First and foremost, I give all glory and honour to God Almighty, the source of all wisdom, truth, and understanding. Without Him, nothing makes sense, and without His grace, this book would never have been written. He is the Author of reality, the Sustainer of all things, and the One who has called us to know Him through Jesus Christ. May this work serve to magnify His name and expose the folly of those who deny Him.

To my wife, my greatest blessing and most steadfast supporter—thank you for your love, patience, and encouragement through every step of this journey. Your unwavering faith and kindness have strengthened me in ways words cannot express.

To my son, who inspires me to think deeply and never stop learning—you are a gift from God, and I pray that you always stand firm in the truth of Christ, no matter how loud the world shouts its lies.

To my sister and mother, who have been constant sources of love, wisdom, and encouragement. Your prayers, support, and belief in me have carried me through more challenges than I can count.

To my friends, both near and far, who have generously given their time, resources, and thoughtful critique—thank you. Your encouragement fuels my perseverance, and your willingness to challenge, refine, and sharpen my thinking is invaluable. Iron sharpens iron, and I am grateful for each of you.

And finally, to those who love truth and seek it boldly—this book is for you. May it equip you, encourage you, and strengthen your faith in the One who is Truth Himself.

Soli Deo Gloria.

Chapter 1 BREAKING NEWS: LIFE JUST RANDOMLY HAPPENED!

Scientists are now telling us that life.—yes, actual, breathing, thinking, meme-making life—just poofed into existe nce from a lucky chemical soup billions of years ago!

Let’s get this straight: One day, there was a puddle. That puddle was full of chemicals. And then, through a totally unexplained, never-before-seen, but totally real process. BAM!—life happened! (and here we are, using WiFi to debate it).

But Wait… What is abiogenesis?

Abiogenesis is the idea that life arose spontaneously from non-living chemicals without any intelligent guidance. According to this theory, at some point in Earth’s early history, basic chemicals somehow organized themselves into complex molecules, which then somehow formed self-replicating structures, which somehow became the first primitive cells. (Notice how "somehow" keeps showing up? Yeah, that’s a problem.)

This means that at one point, there were just chemicals, and the next moment. BOOM!—life began. No blueprints. No programmer. No intelligence. Just raw, mindless physics magically making life happen.

But here’s the problem…

"Trust the Science" (Even If It’s Not Science)

Now, before you ask, “Has this ever been observed?”—NO. Of course not. Silly you, science doesn’t work like that anymore! Who needs observation when you have imagination?

abiogenesis has been tested in labs for decades (Bro. Scientist, we see you and has failed every single time.

But it must have happened because we’re here. (Circular reasoning at its finest! What's more no scientist ever saw it. Imagine the same guy demanding, demanding seeing and believing. As if he sees his own memory in his closet?

And let’s not forget—if you doubt it, you just don’t understand science!

Why Can’t abiogenesis Be Observed in a Lab?

If abiogenesis really happened naturally on early Earth, then we should be able to recreate it in controlled laboratory conditions, right? Well… here’s why that never works:

Time Constraints – Evolutionary scientists claim it took millions or billions of years for life to appear. Unfortunately, no scientist has that kind of patience. Now ask your self can these millions of years be observed? Yet, the atheist in the name of science wants us to believe this as science. But at the same time claiming that he as an atheist believes only what is observed. Wow! If one has to lie straight and fool people.

We cant see it today because, Perfect Conditions Are Missing (Take Note: this perfect condition assumes order to produce an output. But atheist claims its chance, that is randomness produced the output)– The early Earth supposedly had just the right mix of heat, lightning, chemical soups, and magic to make abiogenesis happen. Yet, when scientists try to replicate those conditions, all they get is a mess of chemicals and zero life. Yet we have to believe this unobserved reality just because our all wise atheist says it. But don't forget this guy will believe only what he sees. Seeing and believing is his rule.

Intelligent Intervention (Atheist Scientist not God)– Any lab experiment trying to "create life" is run by highly intelligent scientists adjusting variables, meaning it's not "natural" but guided. If intelligence is required to create life in a lab, then how did it happen without intelligence by random chance billions of years ago?

Self-Replication Is a Mystery – Even if you somehow get complex molecules to form, they still have to start copying themselves for life to continue. No one has ever demonstrated how mindless chemistry makes molecules start self-replicating without already having a functioning system in place.

So basically, abiogenesis cannot be observed in a lab because we can’t make it happen, and when scientists do try, they need intelligent guidance, which contradicts the whole point.

SCIENCE SAYS: "TRUST US, IT'S ALL RANDOM!"

Alright, ladies and gentlemen, gather 'round for today’s "Totally Scientific" thought experiment!

So, we’re told that life, the universe, and everything is just one big cosmic oopsie-daisy—a random, unguided accident where dirt magically turned into brains and bacteria worked really, really hard to turn into elephants. (A motivational story, really!)

But here’s the kicker: The very same scientists who preach "RANDOMNESS DID IT!" are the same people who expect their experiments to work every single time.

"Uniformity? Pffts, Who Needs That?"

Let’s talk about the "Uniformity in Nature" Problem (or what I like to call "Why Atheist Scientists Secretly Love God but Won’t Admit It.")

You see, these same people go to work every day, walk into a lab, and expect:

Gravity to still be gravity. (No floating test tubes, please.) but, wait! they want us to believe in randomness.

Atoms to behave like, well… atoms. (Because exploding labs are bad.)

Chemicals to react exactly the same way they did yesterday. (Science only works if it’s repeatable!)

Do you see the irony here?

These guys don’t step into the lab thinking, “Oh boy, I sure hope bacteria evolved into an elephant overnight!” No, they expect order, predictability, and structure. — things that randomness could never produce.

But when it comes to the origin of life? Suddenly, it’s: randomness not uniformity of nature

"It was all just chaos, bro. Trust me. Just give us more grant money."

And here’s the best part: They need you to believe this nonsense, so they can keep selling it to you in textbooks, documentaries, and cool CGI videos of fish walking on land.

Why Doesn't Gravity Take a Day Off?

Let’s really push this "randomness" thing to its limits:

1. Why doesn’t gravity just decide to turn off on Tuesdays? (Seriously, I could use the weight loss.)

Why don’t atoms just wake up one morning and go, "Nah, I’m tired of being an atom. I think I’ll be a unicorn today!"

If randomness is king, why do we expect science to even make sense?

If everything is just the accidental byproduct of a meaningless explosion, why do we live in a world of perfect mathematical precision, logical structure, and repeatable experiments?

The truth? Because the universe was designed, not random.

They Trust Regularity for grant money. But Preach Randomness! for you to buy their books. They want to be rich on both ends. We who learn from them are real fools.

Atheist scientists depend on the uniformity of nature to keep their jobs, publish their papers, and make money.

But when it comes to explaining how the universe got here, suddenly it's "RANDOM CHANCE, GUYS! JUST BELIEVE!"

They don’t trust randomness when mixing chemicals.

They don’t trust randomness when building rockets.

They don’t trust randomness when diagnosing diseases.

But when it comes to where life and intelligence came from—suddenly, they want you to believe pure, unguided chaos made all of this happen.

Translation: “Shut up and believe the randomness, so we can keep making money.”

The Bible Had It Right the Whole Time

While they’re busy selling you fairy tales, the Bible has had the answer all along:

Genesis 1:1 – “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” (Not randomness, but a Creator.)

Colossians 1:16-17 – "By Him all things were created... and in Him all things hold together." (That includes gravity, atoms, and your brain.)

Hebrews 1:3 – "He upholds the universe by the word of His power." (That’s why your coffee cup isn’t floating away right now.

Meanwhile, "pseudo-science atheist" says: "One day, a lightning bolt hit a puddle and made you."

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts

So, let’s sum it up:

Science DEPENDS on order, predictability, and laws that never change.

Evolutionary scientists PREACH that everything started by random chaos.

But they still need uniformity to keep their jobs and get taxpayers grant money.

And they want YOU to believe randomness so they can sell their nonsense through their books.

So, tell me again—who’s really "trusting this kind of science"? to make atheist rich.

If you trust order, laws, and logic… guess what? You just admitted the universe was designed.

But don’t worry, the atheists will be back tomorrow, using uniform scientific laws to prove randomness caused everything… while cashing in their research grants by believing in order, but selling us their books based on randomness, so that they can become rich. and making us fools who believe them. So, what do you think, is it unseen randomness or observed order and design?

________________________________________________

Chapter 2 BREAKING NEWS: BACTERIA JUST DECIDED TO BECOME AN ELEPHANT!

Alright folks, gather ‘round for today’s episode of "Science Says So!" Today’s headline?

BACTERIA FINALLY TIRED OF BEING SINGLE AND DECIDED TO TURN INTO GIRAFFES!

Yes, you heard that right. Single-celled organisms (tiny little bacteria, those microscopic specks of life that don’t even have a nucleus) apparently held a secret evolutionary board meeting and declared:

"Hey guys, being a blob of goop is getting old. Let's evolve into something cooler—like mammals with lungs, livers, and legs!"

And before you ask, “Has anyone ever seen this happen?”—the answer is a big fat NO. Of course not! You silly, silly person! Evolution isn’t something you observe, it’s something you imagine.

"Just Believe It, Bro" – The Multicellular Fairy Tale

Now, let’s walk through the official science-approved bedtime story:

Once upon a time, a lonely little bacterium (a unicellular organism) got bored.
Instead of dying alone, it decided to cling to its friends, and somehow (through a totally unguided, directionless, and magical process) it evolved into a multicellular organism!
These tiny blobs then randomly decided to differentiate (meaning, some cells just magically "knew" to become livers, others became brains, and others built digestive tracts—without any guiding intelligence).
"No problem!" said the bacteria. "We’ll just wait a few billion years and hope it all works out!"

And voilà! That’s how you got giraffes, elephants, and your friendly neighborhood atheist microbiologist telling you to “just trust the process.”

But wait... When has randomness ever produced order?

Why We Should "Trust the Science" (Even If It’s Never Been Observed!)

