How To Accept Evidence For God There are so many books available about religion, about theology, about science v God, about creationism, about the big bang but Creation Dynamics is different - it gets personal.
You cannot read Genesis and immediately take what it says at face value, it is hard to rationally accept it, that is, it is hard to comprehend the statements made as realistic when reading it without wearing the proper glasses, not glasses of religion.
If God has made us and not only that but made us in His Image, then He has designed us with enquiring minds.
The great strides made in science, thanks to God blessing us with remarkable intellect, should enable us to verify that God did make the Earth and that He then did see 'that it was good'.
And good for science.
Genesis is the base of Scripture.
If what is recorded in Genesis is false, the whole of the Bible is utterly undermined and in fact, the idea that God created us would then become the myth atheists believe it is.
I have read many books on theology, theories from Christians that try to gloss over the problem presented by science in that the Universe took a lot longer to come about than just a few days.
This is done, for example in theology, by inputting thousands of years between biblical chapters.
Ideas like this are useless, especially to science because the difference that needs to be bridged involves billions of years.
Any science book you might pick up will not mention God in any analysis relating to the start of the Universe anyway, simply because it would be unscientific to do so.
There is no religion in space.
On the other hand it is easy to find books from religion telling the story of how God 'Created' the Earth and did so in a mere six days.
Furthermore, science will guide you through evolutionary processes whereas religion will tell you that every creature was created and made to its own particular 'kind'.
Science will declare that our rocks are so old the Earth must have formed billions of years ago, whilst a creationist view in theology will state that our planet is extremely young, maybe only 6000 years old at best.
The differences are so vast that it is very challenging to deal with such widely differing views, unless of course you dismiss a main core belief, such as God or the main core research from science we have to hand.
Either way, if you dismiss one you can then move forward.
But what if this is too easy.
Too simple to use as a base for theology, too simple for science to ignore religion.
What if the truth of our origins can only be revealed by accepting the dynamics of both camps? Many books are in circulation under the banner of Creation though most, if not all of them, are individually selective.
They generally incorporate only certain aspects of the Creation Ideal.
In a refreshing change, we now have the Creation Dyamics papers, which have been developed to explore our roots [from God] in a far more detailed fashion, reflecting the knowledge we have gained and the revelations discovered from modern day research.
The articles go back to a starting point before the actual formation of our own Universe, which is an area where other creation discussions usually fear to tread.
In order to strike a chord of sense with an atheist, or even conduct a reasonable conversation about Creation with another Christian (who may be unable to grasp fully the concepts of our beginnings), then it would be softer and better in tune with today's modern world to talk more in terms of a theory.
In our case, a theory gleaned from the Genesis formula, of a God inspired Creation, which in its own right, established the appearance of humanity and everything else that we see about us.
This view of our origins remember is a very difficult image to explain, particularly when you are generally exchanging views with people who have absolutely no belief in God.
If you start off by saying Creation is a fact, without any proper explanation, you would be dismissed (at best) as being very unreasonable.
Remember we already supposedly have the proof of our origins through the Big Bang and the evolutionary models given by science.
These papers will try to focus on God's Great Work of Creation as a theory rather than as a fact.
This is not as a compromise to non-believers but as a platform to share so that we can approach the atheist or agnostic within a framework of rationale.
The remit of Creation Dynamics is to assist in unfurling the mysteries of our origins, provide a durable and authentic data stream of good information and to relate to all the incredible marvels and sheer odds of our existence.
Every issue will be packed with new information, new ideas and an abundance of thought provoking rational Creation theory.
We will start by looking at questions concerning why we are here and why did a Big Bang apparently occur.
We take a look into the world of the very small (quantum physics) which in turn leads us to establish three very basic principles, tenets fundamental to the concept of proper Creation.
Creation Dynamics are for anyone really, whatever age, believer or non-believer.
Our quest is to seek an answer to that one big burning question that can lay dormant at the back of our minds.
It's the one that asks, "How did we get here?" We do owe it to ourselves to find out.
Join us and let's see if we can.
Could we really have the answers to our existence? Well yes we can, absolutely, but a number of steps will have to be made and Creation Dynamics takes you through this.
There are hundreds of books on Creation and, alternatively, many about our progress from lower life forms, but none give the whole picture.
Scientists have done their best to explain our origins, but they normally just point us towards a study of evolution.
