Imagine No Creator

Thank you for your website it has definantly increased my knowledge of God and as well as other things.

I do have a question for Jason Lisle. In some of your articles that I have read (feedback) I read supossed arguements of atheists. The arguement is directed towards why laws of logic exist and the uniformity of the universe. One of the arguments went as, ‘The uniformity of the universe is a property of the universe.’

This is obviously an assumption as you also said. But lets look at this in another way.

Why do we have to account for this uniformity? What is the purpose of searching for the reason behind it? Assume a hypothetical universe with stable laws of logic without a creator. Now you might that this can not be rational because you are ‘borrowing’ the laws of logic from the Christian worldview. But the Christian worldview is an assumption (presupposition) also. So wouldnt it be possible to have that hypothetical universe? So wouldnt isnt it irational to say ‘borrowing’?

—L.I., U.S.

Thanks for the positive feedback, and I’m happy to answer your follow-up question: why do we have to account for uniformity? The answer is this: in order to be rational. The mark of rationality is to have a good reason for what we believe. And remember, it is biblical to have a reason for what we believe (1 Peter 3:15). The two key forms of irrationality are inconsistency and arbitrariness (not having a reason). You can imagine that when an evolutionist asked why I believe in creation if I replied, “Oh, there’s no reason—it’s just true,” then he would rightly point out that this is arbitrary and irrational. And yet, evolutionists do not have a good reason (on their own professed worldview) for their belief in uniformity—or for laws of logic. They are, therefore, being irrational. Biblical creation is the only rational position because it alone provides a reason for those things we take for granted—like uniformity and laws of logic.

It is fine to pose a hypothetical universe with stability and laws of logic. But those things would still need to be justified. How could we possibly know that the laws of logic are invariant (do not change with time), and not that they simply have not changed so far? And why does the material universe feel compelled to obey immaterial laws? How would we know that the laws are truly universal (applying everywhere) and invariant? The biblical creationist can answer these questions by pointing to God’s special revelation, but these questions are simply not answerable apart from a biblical worldview. So, the evolutionist is still left without a good reason for why he believes in laws of logic, why they have the properties they do, and why the physical universe does not violate them. He is indeed “borrowing” from Christianity.

The Christian worldview is not a mere assumption. It is the worldview that makes knowledge possible (Proverbs 1:7; Colossians 2:3). It alone provides the justification for those things we need for reasoning—such as laws of logic and uniformity. And that is a pretty good reason to believe in Christianity. Even presuppositions require a reason; it’s just that the reason is provided after the fact in the case of a presupposition. In summary, a good reason to believe in the Christian worldview is that without it, we couldn’t reason at all.

God bless,

Dr. Jason Lisle