Now, before you start asking annoying little questions like, “Can we recreate this in a lab?”—let me save you the trouble. The answer is:

NO. Stop asking. That’s not how science works anymore!

Lab Experiments? FAIL.
Scientists have spent decades trying to get unicellular organisms to evolve into multicellular ones. The result? Still single-celled. (Guess those bacteria just aren't in the mood.)

Fossil Record? MISSING.
There’s no clear fossil evidence of how life magically transitioned from single-celled bacteria to complex life. But don’t worry—they promise to find proof someday! (Any day now… just wait.)

Random Mutations? Not Helping.
Mutations are supposed to be the superheroes of evolution. They’re supposedly what made dinosaurs turn into birds and monkeys into professors. The problem?

Mutations don’t create new functional systems. Instead, they break things. Ever seen a fish grow wings and fly? No? Me neither.

But hey, it must have happened, because otherwise, we’d have to admit that life was designed— and we can’t have that now, can we?

SCIENCE SAYS: "RANDOMNESS CREATED ORDER!"

Alright, let’s put this idea to the test:

When was the last time spilling alphabet soup created a dictionary?
If I throw LEGO bricks in the air, will they randomly assemble into a working spaceship?
If we wait long enough, will my Roomba evolve into a Tesla?

If randomness is the ultimate cause of order, why don’t we see it happening anywhere?

And yet, scientists walk into their labs every day expecting...

Cells to function the same way today as they did yesterday.
Biological laws to remain consistent.
Their funding checks to clear.

But when it comes to explaining the origin of life, suddenly, order came from complete chaos?

If Evolution Is True, Why Is Nature So Predictable?

Atheist scientists depend on the uniformity of nature (the idea that the laws of physics and biology remain constant), yet their entire worldview is based on random chaos magically turning into order.

Let’s break it down:

They expect gravity to always work, but they preach random chance as the ultimate law of the universe.
They expect DNA to replicate accurately, but they teach that random mutations built everything.
They expect logical consistency in research papers, but they insist thoughts are just neuron firings in a meaningless universe.

So which is it? Randomness or order? Because you can’t run experiments based on order and then tell us that random chance created everything.

The Bible Had It Right The Whole Time

While these scientists are busy making TikTok videos of fish growing legs, the Bible had the truth from the very start:

Genesis 1:21 – "So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves… according to their kinds." (No magic bacteria required!)
Colossians 1:17 – "He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." (That includes why science actually works.)
Psalm 104:24 – "O Lord, how manifold are Your works! In wisdom You have made them all." (Not randomness, but wisdom.)

Meanwhile, Science says:

"Bro, just trust us. One day, a bacteria got bored and decided to become a dinosaur."

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts: Who’s Really Trusting Science?

Let’s sum this up:

Science depends on order, laws, and logic.
Evolutionary scientists preach randomness, chaos, and chance.
But they need order to get paid.

And they need YOU to believe randomness so they can sell you textbooks, documentaries, and research papers that say nothing.

So tell me again—who’s really trusting “science” here?

If you trust laws, structure, and consistency, guess what?

You just admitted the universe was designed.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using predictable scientific laws to prove randomness made everything… while cashing their grant checks.

________________________________________________

Chapter 3 BREAKING NEWS: DNA JUST WROTE ITSELF!

Scientists have just announced the greatest discovery in history:

A fully functioning, self-replicating, highly structured genetic code just poofed into existence—no coder, no programmer, no instruction manual, and certainly no intelligence required!

Yep, folks, you are the product of accidental letters magically arranging themselves into a meaningful language, just like a monkey banging on a keyboard and randomly typing out an entire Shakespearean play.

Let’s Break It Down (Because "Science" Won’t)

Step 1: The Totally Scientific Fairy Tale

Here’s how the “experts” explain it:

A bunch of dumb, lifeless chemicals were floating in some cosmic soup (an imaginary, never-observed pool of magical goo).
Then, through an unexplained, never-before-seen, but totally real process—BAM!
A fully functional, self-replicating genetic code suddenly appeared!
And of course, all of this happened without a guiding intelligence, because randomness always creates order, right?

Before you ask "Has anyone ever seen this happen?"—the answer is: NO.

But don’t worry! That doesn’t matter! What really matters is that we all nod our heads, say “Science says so!”, and pretend this is actual science.

"Just Trust the Science" (Even If It’s Not Science)

Now, let’s address those annoying little questions that skeptics love asking:

Observed in a Lab? NEVER. No one has ever seen raw chemicals assemble themselves into a self-replicating language—not in nature, not in a lab, not even in an atheist’s imagination.

Logical Explanation? NONE. But hey, if you doubt it, you just “don’t understand science”.

Scientific Papers? FULL OF SPECULATION. But don’t worry, they promise they’ll figure it out someday—right after they get more grant money.

What Even IS a Genetic Code?

Now, let’s take a closer look at what DNA actually is, since some people seem to think it’s just a lucky accident:

DNA is a highly structured, information-driven language—like computer code, but infinitely more advanced.
It follows rules, syntax, and grammar (yes, just like English or math—except more precise).
It contains complete instructions to build and operate every single cell in your body.
It has built-in error-correction mechanisms to prevent mistakes in copying (because even DNA knows that typos are bad).
It stores information more efficiently than any human-made technology—sorry, Google, you’re outclassed.

So let’s ask a simple question: Did it happen? SCIENCE SAYS: "IT JUST HAPPENED, BRO!"

Alright, let’s have some fun with a Totally Scientific Thought Experiment:

Alright, folks, let’s put this brilliant idea to the test with a real-world analogy:

Imagine you walk into your kitchen one morning, and you see your toaster sitting on the counter. Now, you leave it alone for a few billion years (because, you know, time magically fixes everything).

One day, you walk back in, and BOOM! Your toaster spontaneously evolved into Iron Man.

Yes, it grew wires, circuits, a nuclear reactor, AI intelligence, and jet thrusters—all by random chance!

HOW DID THIS HAPPEN? ACCORDING TO SCIENCE:

First, some random screws and metal pieces accidentally fell into the right shape.
Then, some unguided electrical sparks created a motherboard with a perfect operating system (completely bug-free, of course).
Over millions of years, the toaster naturally selected the most useful parts to develop a fully functional exosuit (because survival of the fittest, right?).
One day, the final piece of software just wrote itself, and your brand-new Iron Man suit booted up, complete with a working AI, self-repair systems, and Bluetooth.

CONGRATULATIONS! YOU JUST WITNESSED THE "MIRACLE OF RANDOM EVOLUTION!"

Oh, wait—what’s that? You’re saying that’s completely ridiculous?

So is the idea that a bunch of mindless, lifeless chemicals magically assembled themselves into a fully functional, information-driven genetic code.

WHY THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE IN BOTH CASES:

Complex systems don’t build themselves.
Programming requires a programmer.
Randomness NEVER produces ordered, functional information.
DNA is a thousand times more complex than anything humans have ever designed.

So if you laugh at the Toaster-Turned-Iron-Man scenario but still believe random chemicals wrote DNA, congratulations! You’ve just proven that blind faith isn’t exclusive to religion.

Randomness vs. Order: Pick One!

Here’s where atheist scientists get really funny.

They depend on order, logic, and structure to do their jobs, but when it comes to explaining how life started, they tell us it all happened by... random chaos.

Let’s take a moment to appreciate the contradiction:

They trust information, data, and language, but tell us DNA isn’t really a language.
They depend on logical structure for experiments, but claim nature structured itself randomly.
They mock the idea of intelligent design, but spend their careers trying to intelligently design artificial life in labs.

So which is it?

You can’t depend on order to do science while preaching that randomness is the source of everything.

The Bible Had It Right the Whole Time

While atheists are busy writing textbooks about self-writing molecules, the Bible has had the answer from the very beginning:

Genesis 1:1 – "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Not randomness, but a Creator.)
Colossians 1:16-17 – "By Him all things were created... and in Him all things hold together." (That includes your DNA!)
Hebrews 11:3 – "By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God." (Not by a cosmic typo.)

Meanwhile, Science says:

"Bro, trust us, letters arranged themselves into a book by accident!"

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts: Who’s Really Trusting Science?

Let’s sum this up:

Science depends on information, order, and structure.
Evolutionary scientists preach randomness, accidents, and chaos.
But they still need order to run their experiments.
And they want YOU to believe randomness so they can sell you textbooks and cash their grant checks.

So tell me again—who’s really “trusting science” here?

If you trust language, design, and structure, guess what?

You just admitted DNA was intelligently designed.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using organized scientific principles to prove that disorder created order… while cashing their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 4 BREAKING NEWS: FISH JUST GREW LEGS AND FILED THEIR TAXES!

That’s right, folks! According to "Totally Scientific" theories, some fish, one day, just decided:

“You know what? Swimming is boring. I think I’ll grow legs, crawl onto land, and start filing my taxes.”

And the best part? Scientists claim that’s exactly what happened—give or take a few hundred million years.

Yes, because that makes total sense. Fish just randomly sprouted lungs, a skeletal system strong enough to withstand gravity, an entirely new method of breathing, and boom—they were land creatures!

But wait… shouldn’t we have actual proof of this? Like, I don’t know… fossils?

"The Case of the Disappearing Missing Links!"

Now, if evolution is true, we should have millions of perfectly documented transitional fossils—that is, fossils showing creatures in the middle of turning into something else.

But instead, what do we have?

Nothing but imagination (and a few nice drawings in textbooks).
Fossils that mysteriously “appear” fully formed with no gradual transitions.
Cartoon illustrations pretending to be "science."

Where are the half-fish, half-lizards? Where are the half-reptile, half-bird hybrids? Where are the "almost-human" apes stressed out about their mortgage and student loans?

Oh, that’s right—they don’t exist.

Science response?

"Well, uh… evolution happens too slow for us to see it, but too fast for us to find fossils of it!"

Ah yes, translation: "Just believe us, bro. The evidence is invisible, but it’s totally real!"

Fossil Record? More Like Fossil Wrecked!

