Basic HTML Version
DOES
GOD EXIST?
Can
the existence of God be scientifically
proved? Where did the first LIFE
come
from?
Can
we know whether God possesses MINO
T ET's
FACE
this question: Is it
L
rational to believe in God? Is
God merely a myth - an inven–
tion of an ignorant, superstitious past?
Many today assume this.
1 Questioned God's Existence
With me - and I hope with the
reader - there was the desire to
KNOW! l wanted to be SURE!
1
(jtleS–
tioned
the existence of God
!
Also 1
questioned the opposing doctrine of
evolution. 1 did not seek to msprove
either. But 1 did research and carefully
examine
the e·vidences
on both sides
of this two·sided question. For this
question is the very
.rtarti11g place
for
the acquisition of
all
knowledge.
It
is
the FOUNDATION for UNDERSTAND–
lNG!
In my lengthy research into this
question, starting 46 years ago, 1
emptied my mind of prejudice. I
sought the TRUTH, whether it was
what 1 wanted to believe or not.
There are the two possibilities of
origin - special creation by a Creator,
God, or the theory of evolution. It has
become intellectually fashionable to
accept the evolutionary doctrine.
It
has
won popular acceptance in science and
PLAIN TRUTH
June
1972
power?
by
Herbert W. Armstrong
higher education. Even many profess–
ing Christian denominations have ac–
cepted it, if only passively.
Yet, though in the minority, there
still remain scientists, educators, and
fundamentalist religious groups, as
well as those in Judaism, wbo ding
to belief in the existence of God.
Don't Assume- KNOW !
Many of these, however, especially
among the more or less religious indi–
viduals, have merely
aumned
the
existence of God . Why? Simply be–
cause they were taught
it
from child–
hood. Jt has been believed in the
circles in which they have lived or
associated. But few of these have
looked for proof!
Of course, on the other hand, per–
haps a vast majority who accept evolu–
tion, at least passively, were simply
swept into that acceptance in a college
or university. It has become the schol–
arly
"JN"
thing. The opposite belief,
special creation, has not been taught.
They have probably not examined it.
Too frequent ly proponents utilize the
psychological ploy that it is a badge
of scholarly status to accept evolu–
tion, and a stamp of ignorance or
intellectual inferiority to doubt the
hypothesis.
All of which goes to show that
people in general believe what they
do, simply because they have been
taught it, or because it has been ac–
cepted in their particular social en·
vironment. People want to
belong
.'
They go along with their particular
group. In general, they believe what
they have taken carelessly for granted
- wilhottt examination
01·
proof
.'
Of course I know well, too, that
people generally believe
ollly
what
they are
trilling
TO ACCEPT. In most
instances people feel no compulsion
to
refttse
what is accepted in their
social or geographícal environment. As
one philosopher saíd, most died-in–
the-wool evolutionists accept the theory
becmJSe of their ·relttCtance or 1/rlUJili–
ingness lo believe in God.
As the book professing to be the
Word of God says: "the carnal mind
is enmity [hostile] against God: for
it is not subject to the law of God,
neither índeed can be" (Romans 8:7).
AH the facts, positive evidences,
rational reasonings and proofs in the
world will never induce such a one
to accept that against which he is
17