borrowing credit card to make purchases to purchase these 30:17 things and experience these things, but they're not inherent 30:20 in that world view, they have to reach outside the world view, 30:24 borrow ideals and import those ideals into a foreign world view 30:28 that doesn't have the underpinnings for it. 30:31 >>TY: And the dignity of the individual goes in the direction 30:35 of our systems of justice. 30:38 In the creation perspective, there is legitimate reason for 30:44 which we should all be held accountable for our actions 30:49 toward others, right? 30:50 But in the evolutionary world view, what's the basis for 30:55 accountability? 30:56 On what premise do I say to you, that was wrong what you did, and 31:05 now you're going to suffer the consequences of what you did. 31:08 There's no basis for a just society to be established or 31:13 constructed. 31:14 >>DAVID: Particular, and this is probably going more 31:16 philosophical than we wanna go in this conversation that we 31:18 could, particularly when you realize that strict 31:22 materialistic Darwinian evolution lends itself to 31:26 determinism. 31:27 That is to say that you don't really have a choice. 31:30 You blame it on your genes, you blame it on a hundred other 31:32 things, this is the person you were, well, how do you punish 31:35 that? 31:36 How do you say, and we live in a world, going back to the first 31:39 program there where, why are men unfaithful, why are people 31:43 unfaithful, why can't they stay in bed with the right person? 31:45 Well, you have an evolutionary excuse, well, because you can't 31:49 not. 31:50 Well, if you tell me that I can't not but do something, how 31:54 are you gonna then punish me for doing it? 31:56 In other words, violence or infidelity or whatever. 31:58 >>JEFFREY: I have an article just outside in the car in the 32:01 parking lot and the article's titled My Brain Made Me Do It. 32:05 And the subtitle is something to the effect of how neuroscience 32:10 enters court. 32:11 And the article is literally dealing with the dilemma now in 32:16 the court system of what you just said, and it highlights two 32:22 individuals, otherwise perfectly sane, normal people, some of 32:26 them are physicians, some of them are educators, after years 32:29 and years, child molestation, all this stuff surfaces and now 32:33 they're in court and, oh, there's a chemical imbalance in 32:36 the brain, and I don't wanna take away from that, obviously, 32:38 there are cases where, you know, these things take place. 32:42 But my point is that the article's saying, what do we do 32:47 with this now? 32:48 >>DAVID: It's everybody gets the insanity defense, right? 32:50 That's the thing. 32:51 >>JEFFREY: There's no moral attachment to you 32:54 -- >>TY: But according to the evolutionary theory, it can't 32:56 even rightfully be called insanity, it's just we're living 32:59 in a chaotic explosion that occurred 14 billion years ago, 33:05 and here we are on the tail end of that, we're evolving animals 33:11 and there's no reason to expect anything of anybody that would 33:17 operate or act with respect for any other, and so there's no 33:22 moral quality at all to human actions. 33:25 >>DAVID: You go ahead, James. 33:27 >>JAMES: I wanted to bring, not all of this to a conclusion, but 33:30 I wanted to bring this together with a statement that I wanted 33:32 to read because I think we're looking at very legitimate 33:36 arguments against evolution. 33:38 Arguments that I think need to be brought to the table. 33:41 A lot of the times, when we talk about this and we discuss this 33:44 subject, we try to defend the bible, we try to defend God and 33:47 I think there's not enough offense in this, in other words, 33:50 there's not enough people that are questioning the reasons 33:54 behind evolution and the arguments behind evolution, I 33:56 think that's what we're doing right now. 33:58 So, I wanna read a statement to you and I want you to see if you 34:00 can pick out at least 3 points in here, solid arguments against 34:05 evolution as I read this statement, see if you can bring 34:07 them out and when we're finished, we'll talk about it. 34:09 When consideration is given to man's opportunities for 34:12 research, how brief his life, how limited his fear of action. 34:17 How restricted his vision, how frequent and how great are his 34:20 errors in his conclusions. 