So let’s talk about the elephant (or, more accurately, the half-elephant, half-lizard?) in the room:

The fossil record does NOT support slow, gradual evolution. Instead, it shows:

Creatures appear suddenly, fully formed—no half-fish, half-lizard business.
Fossils show distinct kinds, not blended, in-between species.
NO "almost-this, almost-that" creatures exist in real evidence—only in imagination.

This is exactly what we would expect if life was designed rather than randomly mutated into existence.

But don’t worry! Evolutionists promise they’ll find the evidence someday… eventually… Just keep trusting the missing fossils!

When Science Forgets to Follow Science

Now, let’s be honest. If your job, career, and paycheck depended on pretending evolution was true, would you admit that the fossil record doesn’t support it?

OF COURSE NOT!

Here’s how the game is played:

If they find a fossil that doesn’t fit? "The fossil record is incomplete."
If there are gaps? "Well, evolution happened too fast to leave fossils."
If no transition fossils exist? "That’s just because fossilization is rare."

Hold up. So when they DO find fossils, they support evolution, and when they DON’T find fossils, that also supports evolution?

Ah yes, unfalsifiable science—the best kind!

Atheist Scientists: Trusting Order, Preaching Chaos!

You know what’s even funnier? The same scientists who claim "randomness made everything" go to work every day expecting order, predictability, and logic.

Think about it:

They study the predictable laws of nature, but claim nature started as random accidents.
They trust the consistency of physics, but insist life was born from disorder.
They believe in reliable biological functions, but claim cells just randomly figured out how to work.

So which is it, Science? Order or randomness?

You CANNOT run experiments expecting law and order while preaching that blind chaos made everything.

Example: Why This Is Impossible

Alright, let’s put this to the test.

Imagine I throw a goldfish onto the shore and just wait.

Plop!

Day 1: Fish flops around. No legs. No lungs. Just suffocating.
Day 2: Still flopping. Evolution should be kicking in any second now, right?
Day 3: Fish is very much dead.

Wait… I thought fish evolved into land creatures if you just gave them time?

Oh, what’s that? You’re saying it takes millions of years?

Cool. So let’s speed up the process:

Step 1: Take thousands of fish and put them on land.
Step 2: Wait.
Step 3: Still waiting.
Step 4: Every single fish is dead.

So tell me again—HOW did the first fish magically survive long enough to evolve into a land creature?

Answer: It didn’t. The entire theory is a joke.

The Bible Had It Right All Along

While atheist scientists are busy making up "just-so" stories, the Bible already explained everything perfectly:

Genesis 1:25 – "God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds…" (Notice—“kinds”—not “half-kinds” or “almost-there-kinds.”)
Colossians 1:16 – "For by Him all things were created…" (Not by a magical, unproven process.)
Psalm 104:24 – "O Lord, how manifold are Your works! In wisdom You have made them all." (Not by random accidents.)

Meanwhile, Science says:

"Dude, one day, a reptile decided to become a bird. No reason. Just evolution, bro!"

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts Let’s sum it up:

Science depends on predictability and order.
Evolution preaches randomness and accidents.
Fossil records show distinct, fully formed creatures, NOT gradual transitions.
Yet, we’re told to "just trust the missing evidence!"

So tell me again—who’s really “trusting science” here?

If you trust laws, structure, and consistency, guess what?

You just admitted life was designed.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using scientific order to prove chaos created everything… while cashing their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 5 BREAKING NEWS: HALF-A-BRAINED ORGANISMS SURVIVED FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS!

Ladies and gentlemen, prepare yourselves for the latest installment of "Just Believe, Bro"—the award-winning series where evolutionists expect you to accept wild, unproven claims with a straight face.

Today's scientific breakthrough? Biological systems built themselves, piece by piece, even though they wouldn’t function until fully assembled!

That’s right! You’re here today because millions of years ago, some lucky organisms survived with half-built hearts, non-working blood-clotting systems, and eyeballs that couldn’t see a thing.

How? Well… magic, basically.

The Problem of "Oops, We’re Dead" Evolution

Let’s walk through how this brilliant system supposedly worked.

Let’s say some primitive organism decides it wants a heart. Evolution tells us that:

Step 1: The creature has no heart. (Bad news—no circulation means no survival.)
Step 2: It starts evolving part of a heart. (Great! Except… it still can’t pump blood. Oops.)
Step 3: After millions of years, it finally has a full heart!

Wait a second… HOW DID IT SURVIVE STEPS 1 AND 2?

I mean, call me crazy, but I’m pretty sure half a heart doesn’t beat. A half-functioning blood-clotting system doesn’t stop you from bleeding out. And a half-formed eye doesn’t see anything.

Welcome to the concept of IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY!

This is a super inconvenient idea for evolutionists, because it means certain biological systems cannot function unless every part is in place at the same time. If even one part is missing, the whole system fails.

Examples?

The Bacterial Flagellum – A tiny, motorized whip bacteria use to move. Evolutionists claim it evolved in stages, yet if one part is missing, the whole thing is useless.

The Human Eye – Requires a perfectly coordinated lens, retina, optic nerve, and brain processing all at once. Remove one part, and congratulations! You’re blind.

Blood Clotting System – If the right proteins don’t activate at exactly the right time, you either bleed to death or clot uncontrollably. There’s no “slow evolution” here—you either have a working system or you’re dead.

"Just Believe, Bro!" – The Evolutionary Response

Now, before you ask, “Has anyone ever seen a half-evolved biological system?”—NO.

But don’t worry! The experts have some very compelling responses:

"We don’t know how it happened, but it did. Trust us."
"If you doubt it, you just don’t understand science."
"Fossils? We’ll find them… eventually… we think."

Translation? "We have no clue, but let’s just assume we’re right!"

This, ladies and gentlemen, is called UNFALSIFIABLE SCIENCE. It’s a scientific claim that cannot be tested or disproven, making it more of a belief system than actual science.

Ever Seen a Half-Built Airplane Fly?

Alright, let’s put this to the test with a real-world example.

Imagine an engineer trying to build a self-flying plane like this:

Step 1: Start with a piece of a wing. (But it can’t fly yet.)
Step 2: Add half an engine. (Still can’t fly.)
Step 3: Wait millions of years for the rest to appear.

Meanwhile, the plane crashes every single time until the entire system is complete.

Congratulations! You’ve just debunked evolution.

Because evolution tells us organisms survived with non-functional systems for millions of years until they were fully built.

But in the real world? A system either works or it doesn’t. There’s no “almost working” survival mode.

Science Needs Order, But Evolution Preaches Chaos

Ah yes, the great contradiction of evolutionary science.

Scientists expect order, predictability, and functionality in every experiment they conduct.

Yet, when it comes to explaining origins, they insist blind chaos created everything.

Let’s break it down:

They expect DNA to function properly, but they claim it randomly built itself.
They trust the laws of physics, but say physics is just a cosmic accident.
They rely on fully functioning scientific instruments, but insist life survived for millions of years with half-built organs.

So which is it, Science? Order or chaos? You can’t depend on functional systems while claiming they evolved before they worked.

The Bible Had It Right All Along

While atheist scientists are busy making excuses for why nothing works until everything works, the Bible has had the answer from the beginning:

Genesis 1:31 – "God saw all that He had made, and it was very good."
(Not partially good, almost functional, or waiting to evolve.)
Colossians 1:17 – "He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together."
(Not "random mutations hold things together.")
Psalm 139:14 – "I am fearfully and wonderfully made."
(Not "I am randomly and chaotically assembled.")

Final Thoughts: Who’s Really Trusting Science?

Let’s sum this up:

Science depends on fully functioning systems.
Evolution preaches half-functioning nonsense.
Biological systems only work when ALL parts are in place.
Yet, we’re told to "just trust the missing evidence!"

So tell me again—who’s really “trusting science” here?

If you trust functionality, structure, and design, guess what?

You just admitted life was designed.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using fully functioning logic to explain how non-functional systems survived… while cashing their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 6 BREAKING NEWS: YOUR THOUGHTS ARE JUST BRAIN FARTS!

Ladies and gentlemen, hold onto your neurons because we have another Totally Scientific breakthrough!

According to evolutionary materialism, your thoughts, emotions, logic, and deepest convictions are nothing more than meaningless chemical accidents bouncing around in your head—kind of like a soda can fizzing and thinking it's making decisions.

That’s right! Your love for your family? Just some random neurons firing for survival.
Your moral convictions? Nothing but biological conditioning.
Your belief in science? Also just a chemical illusion.

BREAKING NEWS: You are literally a self-aware bowl of oatmeal.

But wait… if our thoughts are just random chemical reactions, how do we know which ones are true?

Evolution’s Thought Experiment: Can You Trust a Brain Built by Randomness?

Let’s say we build two robots:

Robot A – Carefully designed, programmed with logic, and follows consistent rules to function correctly.

Robot B – Thrown together by an explosion in a junkyard, and whatever circuits happen to land in the right place… well, that’s what it works with!

Now, which robot do you trust to give you reliable information?

If you’re smart, you’d pick Robot A—the one with intentional design! But according to evolution, our minds are built like Robot B—just thrown together by time, chance, and a whole lot of dumb luck.

This is called the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). It was proposed by philosopher Alvin Plantinga, and it highlights the logical problem of believing in reason if our reasoning abilities evolved through irrational and unguided survival mechanisms.

But let’s take it a step further…

But Wait—Science Relies on Rationality!

Atheist scientists spend their entire careers demanding logic, reason, and predictability in science…

And yet, they turn around and claim that our ability to think rationally came from mindless, unguided, survival-based instincts!

Let’s break this contradiction down:

They demand logical arguments… but say logic itself is just a biological adaptation for survival.
They expect rational conclusions… but say rationality evolved through random, irrational processes.
They trust their own thinking… but say thinking is just neurons firing with no foundation in truth.

So… if all thoughts are just accidental brain chemistry, why should we trust atheist scientists’ thoughts any more than our own?

Logical Fallacy Alert! If evolution is true, then all thoughts— including the belief in evolution itself—are just neuron firings with no guarantee of truth.

If Consciousness Evolved for Survival, Truth Doesn’t Matter

According to evolutionary psychology, your brain didn’t evolve for truth—it evolved for survival. That means it doesn’t care about what is true—just what helps you stay alive.

