Read Nothing Created Everything: The Scientific Impossibility of Atheistic Evolution for Free Online Page B

Washington to Islamabad.
     
    But then Wilson began to think, and the catalyst that made him think was the same one that started my brain working when I was twenty-one years old. The reality of death is a massive elephant in the room under and around which this unthinking world walks. A foot coming down full force on friends and loved ones tends to remind us that death is a level playing field. I could see the elephant and knew that it was just a matter of time for the foot to fall. Wilson continued:
    Watching a whole cluster of friends, and my own mother, die over quite a short space of time convinced me that purely materialist “explanations” for our mysterious human existence simply won’t do—on an intellectual level. The phenomenon of language alone should give us pause. A materialist Darwinian was having dinner with me a few years ago and we laughingly alluded to how, as years go by, one forgets names. Eager, as committed Darwinians often are, to testify on any occasion, my friend asserted: “It is because when we were simply anthropoid apes, there was no need to distinguish between one another by giving names.” This creedal confession struck me as just as superstitious as believing in the historicity of Noah’s Ark. More so, really.
     
    Creation cannot be divorced from a Creator. Its existence is testimony to Him who brought it into existence. Yet the professing atheist “suppresses the truth in unrighteousness.” 3 He denies the axiomatic. Interestingly, it was the “evolution” of language that spoke to Wilson about God:
    Do materialists really think that language just “evolved,” like finches’ beaks, or have they simply never thought about the matter rationally? Where’s the evidence? How could it come about that human beings all agreed that particular grunts carried particular connotations? How could it have come about that groups of anthropoid apes developed the amazing morphological complexity of a single sentence, let alone the whole grammatical mystery which has engaged Chomsky and others in our lifetime and linguists for time out of mind? No, the existence of language is one of the many phenomena—of which love and music are the two strongest —which suggest that human beings are very much more than collections of meat. They convince me that we are spiritual beings, and that the religion of the incarnation, asserting that God made humanity in His image, and continually restores humanity in His image, is simply true. As a working blueprint for life, as a template against which to measure experience, it fits.
    When I think about atheist friends, including my father, they seem to me like people who have no ear for music, or who have never been in love. It is not that (as they believe) they have rumbled the tremendous fraud of religion— prophets do that in every generation. Rather, these unbelievers are simply missing out on something that is not difficult to grasp. Perhaps it is too obvious to understand; obvious, as lovers feel it was obvious that they should have come together, or obvious as the final resolution of a fugue.
     
T HE S ECRET P LAN
     
    My wife and I watched an old black-and-white version of Charles Dickens’s
A Tale of Two Cities
, and I was moved to a point of tears. The story is set during the French Revolution and is abouta young lawyer named Sydney Carton who loses the woman he loves to another man. Through a series of circumstances the woman’s husband is awaiting the
guillotine
, and the lawyer gets into the prison, takes his place, and is executed, leaving the husband to go free and be with the one he loves.
    Sadly, the movie dropped the fact that the hero was converted to Christianity during the last few days of his life, repeating the words of Jesus, “I am the resurrection and the life.” In fact, resurrection is the dominant theme of the final part of the novel, but not in the movie. The husband is rescued at the last moment and recalled to life; Carton