34:23 Especially as concerned the events thought to antedate bible 34:28 history. 34:29 How often the supposed deductions of science are 34:32 revised or cast aside. 34:33 With what readiness the assumed period of earth's development is 34:39 from time to time increased or diminished by millions of years 34:43 and how the theories advance by different scientists' conflict 34:47 with one another. 34:48 Considering all of this shall we for the privilege of tracing our 34:52 descent from germs and mollusks and apes, consent to cast away 34:57 that statement of holy ritz, so grand in its simplicity, God 35:03 created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him, 35:07 Genesis 1:27. 35:08 Shall we reject that genealogical record prouder than 35:12 any treasured in the courts of kings, which was the son of 35:15 Adam, which was the son of God. 35:17 Luke 3:38. 35:19 Did you catch 35:21 -- >>DAVID: There's a lot there. 35:22 >>JAMES: Yeah, but did you catch those three 35:24 -- >>TY: I think I want you to tell us what they are because I 35:26 wrote down the fear of action but. 35:29 >>JAMES: Well, the ones that I was specifically thinking about 35:31 were this, first of all, there's this revision of science. 35:37 Science is continually being revised by millions of years, up 35:41 and down, up, the earth is, no, it's this, no it's this. 35:44 Then, there is this, the theories. 35:49 In other words, there are different theories that are 35:51 accepted or cast aside, accepted or cast aside. 35:54 We have this theory then we have another theory then we have 35:56 another theory, and then, when we come to some of these 35:58 conclusions, number 3, we have conflicting theories, one 36:02 scientist will say 4 billion, another scientist will say 2 36:05 billion. 36:06 So, you have the casting aside of ideas, then you have the 36:11 adding and taking away millions and billions of years and then 36:14 you have the conflict of the final theories. 36:16 >>DAVID: The only point of correction on that that I would 36:19 say is, is that the numbers of years, the amount of time, both 36:24 cosmologically and biologically, in other words, for life and for 36:28 the cosmos, those times aren't going up and then back, they're 36:32 just going up. 36:33 In other words, the revisions are always adding years and 36:36 there's a reason for that. 36:37 Theistic evolution, like, in terms of like classical 36:43 biological evolution, okay, here's the simplest way to say 36:47 it, microscopes didn't exist. 36:49 The kinds of microscopes that we have access to today did not 36:54 exist in the 1850s when Darwin's writing Origin of Species. 36:57 So, with their rudimentary tools, they look and they see 37:00 something that looks like, just gonna borrow this from you, Ty. 37:03 They see something that looks like that. 37:07 They see, you know, a basic border, they see a parameter, 37:11 and then they see a dark spot in the middle. 37:12 They know that's a cell, they can look on a leaf, they can put 37:14 it on a glass, they can, and they had a very simple, it looks 37:18 like a brick. 37:20 A simple brick and you take a brick and you build a cathedral, 37:23 you take a brick and you build a library, you take a brick and 37:24 you build a house. 37:26 So, DNA is not gonna be discovered, this is 18, for 100 37:29 years, right? 37:31 And the tricky thing about DNA is not just that it's this 37:34 spiral, whatever, this looks kind of like DNA, it's not just 37:38 that it's this spiral chasse, that's not what makes DNA 37:41 awesome, it's that that spiral, in the same way that this iPad 37:46 is pretty cool, but that's, it's not this nice, glass screen, 37:50 it's what's inside of there. 37:51 >>TY: The info. 37:52 >>DAVID: The chasse contains information. 37:54 It contains data. 37:55 This is lightyears beyond this simplistic notion of what, and 38:02 so, originally, okay, man evolves over this period of 38:04 time, whoa, whoa, whoa, there's a complexity here. 38:06 >>JEFFREY: We need more time to account for the complexity. 38:08 >>DAVID: And then that, and then that. 38:10 >>TY: But the thing is, David, that there's nobody who has 38:15 brought forth any theory or any actual evidence that we witness 38:22 any increase in basic DNA information. 38:25 >>DAVID: Yeah, that's the, yeah, now we're kind of, okay. 38:29 So, now we're getting to sort of the point of the thing. 