Uh-oh. That means:

Your brain is built to believe LIES if they help you survive.

Imagine a caveman. He looks at a river and thinks:

A) "Water is necessary for hydration." (Logical conclusion)
B) "The Water God will eat me if I don’t drink." (Irrational, but keeps him alive)

Evolution doesn’t care which thought is true—only that the caveman drinks the water and doesn’t die.

Which means every single thought you have—including belief in evolution—has no guarantee of being true!

Ladies and gentlemen, this is called a SELF-REFUTING WORLDVIEW. If thoughts are just chemical reactions meant for survival, then there's no reason to trust anything you believe—including the belief that thoughts are just chemical reactions!

SCIENCE SAYS: "YOUR THOUGHTS ARE MEANINGLESS, BUT TRUST OURS!"

Alright, folks, let’s break this down:

If reason is just a survival tool, how do scientists know their theories are true?
If our brains evolved from irrational processes, why should we trust their ability to be rational?
If all thoughts are just chemical reactions, what makes one idea “better” than another?

This would be like:

"Your chemical reactions are WRONG, and mine are RIGHT!"
"The way your soda can fizzes is incorrect!"

It’s absolute nonsense. Yet, atheists want you to trust their thoughts, even though their own worldview says thoughts have no ultimate meaning.

Example: Why This is Impossible

Alright, let’s apply this to real life.

Imagine two scientists are arguing over the best way to make a spaceship.

Scientist A: Uses logic, physics, and mathematics to design a working spacecraft.
Scientist B: Shakes a box of random Legos and expects them to assemble into a spaceship by chance.

According to atheist materialism, Scientist B’s method is exactly how your brain came to exist.

Does that sound like a reliable system for truth?

Exactly. If randomness produced your thoughts, there is no reason to trust your own thinking—let alone someone else’s.

The Bible Had It Right All Along

While atheist scientists try to convince you that you’re just a clump of neurons pretending to think, the Bible had the answer from the start:

Genesis 1:27 – "God created man in His own image…"
(Not a lucky monkey with brain chemicals.)
Proverbs 1:7 – "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge…"
(Not "random mutations are the foundation of wisdom.")
Colossians 2:3 – "In Christ are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."
(Knowledge, wisdom, and reasoning come from God, not blind chemical accidents!)

Meanwhile, SCIENCE says:

"Bro, trust us, your brain is just fizzing chemicals, but you can totally rely on our conclusions!"

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts: Who’s Really Trusting Science?

Science depends on rational thought.
Evolution says rational thought is just brain chemistry.
If thoughts are just chemical reactions, truth doesn’t matter.
But they still want YOU to trust THEIR thoughts.

So tell me again—who’s really trusting science here?

If you trust truth, logic, and rationality, guess what?

You just admitted they must come from something beyond material processes.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using rational arguments to prove that rationality is just an illusion… while cashing their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 7 BREAKING NEWS: GOOD AND EVIL ARE JUST SURVIVAL STRATEGIES!

That’s right, folks! According to Totally Scientific evolutionary theory, morality isn’t real—it’s just a biological illusion created by your brain chemistry to help your ancestors not get eaten.

Murder? Not actually wrong, just not currently beneficial for the species.
Stealing? Bad if you’re the victim, but totally fine if it helps survival!
Helping the poor? Just another genetic mutation to make humans cooperate.

According to evolution, there’s no objective right or wrong—just whatever helps genes pass to the next generation.

Which means... if stealing, lying, and cheating ever became the best survival tactic, guess what?

They’d be “morally good” too!

But hold up—why do atheists still act like some things are truly wrong?

The Evolutionary Morality Paradox

Evolutionists claim morality evolved purely for survival—okay, let’s test that theory with a Totally Scientific Caveman Experiment.

Caveman A: Shares his food, helps the weak, and risks his life to save others.
Caveman B: Takes all the food, pushes the weak off a cliff, and only cares about himself.

According to pure Darwinian survival, who should win?

Answer: Caveman B.

He gets more resources.
He removes competition.
He passes on more selfish genes.

But wait… isn’t that evil?!

If morality was just about survival, why do humans instinctively see selfishness as wrong?

If morality evolved to keep humans alive, why do people admire sacrifice, generosity, and love—things that often reduce personal survival?

Maybe—just maybe—morality isn’t about survival at all, but about something higher.

"Just Believe It, Bro!" – The Evolutionary Morality Problem

Now, before you ask, “Has anyone ever proven morality is just a survival tool?”—the answer is: NO.

But don’t worry! The experts have a brilliant response for you:

"We don’t know how, but it happened. Trust us."
"If you doubt it, you just don’t understand science."
"It’s a social construct that helps species cooperate!"

Translation: "We have no real explanation, but shut up and believe us anyway!"

"Society Decides Morality" – Until You Disagree With It

Some atheists argue:

"Morality is just a social contract!"

Great! That means society decides what’s right and wrong. But here’s the problem…

If society decides morality, was slavery okay when most societies accepted it?
If society defines right and wrong, was Hitler just "following Germany’s morals" in the 1940s?
If morality is just a survival mechanism, why do people die for what’s right—even when it doesn’t help them survive?

Here’s the truth: If morality changes based on social trends, then morality is meaningless.

But wait—atheists still think some things are always wrong!

Why? Because deep down, they know morality is objective, not a social contract.

If Morality is Just Evolution, Why Do Atheists Get Mad?

Have you ever noticed that atheists LOVE talking about morality?

"Religion is evil!"
"The Bible is outdated!"
"You can be good without God!"

Hold up! If good and evil are just evolutionary illusions, why do atheists argue about them like they actually mean something?

Atheists say morality is subjective… but argue as if it’s OBJECTIVE.

That’s like saying, “Taste is just personal preference, but pineapple pizza is WRONG!”

If morality is just brain chemicals, then NO action is objectively good or bad—it’s just neurons firing in someone’s head.

So why should we care about their opinions?

Example: Why This is Impossible

Let’s apply evolutionary morality to real life:

Imagine two people debating whether murder is wrong.

Person A: "Murder is always wrong!"
Person B: "No, morality is just brain chemistry."

Wait, stop right there.

If morality is just brain chemicals, that means:

Murder isn’t truly wrong. It’s just another random neuron firing pattern.
You can’t actually say anything is evil, because it’s just a survival strategy.
Any moral disagreement is meaningless, because it’s just one brain fizzing differently than another.

This is what’s called a self-refuting worldview—it destroys itself!

If morality is just survival instinct, then there’s no such thing as justice, no true right or wrong, and no reason to even have laws.

But funny enough—atheists still call things right and wrong all the time.

The Bible Had It Right All Along

While atheist scientists keep rewriting morality to fit their survival theories, the Bible has had the answer from the start:

Romans 2:15 – "The law is written on their hearts…"
(That’s why we all instinctively know right and wrong.)
Micah 6:8 – "Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly with God…"
(Not “do whatever helps you survive.”)
Isaiah 5:20 – "Woe to those who call evil good and good evil…"
(Like moral relativists!)

Meanwhile, Science says:

"Dude, morality is just an illusion, but let me tell you why you’re wrong and I’m right!"

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts: Who’s Really Trusting Science?

Science depends on order, truth, and logic.
Evolution says morality is just an accident of survival.
Atheists argue as if morality actually matters.
But they still say good and evil don’t exist objectively.

So tell me again—who’s really “trusting science” here?

If you believe some things are truly right and truly wrong, guess what?

You just admitted morality isn’t just a survival trick—it’s real and objective.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using absolute moral claims to prove that morality is just a social construct… while cashing their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 8 BREAKING NEWS: RANDOM CHEMICALS WROTE AN ENCYCLOPEDIA!

According to Totally Scientific evolutionary theory, your DNA—the most sophisticated information system known to mankind—just wrote itself by accident.

That’s right, folks! Your entire genetic code, containing more precise instructions than a billion encyclopedias, was assembled by unguided mutations, blind chance, and cosmic luck.

So let’s get this straight:

DNA is a code.
All codes require intelligence to be written.
But in this ONE CASE, code wrote itself—because “science.”

Makes sense, right?

Let’s Play a Game: "Random Letters, Create Meaning!"

Imagine you walk into a dark cave and find these words carved on the wall:

"Welcome to Bob’s Cave! Beware of Bears!"

Now, do you think:

"Wow, natural forces must have randomly arranged these letters over time!"
"Bob wrote this."

If you picked B, congratulations! You’re smarter than an evolutionist!

Because according to them, letters can randomly arrange themselves into meaningful sentences—as long as you give them millions of years.

But wait… letters don’t organize themselves into words without intelligence.

So why should we believe that DNA—an information system trillions of times more complex—wrote itself?

SCIENCE SAYS: "JUST BELIEVE IT, BRO!"

Now, before you ask, “Has anyone ever seen raw chemicals produce new genetic information?”—NO.

But don’t worry! The experts have an answer for this:

"We don’t know exactly how, but it happened. Trust us."
"If you doubt it, you just don’t understand science."
"Given enough time, anything is possible!"

Translation: "We have no evidence, but we’re definitely right!"

Why Random Mutations Can’t Write a Dictionary

Evolutionists claim that mutations (random copying errors) gradually created complex biological information.

Okay, let’s test that:

Imagine you take a 1,000-page novel and start randomly deleting and changing letters.

Do you get a better book?
Do you get new information?
Do you get a completely different masterpiece?

Or do you get a jumbled mess of nonsense?

Now apply this logic to DNA: If mutations are just copying errors, why would they create complex new systems?

Spoiler alert: They don’t.

"DNA is Just Chemicals, Bro!"

Atheists love to say,

"DNA is just a molecule! It's just chemistry, not a code!"

Oh, really? Then why does it contain:

Encoded information
Instructions for building organisms
Error-checking and correction mechanisms
A built-in operating system that runs your body

If DNA was just chemistry, it would be random chaos—not a perfectly structured blueprint with error correction and redundancies built-in!

It’s like saying a computer program is “just electricity” and not code.

We’ve NEVER seen information create itself without intelligence.

