Helen Roseveare – Fiction, Lie, Coincidence, or God?

I read this story in J.P. Moreland’s book, Kingdom Triangle. It’s told by Helen Roseveare, a missionary to Africa. It’s up to you to decide the best explanation for what happens.

One night, in Central Africa, I had worked hard to help a mother in the labor ward; but in spite of all that we could do, she died leaving us with a tiny, premature baby and a crying, two-year-old daughter. We would have difficulty keeping the baby alive. We had no incubator. We had no electricity to run an incubator, and no special feeding facilities. Although we lived on the equator, nights were often chilly with treacherous drafts.

A student-midwife went for the box we had for such babies and for the cotton wool that the baby would be wrapped in. Another went to stoke up the fire and fill a hot water bottle. She came back shortly, in distress, to tell me that in filling the bottle, it had burst. Rubber perishes easily in tropical climates. "...and it is our last hot water bottle!" she exclaimed. As in the West, it is no good crying over spilled milk; so, in Central Africa it might be considered no good crying over a burst water bottle. They do not grow on trees, and there are no drugstores down forest pathways. All right," I said, "Put the baby as near the fire as you safely can; sleep between the baby and the door to keep it free from drafts. Your job is to keep the baby warm."

The following noon, as I did most days, I went to have prayers with many of the orphanage children who chose to gather with me. I gave the youngsters various suggestions of things to pray about and told them about the tiny baby. I explained our problem about keeping the baby warm enough, mentioning the hot water bottle. The baby could so easily die if it got chilled. I also told them about the two-year-old sister, crying because her mother had died.

During the prayer time, one ten-year-old girl, Ruth, prayed with the usual blunt consciousness of our African children. "Please, God," she prayed, "send us a water bottle. It'll be no good tomorrow, God, the baby'll be dead; so, please send it this afternoon." While I gasped inwardly at the audacity of the prayer, she added by way of corollary, " ...And while You are about it, would You please send a dolly for the little girl so she'll know You really love her?" As often with children's prayers, I was put on the spot. Could I honestly say, "Amen?" I just did not believe that God could do this. Oh, yes, I know that He can do everything: The Bible says so, but there are limits, aren't there? The only way God could answer this particular prayer would be by sending a parcel from the homeland. I had been in Africa for almost four years at that time, and I had never, ever received a parcel from home. Anyway, if anyone did send a parcel, who would put in a hot water bottle? I lived on the equator!

Halfway through the afternoon, while I was teaching in the nurses' training school, a message was sent that there was a car at my front door. By the time that I reached home, the car had gone, but there, on the veranda, was a large twenty-two pound parcel! I felt tears pricking my eyes. I could not open the parcel alone; so, I sent for the orphanage children. Together we pulled off the string, carefully undoing each knot. We folded the paper, taking care not to tear it unduly. Excitement was mounting. Some thirty or forty pairs of eyes were focused on the large cardboard box.

From the top, I lifted out brightly colored, knitted jerseys. Eyes sparkled as I gave them out. Then, there were the knitted bandages for the leprosy patients, and the children began to look a little bored. Next, came a box of mixed raisins and sultanas - - that would make a nice batch of buns for the weekend. As I put my hand in again, I felt the...could it really be? I grasped it, and pulled it out. Yes, "A brand-new rubber, hot water bottle!" I cried. I had not asked God to send it; I had not truly believed that He could. Ruth was in the front row of the children. She rushed forward, crying out, "If God has sent the bottle, He must have sent the dolly, too!" Rummaging down to the bottom of the box, she pulled out the small, beautifully dressed dolly. Her eyes shone: She had never doubted! Looking up at me, she asked, "Can I go over with you, Mummy, and give this dolly to that little girl, so she'll know that Jesus really loves her?"

That parcel had been on the way for five whole months, packed up by my former Sunday School class, whose leader had heard and obeyed God's prompting to send a hot water bottle, even to the equator. One of the girls had put in a dolly for an African child -- five months earlier in answer to the believing prayer of a ten-year-old to bring it "That afternoon!"