38:32 And the truth of matter is, not a scientist, not a scientist, 38:36 not a scientist, not a scientist, right? 38:38 That's huge, we have to admit that. 38:40 So, but we also have to admit that the question of origin is 38:44 too important to leave to professionals. 38:47 You feel the weight of that? 38:49 In other words, we can't allow the priests of modernity, namely 38:54 scientists, to have, you know, they're the only ones allowed to 38:57 speak to these issues just because we can't. 38:59 No, no, no, no, no, we have held our children in our arms, with 39:05 the exception of Jeffrey, we have held our child in our, we 39:09 have seen the sunset, the same sunset they've seen. 39:11 We have heard a symphony, the same symphonies they've heard. 39:14 We have smelled the smell of magnolias or lilacs or whatever 39:19 it is for you, we have tasted a mango plucked fresh from the 39:24 tree. 39:24 We know. 39:25 So, to say, for somebody to come to us and say, there's, it's 39:27 really meaningless, it's just, you remember, a number of 39:31 episodes ago, Ty, there was a statement where you read this 39:33 thing about how the universe is just in this decay, Bertrand 39:36 Russel, this decay and we're just like a blip, a flash in the 39:39 pan. 39:40 I reject that. 39:41 And, can I reject it on the strictly scientific, biological, 39:46 no, but I'm comforted by the fact that there are scientists 39:50 who disagree with the mainstream view, number one, and number 39:54 two, I'm comforted by the fact that scripture says, in the 39:58 beginning God created the heavens and the earth, and let 40:01 us make mankind in our own image. 40:03 Because that resonates deeply with my sense of justice, 40:07 morality, the love, comradery, I mean, I'm preaching now. 40:10 >>JEFFREY: It resonates with your experience in life. 40:13 >>DAVID: Yes, it does resonate with my experience. 40:16 >>JEFFREY: Experientially, that resonates and it corresponds 40:19 with the reality that I've experienced. 40:20 >>DAVID: And I think that it resonated, it's resonated with 40:23 most peoples, most cultures, which have been religious, and 40:26 it gets us back to the Declaration of Independence. 40:29 It's self-evident. 40:31 Come on now. 40:33 Don't tell me that I am the mere product of, I can't accept that. 40:39 >>JAMES: Can I tell you that our time's up and that we'll come 40:41 back and finish? 40:43 >>TY: Our time isn't completely up, that's the end of segment 2, 40:45 we have one more segment, so yeah, let's take a break. 40:48 we have one more segment, so yeah, let's take a break. 40:56 Announcer: Digma videos are short, engaging messages 40:58 designed for opening up discussion with individuals and 41:01 groups regarding the character of God as well as for your own 41:05 personal spiritual growth. 41:06 For your free DVD sample collection of Digma videos, call 41:10 877-585-1111, or write to Light Bearers, 37457 Jasper Lowell 41:18 Road, Jasper, Oregon 97438. 41:21 Once again, for your free DVD sample collection of Digma 41:25 videos, call 877-585-1111, or write to Light Bearers, 37457 41:33 Jasper Lowell Road, Jasper, Oregon 97438. 41:37 Simply ask for Digma DVD 3. 41:40 [Music] 41:45 [Music] 41:50 My tongue was twisting a few times and I sensed that among 41:55 us, we're a little bit out of our depth. 41:58 >>DAVID: I'm preaching. 41:59 >>TY: Well, I'm talking about the fact that we pointed out 42:03 that we're not scientists. 42:05 You were preaching biblical ideas. 42:08 But here's the thing, here's the thing, we're not scientists, but 42:13 we are theologians, we do love the word of God 42:17 -- >>JEFFREY: I would say we're human beings. 42:18 >>TY: We're human beings, and so 42:20 -- >>JEFFREY: I'm speaking as a human being. 42:21 >>TY: As a human being. 42:22 We sense the gravity of the subject matter. 42:24 We've got two stories before us, we've got a creation story that 42:27 invests human beings with dignity, we've got an 42:30 evolutionary storyline that is void of the raw materials from 42:35 which to construct human dignity. 42:37 >>DAVID: I like the way you say that, raw materials. 42:39 >>TY: Yeah, so as we look at this subject a little bit 42:42 further, I think it would be great if we could get to some of 42:46 the biblical ideas that are completely incompatible with the 42:52 evolutionary worldview. 