But evolutionists want you to believe DNA—a system more complex than any supercomputer—just magically assembled itself in a prehistoric puddle.

Why Science Needs Information, But Evolution Has None

Let’s break this down:

Science depends on information—logic, codes, formulas, and mathematical precision.

DNA is an information system—it operates like a computer program.
Atheists say information comes from blind chance.
But we’ve NEVER seen information come from random processes.

So why should we believe DNA wrote itself?

The Bible Had It Right All Along

While atheist scientists keep pretending that random mutations can write libraries, the Bible had the answer from the start:

Genesis 1:1 – “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth…” (Not "In the beginning, random chemicals self-organized into meaningful information.")
Psalm 139:14 – “I am fearfully and wonderfully made…” (Not "I am randomly and accidentally assembled.")
Colossians 1:17 – “In Him all things hold together…” (Including the language of DNA!)

Meanwhile, Science says:

"Dude, DNA is just random molecules that somehow programmed themselves!"

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts

So let’s sum this up:

Science depends on coded information.
DNA is coded information.
Coded information always comes from intelligence.
But evolutionists want us to believe DNA wrote itself by accident.

So tell me again—who’s really “trusting science” here?

If you trust logic, order, and information systems, guess what? You just admitted DNA had to be designed.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using encoded information to argue that encoded information can write itself… while cashing their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 9 BREAKING NEWS: THE UNIVERSE JUST RANDOMLY FINE-TUNED ITSELF!

That’s right, folks! According to Totally Scientific evolutionary cosmology, the universe just so happened to arrange itself in a way that perfectly supports life—not because of design, but because of… drumroll, please… RANDOM CHANCE!

So let’s get this straight:

If gravity was a tiny bit weaker—no stars, no planets, no life.
If protons were just a little heavier—atoms would collapse, no chemistry, no life.
If Earth was just a little closer or farther from the Sun—we’d either be an ice cube or a burnt chicken nugget.
If the fundamental forces of nature were off by even a fraction of a percent—BOOM! No universe, no us.

Yet here we are, perfectly situated in a life-friendly universe… but totally by accident, of course!

Seems legit.

Atheist Scientists’ Best Explanation? The "Lucky Coincidence" Theory

Now, before you ask, "How do scientists explain the insane improbability of a life-supporting universe?"—don’t worry! The experts have answers:

"We got REALLY lucky."
"If the universe wasn’t fine-tuned, we wouldn’t be here to ask."
"Maybe there are infinite universes, and we just hit the jackpot!"

Translation: "We don’t actually know, but we refuse to consider a Designer, so… just go with it!"

The Multiverse—Atheism’s Get-Out-of-Logic-Free Card

Faced with overwhelming evidence of fine-tuning, atheists needed an emergency excuse. Enter: THE MULTIVERSE THEORY!

What’s the multiverse theory? It’s the idea that infinite universes exist, each with different laws of physics. We just happen to live in the one that works.

PROBLEM: There's zero evidence for this.

It’s like saying, "I rolled 100 dice, and they all landed on six. But don’t worry! There are actually INFINITE dice rolls in alternate universes where that didn’t happen!"

Translation: "We can’t explain it, so let’s make up an infinite number of invisible, unprovable universes!"

But wait… I thought atheists only believe in what they can see?

Oh, except when it comes to dodging obvious design. Then they suddenly become more mystical than a room full of astrologers.

Why Fine-Tuning Is Atheism’s Worst Nightmare

FACT: The laws of physics COULD have been anything.
FACT: The probability of getting a life-permitting universe is virtually ZERO.
FACT: The ONLY logical conclusion is that something SET these laws perfectly.

Yet atheists say:

"Nope! It’s just RANDOM!"
Oh really? Let’s test that:

Imagine you wake up, and your breakfast is perfectly prepared, your clothes are laid out, and your coffee is waiting.

Would you assume:

"Wow, someone planned this for me!"
"Obviously, the cereal randomly poured itself, the toast cooked itself, and the coffee brewed itself."

If you picked B, congratulations! You qualify for an atheist PhD!

Because according to them, "Design is an illusion!" Even when everything is arranged perfectly for a purpose.

"The Universe Just Created Itself, Bro!"

Atheists love to say,

"The universe didn’t need a cause, it just happened!"

Oh really? Because:

Every explosion we’ve ever seen destroys things—not builds fine-tuned galaxies.
Every complex system we’ve ever studied was designed—not randomly assembled.
Every law we know of came from a lawgiver—not from nothing.

But when it comes to the universe? "It just fine-tuned itself, bro. Trust me."

Translation: "Shut up and believe in magic, but without God."

Why Science Needs Fine-Tuning, But Atheists Pretend It’s Random

Let’s break this down:

Science depends on fixed, predictable laws.

If those laws weren’t set perfectly, we wouldn’t exist.
Atheists say those laws just "happened" to be perfect.
But we’ve NEVER seen laws "happen"—they’re always established.

So why should we believe the universe fine-tuned itself?

The Bible Had It Right All Along

While atheist scientists keep inventing imaginary universes to avoid a Creator, the Bible had the answer from the start:

Genesis 1:1 – “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth…” (Not "In the beginning, physics randomly balanced itself against impossible odds.")
Psalm 19:1 – “The heavens declare the glory of God…” (Not "The heavens declare how lucky we got!")
Colossians 1:17 – “In Him all things hold together…” (Including the precise constants of nature!)

Meanwhile, Science says:

"Dude, the laws of the universe just SET THEMSELVES!"

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts So let’s sum this up:

Science depends on finely-tuned physical laws.
If those laws weren’t precise, we wouldn’t be here.
The probability of a life-permitting universe is basically ZERO.
But atheists want us to believe it was all just a cosmic fluke.

So tell me again—who’s really “trusting science” here?

If you believe laws and order don’t appear by accident, guess what? You just admitted the universe had to be designed.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using the laws of physics to argue that physics created itself… while cashing their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 10 BREAKING NEWS: SCIENTIFIC LAWS JUST DECIDED TO OBEY THEMSELVES!

Alright folks, let’s talk about scientific laws. You know, those things that make the universe function in a way that keeps us from spontaneously combusting or floating into space on a Tuesday.

According to modern atheist scientists, we don’t need a reason for why these laws exist or stay the same. Nope! They just… are.

"Bro, stop asking questions! Gravity just does its thing, okay?"

Oh, really? So let me get this straight:

The law of gravity? Random.
- The laws of motion? Total accident.
- The laws of thermodynamics? Just lucky, I guess.
- The fact that your coffee cup doesn’t teleport into another dimension every morning? Pure coincidence.

But don’t worry, science has an answer!

"The universe just happens to be this way."
"Things stay the same because… well, because they do!"
"Maybe there are infinite universes where things aren’t stable, and we just won the cosmic lottery!"

Truly ground-breaking logic.

If Laws Are Random, Why Do Scientists Depend on Them?

Let’s play a game:

If you truly believed all of reality is just a chaotic accident, would you:

Wake up expecting your feet to hit the ground?
Expect your car to obey the laws of physics?
Trust that atoms will still be atoms?
Demand consistency in lab experiments?

Spoiler alert: You already assume order exists.

But wait—according to atheist "scientists", the universe exploded into existence from nothing, and somehow physics decided to be consistent ever since?

TRANSLATION: The universe created laws that control itself.

So now laws… just… make themselves? Are they conscious? Do they have free will? Do they hold meetings?

I mean, come on. Even a toddler knows that rules don’t make themselves—somebody has to set them.

The Great Atheist Double Standard

Atheist scientists be like:

"Randomness caused everything!"
"But we expect everything to obey fixed, non-random laws!"

Pick a lane, buddy.

Imagine applying this logic to anything else in life:

"Your country’s laws? No one made them. They just evolved, bro."
"That building? No architect. The bricks randomly assembled over time."
"That book? No author. The letters arranged themselves by accident."

Notice how no one actually lives this way?

Atheists' Favorite Excuse: "It Just Works"

When pressed on why the laws of science exist, the best answer an atheist can give is:

"If the laws of nature weren’t reliable, we wouldn’t be here to ask the question!"

Oh wow. That’s deep, bro. You basically just said:

"Things work because if they didn’t work, we wouldn’t be able to notice that they don’t work!"

This is like saying:

"My TV works because if it didn’t work, I wouldn’t be watching it."

Great job, Einstein. That doesn’t explain why it works.

Atheists’ Last Hope: The "Multiverse Escape Hatch"

When faced with undeniable fine-tuning and order, atheist scientists panic and say:

"M-maybe there are infinite universes, and we just live in the lucky one!"

Ah yes, the great imaginary multiverse! The atheist's magic wand that explains everything without proving anything.

PROBLEM: There’s literally ZERO evidence for this.

But atheists tell us:

"It doesn’t have to be observed. It’s just real. Trust us."
Oh really? So now you believe in things you can’t see or test?
CONGRATS, YOU JUST INVENTED RELIGION!

The Bible Had It Right From The Start

While atheists scramble to explain why the universe actually works, the Bible already told us why:

Genesis 1:1 – "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Not "In the beginning, physics randomly created itself.")
Colossians 1:17 – "In Him all things hold together." (That includes gravity, time, and the fact that atoms don’t randomly explode.)
Hebrews 1:3 – "He upholds the universe by the word of His power." (So no, it’s not just floating in a sea of chaos.)

Meanwhile, modern atheists say: "The universe just obeys itself, bro!"

Yeah… No thanks.

Final Thoughts So let’s sum it up:

Science depends on fixed, reliable laws.
Atheists say the universe was a random accident.
But they still expect laws to remain the same.
Yet they have no explanation for why laws exist in the first place.

So tell me again—who’s really "trusting the science"?

If you believe in predictable laws, guess what? You just admitted the universe was designed.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using the laws of physics to argue that physics created itself… while cashing in their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 11 CHALLENGE: CAN SCIENCE EXIST WITHOUT GOD?

Alright, folks. We've reached the final boss battle of atheist logic—how do scientists even justify doing science without believing in the very foundations that make science possible?

Short answer: They don’t. They just hope you don’t notice.

Let’s break this down like a bad science fiction movie plot.