Religion of course points us generally in one direction too, and this is exclusively towards God.
Millions swear loyalty to God and millions on the other hand insist that evolution is absolutely true.
Many will actually try and merge these two theories.
We also have a good many scientists who believe in God as well as those that say they are agnostics.
There are a few people would you believe, who even think everything about us is an illusion! So quite a variety.
The idea of our creation being activated from an instant kind of Holy Word or Divine Order, rather than us appearing on Earth through the more secular reasoning of development over eons of time, means we have to go straight to the Book of Genesis.
Here we find (after the Earth was made) God quickly proceeded to Create life on the planet including, apparently, man and woman.
If so then when pray did He do this, after six days? The problem right at the start is in the alternative way we are taught, in a philosophy where science rules, which says the Earth is currently over 4 billion years old and it took millions of years to create it from interstellar debris in the first place.
The best that can be said is that there is a misprint in Genesis and that it should say six million years not six days.
However, there's not any misprint, it is six days.
So how? Also, the early life of the Earth had a heavy atmosphere that was very different to what it is today.
Storms raged with a far greater violence than any we experience now, generating massive amounts of electricity, which took the form of mega-lightning bolts.
The super-charged bolts thrust quite easily through the tempestuous gaseous clouds of the time, piercing the unruly primordial seas.
These bolts of awesome raw power it is believed might have been able to somehow create amino acids the basic chemicals of life, during this furious battering of Earth's early oceans.
And then it is said, with all the chemicals of life established, what need of God? This scientific explanation to the start of life on Earth though, begs as many questions as those that spring to mind when we are told that God created everything in a few days.
Amongst the queries is the pertinent question of how the amino acids, assuming for a moment that they were indeed triggered by lightning, suddenly became able to replicate themselves.
The key to life on Earth, according to the scientists, is that these basic chemicals developed the ability to copy each other and therefore create a life form, albeit only some sort of tiny bacteria.
How did they get this ability? No one knows how the chemicals were able to suddenly replicate.
And even if this was so, why is the Earth not just covered with bacteria today and nothing else.
Why would bacteria change? The enigma we find is that if life did develop like this anyway, then perhaps it was God who sparked of the first replication processes (otherwise why did it start) but if you believe in Him, He says He didn't do it this way.
Thank goodness then for Creation Dynamics! Before looking at life itself, we have to really secure the reasons for the existence of planet Earth upon which said life could live in the first place.
This drags us away from the book of Genesis onto the subject which many take as the starting point for the creation of our Universe; the Big Bang.
The idea of a Big Bang occurring out of completely nothing is a very popularly held view.
What many people fail to realize is that the Big Bang would have been more like a Big Little Bang.
Even after the onset of our Universe from such an event, our new cosmos would have been pretty small in it's early stages.
Some think there was not even any noise.
Some think there were not any noise and neither any light.
If there was no light or noise then 'Big Bang' seems to be a pretty odd name for it, but as it is such a common term we will stick to it.
We live on what seems to be a pretty innocuous planet on the outer rim of a Galaxy we call the Milky Way, in a Universe that's got millions of other Galaxies.
The Earth though is unbelievably perfectly placed by being in the outer part of the Milky Way and it is also at the perfect size and has the perfect angle and has the perfect sized moon and is at the most perfect distance from the Sun.
There are many other kinds of perfection regarding the Earth too, such as its magnetic field, the seasons, the size of our Sun and so on.
By the way this is all the word of science.
Somehow then, in someway, the Earth has been made by a huge collection of random chances or God has made it.
Either way, without all these perfect conditions, life would not have appeared, even if just one of the perfect conditions were absent.
And not only that, but we have complex living beings on this planet, which needs its own set of perfect situations so as to be able to be evolved and sustained.
Or of course, God made all the life forms.
Probably 99% of the population has believed without batting an eyelid that we were here due to the Will of God.
However in the last couple of centuries this percentage has reduced a bit, which is natural really when you think about it properly, because diversification generally does go hand in hand with development.
As new theories about our origins have been explained to us, we have had a dilution of emphasis over what was just the one accepted view.
Where everyone would once of said we came from God, nowadays there is a plethora of ideas that jostle for supremacy over the reasons for our beginnings.
Many think we are here due to God and others believe we are here through chance.
Either way, we are here and therefore we are clearly the result of something having happened beforehand because as a fact, we can see ourselves and we know we exist.