42:54 For example, the bible very clearly and explicitly tells us 43:00 that, in Romans chapter 5, verse 12, that death came by sin. 43:06 So, here we have something that all of us, all human beings, 43:12 hate and fear and dread, death, the evolutionary world view 43:16 basically says, this is just a part of the process of the 43:22 evolutionary development of human beings and all life forms, 43:26 but the biblical account says, no, death is the product of sin. 43:30 We have theistic evolutionists that come along and they try to 43:35 retain a belief in God and retain the biblical narrative, 43:40 but then, what happens with death. 43:42 Suddenly, we're left with the distinct impression that if God 43:49 used evolution as his means of creating the world, then death 43:56 didn't come from sin, it came from God. 43:59 God used a process that has death, not just death, but 44:04 brutality inherent in the thing that is called evolution. 44:09 In other words 44:10 -- >>DAVID: Through millions and billions of creatures. 44:12 >>TY: Yeah, so if we accept theistic evolution, then we 44:16 would have to necessarily believe that there is a brutal 44:20 element in the character of God, that God is the one who came up 44:24 with this method, this survival of the fittest, 44:28 self-preservation methodology. 44:30 How can we worship or love a God who thinks up a method that is 44:39 so absolutely full of pain and suffering? 44:42 >>DAVID: Pain, suffering, death. 44:44 >>TY: I think we can only go one of two directions, it's either 44:46 full-blown, materialistic evolution and there is no God, 44:49 or the biblical narrative. 44:51 This theistic evolution thing in between, what is that? 44:55 >>DAVID: You disagree with that? 44:56 >>JEFFREY: No, I'm saying absolutely. 44:58 >>DAVID: Especially when you have Jesus in the New Testament 45:00 saying, a sparrow doesn't fall to the ground but your heavenly 45:03 Father takes notice. 45:04 >>JAMES: But evolution would say, this day, evolution would 45:07 say, a sparrow falls to the ground and that's part of a 45:09 process that God developed in order for us to move on and 45:11 grow. 45:13 >>DAVID: The picture shows a tender, brooding, you know, 45:18 looking in picture over a sparrow. 45:21 I'm a birder, as you know, I love my birds, I love that 45:24 picture of God. 45:25 Jesus also said, consider the ravens. 45:27 I just love this idea that the tenderest, smallest things, God 45:32 is aware of, he's cognicent of, he created, and he loves, versus 45:36 this picture that you're describing, which puts brutality 45:39 as in the heart of God as the mechanism, the creative 45:43 mechanism by which he said, hey, how am I gonna get to my, you 45:46 know, Adam and Eve in the story? 45:48 >>JEFFREY: And the biblical story says that death is what 45:50 broke God's original mechanism, not part of his mechanism. 45:52 >>TY: But take it a step further, what about the biblical 45:54 idea of atonement? 45:55 >>DAVID: The whole thing, the wheels come off. 45:58 >>TY: What do you do with that? 45:59 So, Jesus comes into the world and he dies for what? 46:04 If theistic evolution is true, how is the death of Jesus 46:09 remedying sin? 46:12 A remedy for death? 46:14 It makes no sense. 46:16 >>DAVID: When we read the New Testament, the New Testament 46:18 writers and Jesus himself assumed the basic historicity 46:23 and truthfulness of the creation account. 46:26 In other words, they're not building up to prove the 46:29 creation account, they're starting with the creation 46:31 account as their basis upon which they build their ideas. 46:35 So, if we say, okay, no creation, the creation account 46:39 where death comes after sin and where sin is an alien in God's 46:44 otherwise beautiful and wonderful creation, if we start 46:48 at a different place than that, then the New Testament doesn't 46:51 make a wink of sense, that's my opinion. 46:53 >>TY: You gotta go one of two directions. 46:55 >>DAVID: I know there are well-meaning Christians that are 46:58 trying to marry the two and they see a basic compatibility. 47:01 I've looked for it, I don't see it. 47:03 >>TY: And the arguments are not persuasive. 47:06 For example, in one conversation, an individual, who 47:10 is espousing theistic evolution, the basis of accepting that 47:15 theory and retaining a belief in God was to say, well, the 47:19 Genesis account of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 is clearly a 47:23 poem, therefore, it can't be taken literally. 