"And it shall come to pass, that before they call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear." (Isaiah 65:24)

My First Debate!

I had my first online debate with some atheists on Reddit Friday regarding the Kalam Cosmological Argument (by William Lane Craig) for the existence of God. 

Here is how the Kalam goes:

1.      Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;

2.      The universe has a beginning of its existence;

3.      Therefore, The universe has a cause of its existence

My question was, “Which of the premises of the Kalam are incorrect and why?”

Here were my reasons for supporting the premises:

1.   Observation shows #1 to be true. What has not been observed is something beginning to exist without a cause

2.   Big Bang Theory, 1st & 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics, an actual infinite cannot exist in nature.

a.   The Big Bang Theory shows that there was a massive expansion of energy, but that energy either pre-existed this expansion or was created at the expansion.

b.   The 1^st Law of Thermodynamics says that energy cannot be created in nature.  If the energy was created, only a cause outside of nature could create the energy.

c.   The 2^nd Law of Thermodynamics says that entropy (usable energy) will continue to increase until there is no more usable energy left.  As a result, the universe will enter a state of Heat Death where everything turns cold and nothing can live. 

d.   If the universe has an infinite past, the universe would have reached the Heat Death state an infinite time ago.

 

Here are some of the rebuttals I saw:

1.  “creation ex material” and “creation ex nihilo” cannot be compared since we’ve never seen “creation ex nihilo”

2.  We don’t know if the Big Bang was ex nihilo or ex material

3.  Virtual particles pop in and out of existence and are uncaused (even though the cause is the energy in the vacuum fluctuations) because this phenomenon occurs randomly.  There is no hidden mechanism for their appearances; the energy merely sets the conditions for this to occur.

4.  Radioactive decay does not have a cause.  It just happens.

5.  We don’t know if the philosopher’s “nothing” is possible.

6.  If nothing exists, then something coming into existence cannot have a cause since there was nothing to act on.

7.  “It's laughable nonsense that only a childish intellect would consider valid... neither premise is known to be true and it's merely begging the question.  The cosmological argument for God is silly, the ontological argument for God is silly, and the teleological argument for God is silly. These are tools used by intelligent, but dishonest, people to convince dumb or ignorant people to subscribe to their irrational belief system, and it works, extremely well. There have been many discussions on Reddit where former atheists were asked why they became theists and a common answer is one or more of these arguments.”

 

I believe the argument stood up well, although the atheists would disagree.  I suppose we are all biased.  Care to guess which rebuttal is my favorite?  #7 inspires me to continue these types of debates on Reddit. 

One may ask, “Why bother debating atheists?  You aren’t going to change their minds.”  I agree, I’m not likely to convert one of the atheists that I’m debating with.  They are very entrenched in their beliefs.  However, there are many Christians who silently struggle with doubt.  They do not feel free to be open and honest with the questions they have.  In searching for answers, the internet is the place they’ll go.  It’s not always about who someone is discussing an issue with; it’s also about who is listening (or reading).

 

Stephen Meyer's "Signature in the Cell" Lecture

I first saw Stephen Meyer in the Ben Stein’s movie “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”, but didn’t know who he was.  Then earlier this week I was listening to a debate on Intelligent Design between William Lane Craig and Francisco Ayala (boring…) and saw this link to a lecture by Stephen Meyer.  I will definitely be getting Stephen Meyer’s book, The Signature in the Cell: DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design.  I’m super impressed with the research that has been done in cellular biology and how it points to design. 

Now to be an atheist, you have to believe that the molecules necessary for life came together and formed a means to replicate without a pre-existing template (ie DNA), which through an undirected mechanism (ie natural selection, which is a process description not a mechanism), continued to gain complexity until a cell formed…and then eventually humans.  Is there any evidence to support the existence of self-replicating molecules?  For example: Scientists are able to replicate life using DNA, which provides the mechanism for the replication, but these processes are directed by a designer (ie the scientist).  How does this occur in nature without a designer or DNA?  What is the cause for the replication?  Why would this occur?  This is something I hope to study more.