If you ever decide to make enquiries into our beginnings, at a library for example, it becomes quickly apparent that we seem to have all the answers relating to our origins anyway.
These answers tend to change over the years, as our data becomes richer in technique and accuracy.
On the whole though the answers are indeed available, but exclusively from the domain of science.
References about God will probably only be found in a small corner of the library and will be lingering under the banner of religion.
There is no way that you will find books on God within a section relating to our origins.
Those spaces will be filled with books on the Big Bang and other like-minded theories authored by the leading professors of science.
It is easy to come to the conclusion, whether we like it or not, that the nineteenth century began with an assumption that everything existing was made by God, which changed to a mixed consensus during the twentieth century that everything was probably made by God, to the latest view that everything possibly was made by God.
We are even at a more advanced stage in some countries where many people believe that God made nothing.
These fast growing viewpoints, especially the latter, create some extremely difficult and awkward obstacles for any Christian or any religious person for that matter, to overcome during any discussions with atheists who tend to seize upon scientific information to try and embarrass and to show up perceived weaknesses in the arguments for God and the desire to believe in God.
Twin-Theories Scientific research into our origins has been honed, tested, simulated, explored, dissected, diagnosed and reviewed.
This deep analysis has been on-going for many years and its goal is to seek to thread a pattern and a path throughout the ages of the cosmos, which in turn will illuminate a galactic guide if you like, for all of our natural observations and to thus develop enough visual accuracy to align us up with particular theories about our origins that can be assumed to be as near to proper factual sense as possible.
And primary to this attainment is an origins-theory, already so strongly entrenched in scientific thought that it's being practically regarded as completely true.
This origins-theory has at its core an assumption of an event commonly called the Big Bang.
It was this Big Bang that activated the first tick of the cosmic clock, showering New Space with all the matter required to sustain a New Universe.
The origins-theory does not in itself exclusively do away with God, but it is inexorably linked to one, which does, a twin-theory that champions the various evolutionary mechanisms within every species.
When both theories are combined then this particularly gives the whole parameter a power that becomes pretty awesome, enough anyway to obliterate the need for God.
The strong co-operative twin, which is in effect a life-theory, relates to what happened when life appeared on Earth and how a series of biological and chemical sequences within early living tissue caused favourable alterations over long time periods to in turn create constructive developments in replicating organisms and thus encourage an inevitable progression towards more complex creatures.
The twin-theories are the cornerstone for scientific debate into the rise of humanity.
Our existence is a natural result of an unfurling Universe self-assembling itself within proven chemical and mathematical frameworks consistent with the laws of physics and scientific formulae.
This, at least at first sight, is the images, thoughts and findings of the highest minds of our societies over the last century or two.
And so then, according to many places of learning, these theories are now facts.
God becomes nothing more than a made-up supernatural myth.
And yet...
It is uncanny and a little amazing that no matter what scientific discoveries are made, millions (perhaps billions) still believe that God and God alone is responsible for our existence.
One day our great scientific research might bring us around full-circle and right back to a Godidit conclusion.
What goes around comes around.
Our history is littered with a 'humans know best' attitude.
We thought the sun went round the Earth - wrong.
We thought the Earth was flat (despite what the Bible was telling us), again we were wrong.
We thought the Universe was expanding and now we don't, so again we now agree with the teachings of ancient Scripture! We think we can one-day travel to the distant stars.
Almost certainly wrong.
Education of our origins is based so strongly on the twin-theories we could easily take them as the truth of our reality.
On the face of it, this is as it should be; there is a high amount of evidence in support of these explanations and they are generally taught as factual accounts of our origins at schools in almost every country.
Yet there are doubts.
Quite why we should doubt the findings of great men and women of science is intriguing, but many do.
Scientists are good, honest, caring and decent human beings, who display serious quality integrity and basically just tell us what they have found through their observations, their testing and experiments.
So we should trust them.
And we do.
Except for two areas, two fields where we have an innate curiosity of spirit that nurtures seeds of doubt about whether they have all their data tied up correctly.
These areas happen to be at the heart of the twin-theories presented to us by science as being fact.
Millions of people are not comfortable with either the origins-theory or the life-theory and more often than not people are not at ease with the both of them.
That's just tough though as it is, say scientists, not the fault of the research done if the truth seems a bit unpalatable to God-believers.