47:26 Well, the fact is, Genesis one and two is written as a poem. 47:32 It's a poetic, it's structured as a poem. 47:37 But here's the thing, just because it's a poem doesn't mean 47:40 it's not describing things that are true. 47:42 Isaiah 42 is a poem, and it's describing the coming of the 47:46 Messiah. 47:47 We don't say we can't have the Messiah because that's a poem, 47:49 people write poems and love songs to express real things. 47:54 it's not describing every detail. 47:58 It's not telling us down to exactly what's going on with God 48:06 at the molecular level, it's just describing that God created 48:10 the world in 6 days and rested on the seventh day, it's a 48:13 beautiful poem, it's telling us the truth. 48:15 >>DAVID: Something I wanna say about that is while we are not 48:18 scientists or philosophers of science there are, there are 48:23 many, not the majority, not by any stretch, but there are many 48:26 scientists and philosophers of science and other thinking 48:31 people out there who are familiar with the various 48:34 disciplines and nomenclatures of these other academic areas that 48:38 also are calling evolution into question, not on biblical 48:43 grounds, and that's the key. 48:44 >>TY: But on scientific grounds. 48:45 >>DAVID: But on scientific grounds. 48:46 A number of years ago, I read a book that, it's a little heady, 48:51 but recommended, especially for those that are interested in 48:54 this, titled Uncommon Descent, which is a play on the idea of 48:58 common descent, the Darwinian mechanism of common descent. 49:00 Uncommon Descent, intellectuals who find Darwinism unconvincing, 49:06 right? 49:07 One of those intellectuals that writes in the book there was a 49:09 man by the name of David Berlinski, David Berlinski's a 49:11 writer, an author, secular Jew, mathematician, philosopher, and 49:17 I've read most of his books, at least his non-technical books, 49:21 I've read most of his popular books and some of his books I've 49:23 read repeatedly. 49:24 And Berlinski is somebody who, though he's a Jew, he's a 49:28 secular Jew, he's an admitted agnostic, and he's not coming 49:34 and saying, well, the bible says, therefore, scripture says, 49:36 therefore, the Jewish scriptures say, therefore, he's saying, I'm 49:39 not even sure about this whole God thing, but I know that's not 49:42 true. 49:43 So, here's a scientist, here's a philosopher of science, and 49:46 there are others, there are many others that are taking issue 49:48 with this basic picture, not because they're in defense of 49:52 some theological position, which we could be accused of in this 49:56 program, somebody, a scientist, or somebody else might watch 49:58 this program and say, okay, but where's the scientific data? 50:00 But we're not scientists. 50:01 >>TY: Right, so we're not gonna bring that. 50:02 >>DAVID: But we can say, philosophically, we don't feel 50:04 it, when it comes to governmental systems, when it 50:07 comes to basic sense of justice, when it comes to human dignity, 50:09 when it come, we have addressed, philosophically, where evolution 50:13 tends to, we talked about Germany and eugenics, but I'm 50:17 greatly comforted know that there are people out there like 50:19 Dr. Berlinski, William Dempsky, Dr. Sean Pitman, and this is a 50:23 friend of Ty and I's, Dr. John Ashton wrote a great book, 50:27 Evolution Impossible, 12 reasons why evolution cannot explain the 50:31 origin of life on earth, he's a PhD microbiologist, and just a 50:36 really, just a cool guy, I mean, he's got the longest eyelashes 50:40 in the world, by the way. 50:41 >>TY: Yeah, he has beautiful eyelashes. 50:42 That is a fun book to read and it's at the laylevel. 50:46 >>DAVID: It's at the laylevel. 50:47 So, I love the fact that there are people out there who are 50:51 conversant in that nomenclature and that terminology that say, 50:54 oh, by the way, another great resource is the website, I 50:58 mentioned Dr. Sean Pitman, detectingdesign.com. 51:02 I don't know if you've been there or not, that's a huge 51:03 resource for me. 51:04 Detectingdesign.com. 51:06 And I'll be honest, a significant percentage of that 51:09 goes over my head, but what I get, I love. 51:13 Now, with your guys' permission, I wanna read one of my favorite 51:15 quotations from David Berlinski, from his book, The Devil's 51:18 Delusion, which is a response to Richard Dawkins' The God 51:21 Delusion, that describes 51:24 -- >>TY: By the way, that's a fun book to read, too, and 51:26 anybody can read it, it's not technical, it's entertaining, 51:29 but it's so stimulating intellectually. 