Step 1: Assume Science Works (Without Justifying It)

Evolutionary scientists get up in the morning, drink their coffee, and trust that logic, uniformity, and rationality will still be here today.

They don’t step into a lab worried that gravity might change its mind.
They don’t triple-check if 2+2 still equals 4.
They don’t wonder if fire will decide to freeze things instead of burn them.

They just assume reality is stable, predictable, and logical.

But wait… why?

If the Big Bang was just an accident… and life is just a meaningless fluke… and everything is random, then how do they rationally justify trusting in order?

Oh, right. They don’t. They just pretend science works "because it works."

Step 2: Forget That Science Needs Transcendental Foundations

Science isn’t just playing with chemicals in a lab—it requires things that atheism can’t explain:

Logic: Why should a universe that came from "random chaos" obey any logical principles? Why do the laws of physics hold? Where did math come from?
Uniformity in Nature: If everything came from a meaningless explosion, why does the universe behave in a stable, orderly way instead of descending into chaos every five minutes?
Consciousness & Rationality: If your brain is just a bunch of atoms bouncing around randomly, how can you trust your thoughts to be true instead of just a side effect of evolutionary brain chemistry?
Information in DNA: Why do mindless processes generate complex, structured information? Who programmed the genetic code?

Oh, and here’s the kicker: You can’t even ask these questions without assuming logic, reason, and truth exist.

Atheist Translation: "Don't ask! Just accept that it works!"

Step 3: The Grand Act of Pretending Science Exists Without a Creator

Imagine this conversation:

Atheist Scientist: "We don’t need God! Science explains everything!"
You: "Okay, where did logic and uniformity in nature come from?"
Atheist Scientist: "Uhhh... Science?"
You: "No, I mean, why do these things exist in the first place?"
Atheist Scientist: "Stop asking questions and trust the science, bro!"

This is intellectual bankruptcy at its finest.

They act like science can function in a universe with no foundation for logic, order, or rationality. But if the universe has no cause, no purpose, and no order, then why should scientific inquiry even be possible?

Spoiler Alert: It wouldn’t be.

But don’t worry—their "solution" is to make up stuff like:

"The laws of nature just exist, okay?"
"Maybe an infinite number of universes exist, and we got lucky!"
"Who cares about philosophical nonsense? Just do the experiment!"

Brilliant. Truly scientific.

Step 4: Atheist Scientists Keep Borrowing From Theism

Atheists say: "God isn’t real, but science is!"

But then they steal from God’s worldview every time they:

Trust that logic and math are real
Assume the laws of physics will be the same tomorrow
Believe their own reasoning is reliable
Expect their experiments to work consistently

They depend on theistic assumptions (order, logic, meaning, and truth) to do their work… while denying the very foundation that makes those things possible.

THIS IS CALLED STEALING FROM GOD.

It's like an atheist saying "Cars don’t exist!" while driving to work every morning.

Or like someone saying "I don’t believe in chefs!" while eating a steak dinner.

Final Round: The Bible Had It Right All Along

Science works because the universe was designed to be orderly, rational, and logical.

The Bible explains why science works better than any atheist ever could:

Genesis 1:1 – "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Not 'In the beginning, a random explosion just happened for no reason.')
Colossians 1:17 – "By Him all things hold together." (So much for ‘things just exist, bro.’)
Hebrews 1:3 – "He upholds the universe by the word of His power." (That’s why your coffee doesn’t randomly fly into space.)

Thoughts Let’s sum it up:

Science requires logic, order, and rationality.
Atheism can’t justify logic, order, or rationality.
But scientists need these things to do their job.
So they steal from God’s worldview while denying He exists.

CONCLUSION: The atheist scientist depends on God's existence while denying Him.

They mock believers, but they literally cannot do science without standing on the very foundations that only God provides.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using the uniformity of nature to argue that everything is a random accident… while cashing in their research grants.

So tell me again—who’s really being irrational?

________________________________________________

Chapter 12 BREAKING NEWS: ATOMS CAN’T THINK—BUT YOU CAN!

Ladies and gentlemen, in today’s episode of “Science™ Says”, we’re faced with the strangest contradiction of all: atheists tell us that we are nothing but atoms and neurons, yet they want us to engage in rational debate, moral reasoning, and philosophical reflection.

That raises an important question:

Since when have atoms been able to identify concepts like atheism, morality, truth, and justice?

Because if all we are is matter, then:

Where did concepts like justice, love, and logic come from?
How can unthinking atoms engage in rational discussion?
How do neurons firing in a brain explain consciousness, self-awareness, and free will?

Atheism tells us that we’re just biological machines. But the moment an atheist argues for truth, morality, or rationality, they prove themselves wrong.

1. Atoms Don’t Think—So Where Does Thought Come From?

If we are just bags of randomly evolved chemicals, how did we get from mindless particles to rational beings capable of abstract reasoning?

Genesis 1:27 – "So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them."

Only the biblical worldview explains why human beings:

Think logically (because we are made in the image of a rational God).
Use language and communication (because God speaks and has given us language).
Understand truth (because God is truth and has revealed Himself to us).

If atheism were true, our thoughts would be nothing but chemical reactions in the brain, meaning:

There is no "right" or "wrong" reasoning—just neurons firing differently in different brains.
There is no absolute truth—just evolutionary survival strategies.
There is no meaning in words—just sound waves bouncing around in the air.

But here’s the problem: Atheists use logic, truth, and reason to argue that God doesn’t exist!

The moment they expect their arguments to be true, they prove that absolute truth exists. The moment they assume logic is valid, they acknowledge that laws of logic are real. But neither truth nor logic can come from random, unguided material forces.

Colossians 2:3 – "In Christ are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."

Knowledge and rationality exist because God exists. Apart from Him, we couldn’t know anything at all.

2. Atoms Don’t Define Morality—So Why Do We Know Right from Wrong?

If atheism is true, then morality is just a human invention. In that case:

Murder isn’t really wrong—it’s just unpopular.
Justice is meaningless—it’s just social conditioning.
Helping the weak is foolish—because evolution favors the strong.

Atheists say, "Morality evolved because it helped humans survive." But this is nonsense.

Why do people sacrifice their lives for others, even when it reduces their survival chances?
Why do we feel guilt over things no one else knows about?
Why do cultures around the world share the same basic moral laws?

Because morality isn’t a social construct. It was given by God.

Romans 2:15 – "They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness."

Morality exists because God exists. Right and wrong are real because they are grounded in the character of a holy God.

If morality were just atoms bouncing around, there would be no reason to say murder is evil, lying is wrong, or justice is good. But because we are made in God’s image, we all have an innate sense of justice and righteousness.

Micah 6:8 – "He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?"

Reject God, and you reject morality. But keep using moral arguments, and you prove that morality must be grounded in something beyond evolution—something eternal, unchanging, and absolute.

3. Atoms Don’t Speak—So Where Did Language Come From?

Think about this:

How do different languages exist if we’re just evolved brains?
Why do different languages have words that mean the same thing?
How do mere sound waves convey deep meaning, emotions, and complex ideas?

Language isn’t just grunts and sounds. It’s built on rules, structure, and meaning—all things that cannot come from unguided evolution.

Genesis 11:9 – "Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth."

Language was given by God. It was meant for relationship, communication, and worship. Atheism cannot explain why words have meaning and why human beings can express abstract ideas like love, justice, and truth.

John 1:1 – "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Jesus Himself is called the Word because ultimate meaning and communication are found in God alone. Without Him, language is just random noise.

4. Atoms Don’t Love—So Why Do We?

If atheism were true, love would be nothing more than a chemical reaction for survival. But we all know love is far more than that.

1 John 4:8 – "Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love."

Love isn’t just biology. Love is a reflection of the God who made us. We were created for relationships, because God is relational.

In an atheistic world, love is just brain chemicals. But in the real world, love is the very nature of God.

John 15:13 – "Greater love has no one than this, that someone lay down his life for his friends."

If love were just a survival instinct, then sacrificial love wouldn’t make sense. But because we are made in the image of God, we know that love is real, powerful, and eternal.

The Only Worldview That Makes Sense

Atheism collapses under its own weight. It borrows morality, logic, truth, and meaning from the biblical worldview, while denying the God who makes those things possible.

Only the Bible explains:

Why we think (because God made us rational).
Why we know morality is real (because God is holy).
Why we use language (because God communicates with us).
Why we love (because God is love).

Proverbs 1:7 – "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge; fools despise wisdom and instruction."

Atheists can only argue against God by using the very things He created. But without Him, nothing makes sense.

THE NEXT STEP: THE FOUNDATION OF ALL REALITY

If God alone makes sense of everything, then who is this God?

The answer isn’t just “God exists.” The answer is the Triune God of the Bible—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

The reason reality is both one and many, both logical and relational, is because God is triune.

The Father is not the Son.
The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is not the Father.

Yet, they are one in being and three in person.

And this is why all reality is built on both unity and diversity—because the Trinity is the foundation of all things.

Colossians 1:17 – "And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together."

Now, let’s look deeper into the Triune God, the only foundation for truth, reason, morality, and existence itself.

________________________________________________

Chapter 13: The Triune God and the Laws of Logic—The Foundation of All Reality

BREAKING NEWS: ALL LOGIC DEPENDS ON THE TRIUNE GOD!

Ladies and gentlemen, prepare yourselves for the ultimate reality check: the Laws of Logic don’t just “exist”—they are grounded in the very nature of the Triune God. Without the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, not only would logic collapse, but rational thought, consistency, and knowledge itself would be impossible.

So, before you say, “Well, logic is just something we use to think,” let’s ask some fundamental questions:

Where do the laws of logic come from?
Are they just human inventions?
Did they evolve like bacteria?

Atheists have no answer. But the Bible does. Logic is not some arbitrary rule imposed on reality—it is a reflection of the eternal, self-existent, and relational nature of God.

And here’s the kicker: The Laws of Logic are inherently Trinitarian—each law is distinct, yet they function in perfect unity, just as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are distinct in Personhood yet One in Being.

