1. Is there a God?
-You cannot test for God in a science lab. You can study His miracles, but you cannot duplicate them in a lab, so you cannot scientifically prove supernatural activity. You can examine His creation, noting the incredible attention to detail, the vastness of the universe, the perfect conditions on our planet to support life, and the mind-boggling intricacy of the human body and brain.
-You could request that God show Himself to His creation to prove His existence. He has already done so. He performed more miracles than his biographers could write down. The Apostle John ended his gospel account with these words: “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that have been written.” (John 21:25) He proclaimed Himself to be God, and was arrested by the Jews for His blasphemy for claiming to be God, and executed by the Romans for claiming to be King.
-
2. How did life appear on this planet, and how did it come to be as we now experience it? Without an acknowledgement of God, there are basically two answers to this question:
a. Life evolved on this planet because a long chain of random events led to the life-sustaining conditions on earth. Living single-celled organisms emerged from a primordial soup of non-living substances, which then evolved into more complex organisms over the course of a few million years. Accidental genetic mutations enabled the specimens with more viable traits to survive and leave their DNA for the future, a process called natural selection. The trouble with this theory is that it defies the laws of physics. Order does not come from chaos without purposeful energy being added to the system. No matter how many trillions or gazillion years this evolution is granted, genetic mutations are almost always harmful to the specimen. Today, in modern laboratories, scientists have been studying genetics for decades. The more they learn, the more they discover how much is still unknown. Altering a species by means of genetic engineering takes a great deal of knowledge, and years of experimentation. Also – keep in mind that scientists cannot create the building blocks of life. They have to use materials like eggs and sperm, which just happen to have evolved by random chance.
-I am baffled by the illogical notions that people will accept as scientific fact. My biology professor in university told us that the reason we have pubic hair is because our ancestors used it as a sign that a particular individual was mature enough to mate with. Other members of the class just accepted this as fact because our professor told us it was so. I was inwardly screaming: “That’s not a scientific fact – it can’t be known by the Scientific Method, which this same professor taught. (I kept quiet until after class, then I asked the esteemed professor if I could address the class and present the Creation account. He told me that I would have to take another class – Ethics in Biology, but I had no room in my schedule – nor any inclination to take another class taught by this professor.)
This professor also told us that a modern example of continuing evolution is that more people are being born without wisdom teeth. He said that since our diet is softer, we don’t need as many teeth. How do our genes decide when a trait is no longer needed? It’s not like prospective mates check each other’s teeth to see how evolved they are. Proponents of the theory of evolution seem to be assuming that there is some kind of intelligence behind these mutations.
b. The scientists who have finally realized that evolution could not possibly account for the trade up from one celled organisms to homo sapiens have acknowledged that there had to have been some sort of intelligent design. This answer sounds more logical than evolution, until one asks the question “who?” What are the possibilities, besides God? Aliens? Some sort of force? Is it benevolent, or is the intelligent designer planning to come back to harvest the humans that they seeded here to take back to their home planet for slave labour or a food source? Seems to me that the intelligent design theory asks more questions than it answers.
-
3. Is there an afterlife?
I have heard literally hundreds of Christian testimonies about how and why they turned to Christ, and only a few of these mentioned that their main motivation was fear of hell. Yet non-Christians keep assuming that Christians are all living in constant fear of hell fire. Yes – the hope of heaven in the next life is a great comfort when loved ones die, and it keeps us going through the trials of this life. And, yes, our drive to lead others to Christ is strongly motivated by the threat of hell. I believe that hell is a literal place of punishment for those who have been offered the choice of life with God or death without Him, and have made the choice of death without God. I would not wish anyone to go to hell. Christ would rather die than see anyone go to hell.
I do not live in fear, and I do not see my faith as only fire insurance for the afterlife. The relationship of Christians with our God is love. I don’t walk around on eggshells, terrified of offending God. I am sure of my salvation. The truth really does set us free – it is sin that enslaves, keeping people in bondage to addictions and desires.
Think of it this way: if I am wrong, and there is no heaven or hell after this life – I have lost nothing. My life has not been negatively affected by my decision to live a Christian life. But if you are wrong, and there is an afterlife, has your life lived without God been worth it?

You composed this so well. Thank you!
Well presented but these questions have different answers for each person.
Interesting thought. I agree with PR Mace, each person may have different answer.
So true. Scientists are the new priests whose word must be taken without question.
i loved this article. You talk some pretty complex issues in an enjoyable and easy to read manner.
Okay first of all why do creationists not understand what random means? If lightning strikes the dried out underbrush in forest in California causing a forest fire it is no more random than a farmer using controlled burns to clear parts of the forest to make way for more crops. The absence of conscious thought does not make something random both instances are subject to the laws of cause and effect. Also the second law of thermodynamics say’s absolutely nothing about “purposeful” energy it refers to the increased state of entropy in an enclosed system which the earth is not.