51:33 >>DAVID: I've read the book four times and sections of it, like, 51:36 ten. 51:36 It's just pure, it's intellectual candy. 51:39 It's a joy. 51:40 It's fun to see a mathematician, a scientist, and a philosopher 51:44 of science give other intellectuals a hard time about 51:48 the gaps in their own thinking and reasoning. 51:51 Anyway, he has this great quotation from the book The 51:54 Devil's Delusion that's talking about the fundamental difference 51:57 that we all know intuitively between us and apes. 52:01 Us and lower life forms. 52:04 Can I share that with you? 52:05 >>TY: Sure, do it. 52:06 >>DAVID: He says, the idea that human beings have been endowed 52:08 with powers and properties, not found elsewhere in the animal 52:11 kingdom, arises from a simple imperative, just look around. 52:16 It is an imperative that survives the invitation, 52:19 fraternally, to consider the great apes. 52:22 The apes are, after all, behind the bars of their cages and we 52:25 are not. 52:26 Eager for the experiments to begin, they are impatient for 52:30 the food to be served. 52:31 They seem impatient for little else. 52:34 After years of punishing trial, a few of them have been taught 52:37 the rudiments of various primitive symbol systems, sign 52:40 language. 52:41 Having been given the gift of language, they have nothing to 52:44 say. 52:45 [Laughter] 52:46 >>TY: I love that line. 52:48 >>DAVID: He says, in much of this, apes communicating, in 52:52 much of this, we see ourselves, now listen to this, but beyond 52:55 what we have in common with the apes, we have nothing in common. 52:58 And while the similarities are interesting, the differences are 53:03 profound. 53:04 If human beings are as human beings think they are, then 53:08 religious ideas about what they are gain purchase. 53:12 Last part, these ideas are ancient. 53:16 They have arisen spontaneously in every culture. 53:19 They have seemed, to men and women, the obvious conclusions, 53:23 self-evident, the obvious conclusions to be drawn from 53:27 just looking around. 53:29 An enormous amount of intellectual effort has 53:31 accordingly been invested in persuading men and women not to 53:35 look around. 53:35 >>TY: [Laughter] 53:36 Right. 53:37 >>JAMES: I think that quote was really good, but I also think it 53:40 was read really well, too. 53:41 [Laughter] 53:42 >>DAVID: I just read it so many times, I just love it. 53:44 He's basically saying that the sense that we are different than 53:48 the other animal kingdom arises from this imperative. 53:51 >>TY: Just look around. 53:52 >>DAVID: Take a look around. 53:53 And he says there's a lot of intellectual effort invested in 53:56 getting people to not look around. 53:57 >>TY: We mentioned earlier that we're not scientists, and of 54:00 course, we're not, but there's something there that I think is 54:03 interesting, the just look around part. 54:06 >>JEFFREY: That invites everyone, that invites normal 54:08 people. 54:09 >>TY: That invites everybody into the discipline into the 54:13 process of observing and that's science. 54:16 We may not be able to observe on the scientific level that 54:20 specialists are observing, but we sure can look around us and 54:25 see the way the world operates, we sure can look at the 54:29 relationship that we enjoy between a husband and a wife, 54:32 between parents and children, we can certainly look at deeds of 54:37 heroism that we witness in the world around us and we find 54:40 ourselves spontaneously just wow, beautiful, well done. 54:47 There's something in us that agrees with moral beauty and 54:51 there's something in us that pushes back on anything contrary 54:55 to human beings rising to the level of what we know in our 55:00 heart of hearts we were made for. 55:02 >>JEFFREY: That reminds me of a Lewis statement, where he says 55:04 that we can look out there to try to understand the universe 55:08 and try to understand, he says, or you can look somewhere closer 55:11 to home. 55:12 You can look at yourself instead of your own processes and your 55:15 own experience and that itself is, that's the most accessible 55:20 lesson book than looking out there, looking at other species, 55:24 how about looking at our own species and just. 55:26 >>DAVID: John Calvin, the reformer, had this great 55:28 quotation where he basically said, go sit under a tree and it 55:33 will become obvious to you that the faculties which you possess 55:37 could not possibly have come from yourself. 