The Three Laws of Logic and the Triune God

The Laws of Logic are universal, immaterial, and unchanging. Why? Because they reflect the eternal, unchanging nature of God.

The Law of Identity (A is A) – A thing is what it is and not something else.
The Law of Non-Contradiction (A is not Non-A) – A thing cannot be itself and not itself at the same time in the same way.
The Law of Excluded Middle (Either A or Non-A, no third option) – A proposition is either true or false—there is no in-between.

Let’s explore each of these laws and see why they exist only because of the Triune God.

1. The Law of Identity: Rooted in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

The Law of Identity states that a thing is itself and cannot be something else.

The Father is the Father, not the Son or the Holy Spirit.
The Son is the Son, not the Father or the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is the Holy Spirit, not the Father or the Son.

The Triune God is the perfect embodiment of identity. Each Person of the Trinity is fully God, yet distinct in identity.

Exodus 3:14 – "I AM WHO I AM."

God defines Himself. He is not dependent on anything outside of Himself. He is who He is.

John 1:1-2 – "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

The Word (Logos) was with God (distinction) and was God (unity).

If there were no Trinity, identity itself would be meaningless because there would be no eternal distinction and unity to ground it.

Atheists cannot explain why things are what they are. Without God, why does anything have identity at all? Why is a cat a cat and not something else? They can’t say. But Christians can, because the Law of Identity is a reflection of the Trinity.

2. The Law of Non-Contradiction: Rooted in the Eternal Distinctions of the Trinity

The Law of Non-Contradiction says that something cannot be both itself and not itself at the same time and in the same way.

The Father is not the Son.
The Son is not the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit is not the Father.

Matthew 28:19 – "Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit."

One name (unity), yet three distinct Persons (distinction).

If the universe were purely random, contradictions should be possible. But they are not. Why? Because God is never confused within Himself.

If God were a monolithic being (like Islam’s Allah), there would be no eternal distinctions, and thus no foundation for non-contradiction. Everything would collapse into undifferentiated oneness, making distinction arbitrary, like the philosophy of Adi Shankaracharya. Where all distinction would collapse, there would be no distinction between oxygen and hydrogen.

If God were multiple gods (like popular Hinduism), reality would be full of contradictions because different gods would have different natures and approval of reality.

Only the Trinity provides a rational foundation for why contradictions are impossible.

3. The Law of Excluded Middle: Rooted in the Absolute Truth of God

The Law of Excluded Middle states that something is either true or false—there is no in-between.

The Son of God is either Son or he is not he cannot be partially Son and partially Father. The same applies to the Father and the Holy Spirit.

God is either God or He is not. (John 8:58 - “Before Abraham was, I AM”)
God either exists or He does not. (Hebrews 11:6 - “Whoever would draw near to God must believe that He exists.”)
Sin is either rebellion against God or it is not. (1 John 3:4 - “Sin is lawlessness.”)

John 14:6 – "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

If Jesus is the Truth, then there is no middle ground between truth and falsehood.

If God were not absolute truth, there would be no absolute distinction between truth and falsehood.

Atheists cannot justify why contradictions don’t exist. Without an absolute standard of truth, why should anything be either true or false? They don’t know. But Christians do.

4. Perichoresis: How the Laws of Logic Relate Like the Trinity

The Law of Identity (A is A) implies the Law of Non-Contradiction (A is not Non-A).

If A is A, then it cannot also be Non-A at the same time.
If the Father is the Father, then He cannot also be the Son.

The Law of Non-Contradiction implies the Law of Excluded Middle (Either A or Non-A).

If A cannot be Non-A, then it must be one or the other—no third option.
If Son of God is either Son or not Son, there is no middle ground.

The Laws of Logic are One and One Law implies the other— just like the Perichoresis of the Triune God.

John 14:10-11 – "I am in the Father and the Father is in me."

The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit exist in a perfect, relational unity. Likewise, the laws of logic exist in a structured unity—each law implies the others.

Atheists cannot explain why logic is unified. But Christians can, because logic is a reflection of God’s Triune nature.

The Trinity and the Foundation of All Thought, Science, and Life

“Reality Only Makes Sense Because of God.” The big revelation? Everything—yes, everything—you see, think, know, and experience is grounded in the Triune God of the Bible.

That’s right. Without the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, you wouldn’t just lack morality or reason—you wouldn’t exist at all.

Atheists want you to believe that reality just holds itself together—no cause, no intelligence, no rational foundation. It just… is.

But let’s think logically (which, ironically, only works because God exists).

Science depends on predictable laws.
Laws require order.
Order requires a mind behind it.
But atheists say reality just “happens.”

That doesn’t sound very scientific, does it?

Now, we already explored laws of logic, let’s now explore how Science, Morality, Mathematics, Consciousness, and even Social Order are only possible because of the Triune nature of God.

1. The Uniformity of Nature: Why Science Needs the Triune God

Let’s play a game:

Why does gravity work today the same as it did yesterday?
Why do chemical reactions always follow the same rules?
Why does math hold true no matter where you are in the universe?

Science requires uniformity—the belief that nature is stable, repeatable, and predictable. Otherwise, every experiment is meaningless.

But here’s the big question: Why is nature uniform?

Atheists have no answer.

If everything is just random physical processes, why should we expect consistency? If the universe is just an accident, why should it follow rational, predictable laws?

Colossians 1:17 – "In Him all things hold together."
Hebrews 1:3 – "He upholds the universe by the word of His power."

Translation: Science only works because God makes it work.

Atheist Response:

“Uhh, the universe just follows rules, okay?”
“It’s just the way things are, stop asking questions!”
“Maybe there are infinite universes, and we just got lucky!”

Translation: They don’t have an answer.

Only the Triune God can account for the unity and diversity in scientific laws—just as He exists as One in Being and Three in Person.

2. Mathematics: The Trinity and Absolute Truth

Mathematics is objective, unchanging, and universal. But why?

Numbers exist independently of human thought. No one “invents” math—it’s discovered.

1 + 1 = 2 is always true. But why?

Mathematics reflects the unity and diversity of the Trinity:

One (oneness of God’s being).
Many (diversity of Persons in the Trinity).
Relationship (how numbers interact).

Proverbs 8:27-29 – "When He established the heavens, I was there, when He drew a circle on the face of the deep… when He marked out the foundations of the earth."

Mathematical truths exist because they are grounded in the rational nature of God.

Atheists use math, but they can’t explain why math exists in the first place.

3. Morality: The Ultimate Atheist Contradiction

Atheists love talking about morality.

“Religion is evil!”
“Christians are bad people!”
“You don’t need God to be good!”

Wait a second… evil? bad? good?

Those words only make sense if morality is real. But if evolution is true and we’re just advanced pond scum, what does “good” even mean?

Atheism’s Morality Problem

If morality is just a survival mechanism, then nothing is truly right or wrong.
If morality is based on human opinion, then Hitler wasn’t “wrong”—he was just unpopular.
If morality is constantly changing, then today’s “good” could be tomorrow’s “evil.”

But God’s morality is absolute.

Romans 2:15 – "The law is written on their hearts."
Micah 6:8 – "Do justice, love mercy, walk humbly with God."

Translation: You know right from wrong because God put it in you.

Atheists borrow Christian morality to argue against Christianity.

They say, “Morality is just an illusion, but let me tell you why you’re wrong!”
See the contradiction?

Only the Trinity accounts for both the absolute standard of goodness (God’s nature) and the relational aspect of moral law (how we love one another).

4. Consciousness: The Mind That Shouldn’t Exist

Alright, science nerds, explain this one:

Why are you aware of yourself?

Atheists say your brain is just neurons firing. But how does electricity produce self-awareness?

If evolution were true, you’d expect only reactive creatures—beings that respond to their environment without thought, like a Roomba vacuum.

But humans aren’t just reacting—we’re reflecting.

“Why am I here?”
“What is my purpose?”
“How do I know I exist?”

No chemical reaction in the universe explains this.

Genesis 1:27 – "God created man in His own image."

Translation: Your mind isn’t just brain activity—it’s a reflection of God’s image.

Meanwhile, Science says:

“We don’t know where consciousness comes from, but trust us, it evolved.”
“Maybe it’s just an illusion.”
“Shut up and trust the experts.”

Translation: They have no idea.

Only the Triune God—who exists in eternal relationship within Himself—can account for human self-awareness.

Final Thoughts: Who’s Really Trusting Science?

So, let’s sum this up:

Logic exists because God exists.
The Trinity explains why logical distinctions exist.
The laws of logic reflect the Triune nature of God.
Without the Trinity, knowledge is impossible.
Science only works because of God.
Mathematics is grounded in God’s nature.
Morality is absolute because God is holy.
Consciousness only makes sense because we are made in God’s image.

Meanwhile, Science says:

"Logic is just there, bro."
"There’s no reason for logic, but let’s trust it anyway."
"Maybe logic evolved too!"
“Everything came from nothing, for no reason, with no purpose!”
“Stop asking questions and just trust the randomness!”

Yeah… No thanks.

If you trust Logic, reality, guess what? You just admitted it depends on the Triune God.

But don’t worry—the atheists will be back tomorrow, using logic, math, and morality to argue that none of these things actually exist… while cashing their research grants.

________________________________________________

Chapter 14 CONCLUSION

ONLY GOD CAN RESTORE ALL THINGS!

Ladies and gentlemen, we have learnt that: All reality depends on God.

Without God, everything is broken. Without the Triune Creator—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—the world itself has no foundation. Science, logic, morality, order, and even your very thoughts would be meaningless.

But here’s the problem: We, as a people, are shattered.

Just like the rhyme

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.
All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty and Dumpty together again.

The Fall: How We Got Here

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,
Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.

Once upon a time, mankind sat secure—created by God, whole, perfect, unbroken. But just like Humpty Dumpty, we fell. We shattered. Sin entered the world. The curse of death was set in motion. And no human power—no king’s horses, no king’s men—could ever fix what was broken.

Science can’t fix the soul.
Philosophy can’t explain away the problem.
Politics can’t repair what was lost.
Self-help can’t glue the pieces back together.