However, and this is where we dig a little deeper, there are millions of people who, though not comfortable with the twin-theories, don't really mind them being taught providing that they are highlighted as only having theoretical status.
Make a note of this and listen.
Next time you hear a scientist speak on these subjects see how much emphasis is put on either theory as being just that, a theory.
No, they are portrayed quite unashamedly as pure facts.
So let's outline briefly on how the first theory goes.
Thirteen billion years ago (give or take a month) there was a huge explosion that suddenly occurred in our Universe; well it wasn't exactly a Universe at this stage because there was only a sort of invisible realm where there was nothing, not only nothing but also nowhere! Hard to imagine but this is what we would have, no space, no time, not even any anywhere.
Perhaps there was so much nothing that this in itself caused the Big Bang.
Well, it is often said that too much of something is bad for you; perhaps too much nothing is as well! In the dark void of emptiness came a sudden bewildering explosion of material, an eruption that not only came from nothing but which started everything off too, including credible space and the concept of real time, producing an outpouring of a quite incredible alliance of cosmic blueprints, mathematically impeccable formulae and a multitude of substances that all worked together simultaneously and harmoniously so that the mix would eventually result in the making of the Universe as we know it today.
There also had to be a slender positive degree of favour toward physical matter over anti-matter or the Big Bang would have just destroyed itself leaving a state of nothing again.
Cosmologists declare the Big Bang was an incredible event but this does not really do it justice.
It would be fairer to say the Big Bang was billions and billions of incredible simultaneous events, multiplied by billions and billions of incredible random chances all multiplied some billions of billions of times over.
This is the only way to come close to describing the production of an event that delivered all the building blocks needed to create and sustain a Universe; from what was previously nothing.
For a moment, if you take away just how incredible it would have been for this to happen and just accept the Big Bang as a fact, then it makes great reading and viewing for textbooks, videos and television.
It is a nice, sort of simple way of explaining the beginnings of our Universe.
Of course lots of fantastic special effects can be used to dramatically impress a mark upon our minds.
However, before considering a Big Bang at all, we should try and address what would have been in place before the Big Bang or what forces would have been required to make it happen, if it happened at all.
On the face of it we seem to have, as Christians, the Genesis account as an alternative to the Big Bang, although don't be too sure - just yet.
Then even here we could ask the question as to what was before Genesis.
Either way, something caused the Big Bang or something caused God.
New Testament As with any Christian analysis about anything, we always must have our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ at the center of debates so when seeking revelation to these great-unanswered questions of our origins, we start not at Genesis, but from the New Testament.
We need to be fully aware and full of strong conviction in the writings of the New Testament before embarking on a journey that is by nature and en-route, fraught with many dangerous debating swords of unbelief.
Many strong and poisonous attacks will come from all sides and your defences will be shattered quickly if you try to cover the Genesis account of our Creation without durable answers and thought out responses.
There is a war going on for the supremacy of our psyche.
If you say to a scientist that the world was created in seven days you will be shot down rapidly and left to whimper away with only a bruised faith (probably the size of a grain of mustard seed) to console you.
If you are tempted to lock horns with a palaeontologist over the merits of whether we have evolved from animals you could be faced with the same outcome.
And when we speak of God, the charge will be levied that by starting off with God as a pre-condition to research, then we are simply going to try to make the evidence fit in with the Bible and if it doesn't then we will just discard those facts, which will result in an unbalanced view and a distortion of reality.
This is why we have to look at things from a God perspective by way of a theory, a theory of Creation.
In other words if God does exist, if, then this is how the formation of our Earth and Universe may have developed.
Let us turn then to our Lord and make sure we have a firm grasp of our beliefs, so that we have strength and the ammunition to deal with situations which may be uncomfortable.
For it is a fact of today's life that whilst there are many God fearing peoples around the world, there are also many that deem the Bible and other related Scriptures to be nothing but collections of dreamt up stories or fables, which are of no relevance in today's modern society.
You will even come across those that think Jesus Christ is Himself a myth not only as a Divine Person, but also even as a normal man.
So it is clear that problems in the understanding of the Bible can hit fairly quickly in the subject matter of Creation, so we need to take care.
Although there are many good books in circulation that can help us grasp the exact meanings of Scriptural passages, the efforts of Creation News, made through the preference of a Theory Of Creation, is to look solely through the eyes of origin-seekers.
We do this by looking at the information in Genesis and the Dynamics of Creation.