55:39 In other words, just spend a moment in self-reflection, of 55:42 course, televisions didn't exist in his day, but turn off the 55:44 television, turn off the iPad, get away from the internet, and 55:47 just go sit under a tree for a while, look at the birds, listen 55:49 to the sounds, look at the grass, and look inside of 55:52 yourself and you will become aware that the world is a 55:55 beautiful place and you occupy a divine niche in that place, 56:01 God's speaking both external and internal. 56:04 >>JEFFREY: We don't do that enough today. 56:05 In today's society, it's just, I think we should go back to 56:09 that, just staring out the window. 56:11 >>DAVID: Well, this is rich coming from a city boy. 56:13 >>JEFFREY: I heard, I have chickens now, I own chickens. 56:16 [Laughter] 56:18 And my wife keeps bees in the backyard, but I, I listened to a 56:22 song last night with my wife where the musician was saying, 56:25 we need to turn the screen off and go out and stare at the 56:29 stars. 56:30 We need to do that more often and I just think that's powerful 56:32 and I think that everyone, in a sense, is a natural scientist, 56:37 in the sense that we're natural observers of the world around 56:41 us. 56:42 >>DAVID: You're talking about turning screens off, can I ask 56:44 you to turn your screen on and read us that quotation? 56:46 Because you have that one. 56:48 >>JEFFREY: That one. 56:51 >>DAVID: I just love it. 56:51 [inaudible chatter] 56:55 >>JEFFREY: God and the astronomers, and this one here 56:57 is just basically painting a picture of how, for all these 57:00 years, the bible has been telling us that the universe had 57:02 a beginning, the universe had a beginning, and what is so 57:06 obvious now to the scientific community hasn't always been. 57:09 I think it was mid-20th century 1960s, Big Bang Theory and all 57:13 of that, right? 57:13 So, here's what he says. 57:15 For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of 57:20 reason, the story ends like a bad dream. 57:25 He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he's about to conquer 57:29 the highest peak, and as he pulls himself over the final 57:33 rock, he's greeted by a band of theologians who have been 57:38 sitting there for centuries. 57:40 >>TY: Oh, I love that. 57:43 >>JEFFREY: And at that point, it's basically in the beginning, 57:46 God created the world, and with that, all of the components that 57:51 we understand of life... 57:52 >>DAVID: And that's not a diminishment of the scientific 57:55 enterprise at all. 57:56 What it's saying is, is that in the beginning, God created the 57:59 heavens and the earth. 58:00 Scripture has said that for 3,000 years, right, and it's 58:04 been the intuitive sense that man has had for even before 58:07 scripture was written. 58:09 And then, science says, that's been the storyline of human 58:14 history for a long time, and then, this modern sort of 58:18 atheistic enterprise, last couple hundred years, has kinda 58:21 gone away from that, and then, now, the actual discoveries of 58:25 cosmology and other scientific disciplines are bringing it 58:28 back, and so, he's saying, man, this sounds like a nightmare for 58:30 these guys. 58:31 >>TY: I read somewhere that a little bit of science makes a 58:35 person an atheist and a lot of science makes a person a 58:38 believer. 58:39 >>DAVID: Yeah, I've heard the same quotation, but with 58:40 philosophy. 58:41 It's a Francis Bacon quote. 58:42 >>TY: Oh, is it? 58:42 >>DAVID: Yeah. 58:44 >>TY: So, really, we've come full circle in our discussion 58:47 here and I think there's something more than merely what 58:50 we observe. 58:51 We notice, in human hearts, our own, and in other human hearts, 58:56 that we aspire to something that finds no perfectly satisfying 59:02 match in our present state of affairs. 59:06 We're longing for a love, for a dignity that we cannot find 59:14 satisfaction for in any relations in this world. 59:17 [Music] 59:27 [Music] |
Revised 2016-04-14