The laws of the universe declare order, but human history declares chaos. We are all Humpty Dumpty, sitting on a wall that is crumbling beneath us. The moment we sin, we fall. And the moment we fall, we break. And the moment we break, we face death.

Romans 6:23 – "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

The Futility of Human Effort

All the king's horses and all the king's men
Couldn't put Humpty and Dumpty together again.

The world has tried to repair itself with false gods, human philosophies, and scientific theories that claim we are nothing but accidents of evolution.

But think about it: If we are just random matter, why do we yearn for meaning? If morality is an illusion, why do we cry out for justice? If death is natural, why do we fear it so deeply?

Because deep inside, we know the truth: We were created for something more.

But we are broken beyond self-repair. The cracks are too deep, the fractures too severe. No scientist, philosopher, or politician can undo sin, suffering, and death.

And so, the world is left grasping at illusions of hope that ultimately fail.

Atheism says we are just cosmic accidents.
Pantheism says all is an illusion, and suffering is just karma.
Secular morality says good and evil are just social constructs.
Science claims to explain life but cannot explain why life exists at all.

Each of these is an attempt to fix the shattered mess of humanity. But no king’s horses, no king’s men can put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

The King Who Came to Restore

The rhyme is a tragedy but should we continue like that without hope? No

Because, here is the good news—the Gospel. What the world could not fix, God Himself came to restore.

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, stepped down into this broken world.
He lived without sin, without fracture, without fault. He obeyed God’s law perfectly, something no one else had ever done. And then, He did something incredible: He willingly took our brokenness upon Himself.

Isaiah 53:5 – "But He was pierced for our transgressions; He was crushed for our iniquities; upon Him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and by His wounds we are healed."

On the cross, Jesus Christ bore the full weight of our sin, death, and destruction. He allowed Himself to be crushed so that we might be made whole. He died, taking the penalty we deserved.

But the story doesn’t end with His death.

The Resurrection: The Ultimate Restoration

Three days later, Jesus rose from the dead.

The power that governs the universe, upholds the laws of nature, and binds reality together—God Himself—reversed death. And with His resurrection, He declared that death would not have the final say.

John 11:25-26 – "I am the resurrection and the life. Whoever believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live, and everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die."

This is the difference between the Gospel and every failed human effort. Science cannot undo death. Technology cannot raise the dead. Philosophy cannot stop the grave. But Jesus Christ did.

Jesus doesn’t just glue the shattered pieces of your life back together. He makes you new.

2 Corinthians 5:17 – "Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come."

The resurrection of Jesus guarantees that one day, all things will be made new. The broken world will be restored, and those who trust in Him will receive eternal life, free from sin, suffering, and death.

Revelation 21:4 – "He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away."

The Choice Before You

Right now, you are at a crossroads. You can continue believing in a random, meaningless universe, trying to make sense of life in a broken world, or you can trust in the One who designed reality itself.

Like Humpty Dumpty, you are falling. You are breaking. You are dying. And you cannot fix yourself.

But Jesus can. He alone has conquered death. He alone restores. He alone makes whole.

Romans 10:9 – "If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved."

If you turn from your sin and trust in Christ, you will be made whole.

Your brokenness will be healed.
Your sins will be forgiven.
Your death will be reversed.
Your life will be made new.

No king’s horses and no king’s men could put Humpty Dumpty back together again.
But the King Himself can.

WILL YOU COME TO THE KING?

There is only One who can restore what has been broken.
There is only One who can reverse death.
There is only One who can save.

John 14:6 – "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

Jesus Christ is calling you. The King has come, the King has conquered, and the King is offering you life.

NOW, IF YOU BELIEVE, WILL YOU LIVE FOR HIM?

But the question doesn’t end here. If you choose to believe, will you now choose to live the rest of your life restoring what is broken by doing the will of Him who restores all things through His resurrection?

John 20:21 – "As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you."

Jesus did not come to be served but to serve, to seek and save the lost, and to bring restoration where there was ruin. If you believe in Him, will you now live like Him?

Will you love as He loves?
Will you work for the restoration of others?
Will you proclaim His truth in a world that is lost?
Will you stand firm in faith, knowing He is making all things new?

James 2:17 – "So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."

Turn to Him. Trust in Him. Live for Him. And be made whole.

________________________________________________

Glossary of Terms: Scientific and Evolutionary Terms

Abiogenesis – The theory that life arose from non-living matter without any intelligent direction.
Evolution – The process by which different species develop and diversify from earlier forms through natural selection.
Natural Selection – The process where organisms better adapted to their environment tend to survive and reproduce.
Mutation – A change in the DNA sequence that may lead to new traits in an organism.
Fossil Record – The collection of fossils that documents the history of life on Earth.
Transitional Fossil – A fossil that shows traits of both ancestral and derived species, supposedly demonstrating evolutionary change.
Random Mutations – Changes in DNA that occur without a specific purpose or direction.
Macroevolution – Large-scale evolutionary changes that result in the formation of new species.
Microevolution – Small-scale evolutionary changes within a species.
Genetic Code – The system of nucleotide sequences in DNA that contains the instructions for building and maintaining an organism.
Irreducible Complexity – The argument that some biological systems are too complex to have evolved incrementally.
The Bacterial Flagellum – A complex cellular structure often used as an example of irreducible complexity.
Punctuated Equilibrium – A theory suggesting that evolutionary change occurs in rapid bursts, not gradually.
Multiverse Theory – The speculative idea that multiple universes exist, each with different physical laws.
The Fine-Tuning Argument – The argument that the universe’s physical constants are precisely set to allow life.
Genetic Information Paradox – The idea that information requires an intelligent source and cannot arise randomly.
Survival of the Fittest – The concept that organisms with advantageous traits are more likely to survive and reproduce.
Spontaneous Generation – The outdated idea that life can arise from non-living matter (e.g., maggots from rotting meat).
Vestigial Structures – Body parts that are considered evolutionary leftovers with little or no function.
Hominid Evolution – The study of human evolution from ape-like ancestors.
RNA World Hypothesis – The theory that early life used RNA instead of DNA for genetic storage and enzymatic activity.

Philosophical and Logical Terms

Materialism – The belief that only physical matter exists, and everything (including thought and morality) arises from material interactions.
Determinism – The idea that all events, including human actions, are determined by preceding causes.
The Law of Identity – A fundamental logical principle stating that something is what it is (A is A).
The Law of Non-Contradiction – A principle stating that something cannot be both true and false at the same time in the same way.
The Law of the Excluded Middle – A principle stating that something is either true or false with no middle ground.
Epistemology – The study of knowledge, including how we know what we know.
Self-Refuting Argument – An argument that contradicts itself (e.g., "There is no absolute truth" is an absolute statement).
Begging the Question (Circular Reasoning) – A logical fallacy where the conclusion is assumed in the premise.
Reductionism – The idea that complex systems can be explained entirely by their simpler components.
The Problem of Induction – The philosophical issue of justifying the assumption that future observations will be like past ones.
The Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN) – Alvin Plantinga’s argument that if human cognition evolved purely for survival, we have no reason to trust our reasoning as true.
Cognitive Dissonance – The mental discomfort of holding conflicting beliefs.
Objective vs. Subjective Morality – The debate over whether moral values exist independently or are defined by individuals/society.
Social Contract Theory – The belief that morality is based on agreements within society rather than objective truths.
Moral Relativism – The belief that morality is subjective and varies by culture or individual belief.
Unfalsifiable Hypothesis – A claim that cannot be tested or disproven, making it non-scientific.

Theological and Metaphysical Terms

Theism vs. Atheism – The belief in God versus the belief that no deity exists.
Biblical Creationism – The belief that God created the universe and life as described in Genesis.
The Uniformity of Nature – The assumption that the laws of nature remain consistent over time.
Teleology – The study of purpose and design in nature.
Presuppositional Apologetics – A method of defending Christianity that argues all reasoning must start with belief in God.
Irreducible Complexity – The claim that some biological structures are too complex to have evolved incrementally.
The Anthropic Principle – The argument that the universe’s physical laws appear fine-tuned for human existence.
Transcendental Argument for God (TAG) – The argument that logic, morality, and science depend on God’s existence.

Miscellaneous Terms

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and DNA Comparison – The analogy comparing DNA’s complexity to human programming.
Information Theory – The scientific study of how information is transmitted and stored.
Algorithmic Complexity – The difficulty of randomly generating ordered, meaningful information.
Probability and Large Numbers – The argument that just because something is statistically possible doesn’t mean it will happen.
Grant Money in Scientific Research – The critique that many scientific theories are shaped by financial incentives.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Coyne, J. A. (2009). Why Evolution Is True. Viking.
Rana, F., & Ross, H. (2004). Origins of Life: Biblical and Evolutionary Models Face Off. NavPress.
Gish, D. (1995). Evolution: The Fossils Still Say No! Institute for Creation Research.
Nilsson, D.-E., & Pelger, S. (1994). "A Pessimistic Estimate of the Time Required for an Eye to Evolve." Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 256(1345), 53-58.
Behe, M. J. (2007). The Edge of Evolution: The Search for the Limits of Darwinism. Free Press.
Plantinga, A. (2011). Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism. Oxford University Press.
Nagel, T. (2012). Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False. Oxford University Press.
Dostoevsky, F. (1880). The Brothers Karamazov (on the consequences of a godless morality).
Lewis, C. S. (1952). Mere Christianity. HarperCollins.
Shannon, C. E. (1948). "A Mathematical Theory of Communication." The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379-423.
Gitt, W. (1997). In the Beginning Was Information. Christliche Literatur-Verbreitung.
Barrow, J. D., & Tipler, F. J. (1986). The Anthropic Cosmological Principle. Oxford University Press.
Davies, P. (2007). The Goldilocks Enigma: Why Is the Universe Just Right for Life? Mariner Books.
Craig, W. L. (2000). The Kalam Cosmological Argument. Wipf & Stock Publishers.
Lennox, J. C. (2009). God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? Lion Hudson.
Moreland, J. P. (1987). Scaling the Secular City: A Defense of Christianity. Baker Academic.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Bahnsen, G. L. (1998). Always Ready: Directions for Defending the Faith. Covenant Media Press.