Introduction

I practiced medicine for forty-four years…practice, practice, practice.  When retirement arrived, I realized that that season of that practice was over; a new season of practicing had begun.  That new season could be called many things like the practice of that over-used word retirement, like the practice of pre-burial-living, or like the practice of self-pity and regrets.  But there is another practice that requires a little more effort. That is the practice of fine-tuning my worldview.

Why not philosophy rather that worldview?  Philosophy in a pure sense has to do with academic theory and has a more general application to the masses.  It involves books, lectures, and teaching positions.  Did I say that it has to do with theory?  Worldview has more to do with one’s particular and personal understanding of life.  It is personal because no one else is more of an expert in my worldview.  It is particular because one views the world with certain parameters.  One’s worldview is like an onion: it has layers.  One layer might be personal appearance.  Another might be the value of being friendly or neighborly.  A deeper layer could be integrity, etc. But in the center of that onion lies the question of “WHY”.

Some components of the “WHY” are where did I come from, what am I to do here, and where am I going???  After my recent treatment of cancer, another component that came into focus is when will it end?  One’s worldview does not have to answer all the above; but it will provide the framework in which to think of each.  In this essay, I would like to focus in on the first question of where did I come fromor better, how did it all start?  My thoughts on the other two follow in other essays.

In general, one’s worldview on how things started either involves a creator (remember intelligent design?) or not.  Some who believe in a creator would like to have a middle road.  For them, this creator is a   s   l   o   w  creator who required millions of years of trial and error.  The reason for this middle road position is to accommodate the smart and unbiased scientist with letters after his/her name.  I do not think that this option is defensible. So, to keep it simple and intellectually honest, I propose that there are really only two views.  The first is that of the creationist and the second is that of the evolutionist.

Unhappy Evolutionists

The evolutionists are an unhappy group and they take all the fun out of life.  They have no idea why dogs wag their tails.  They also make some strange, unscientific assumptions like: time + chance + energy + matter = increasing complexity.  I guess they do not agree with the second law of thermodynamics and all that increasing entropy stuff (1).  But I do admire them for taking on the challenge of getting God out of the beginnings business.  If God did not start things, then something else did, thus the equation above.  They might smile more if someone reminded them that time is timeless, chance does not exist, and energy and matter had to start somehow (ex nihilo anyone?).

Has anyone ever seen a photo of Charles Darwin smiling?  The answer is “I do not think so.”  So, one might ask the question “Why not?”  It could be because he realizes that he cannot prove his theory and that a future someone else will and get the real credit.  Or, it could be that the “sub-theories” of evolution are multiplying like rabbits in his mind and the proofs are not.  But not to worry, some future-someone will prove the theories…just wait.  The evolutionist’s answer to the question of “how did it all start?” must be there somewhere; I just cannot find it.  Maybe, I just do not have the faith!  In the meantime, get your photo taken, like Darwin, and look really serious and scholarly.  But do not smile (an indicator of happiness) because the hope of explaining how and why a human being sees, hears, smells, feels, thinks, and aspires is wistful; and that nagging concept of a creator just will not go away.

Happy Creationists

My worldview includes my position of being a creationist; and I know why dogs wag their tails. Some might say that that worldview is naïve, closed-minded, juvenile, anti-scientific, fatuous, retrogressive, stupid, obtuse, simple-minded, foolish, and even racist (if one considers looking down on aliens).  Genesis 1: 26ff says: “Then God said, ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness’…And God saw everything that He had made, and behold, it was very good.  And there was morning and there was evening, the sixth day.” If there was a sixth day, then five days preceded it (duh!), but I jumped to the sixth day because that is when the image-bearer appears.  In reading all of Genesis 1, one notes that all the six days have morning and evening; sounds like the days of our experience, doesn’t it?  One would also note that the first five days were described as “good.”  But there was something special about the “very good” sixth day.  That something special was the creation of man.  By the way, tail-bearing dogs were created earlier on day six.  The creation of man was an event, not a process.  This was divine fiat if ever I saw one!

As a Christian believer, I not only acknowledge the account of the Creator and His creation, but I acknowledge the account of the re-Creator and His re-creation.  The sin of Eve and Adam did not stop the love of God.  In fact, John 3:16 shows His continuing love in spite of the fall: “For God so loved the world, that He sent His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.”  His only Son, Jesus, was a creationist (and “heterosexualist” and “monogamousist”) as seen in Mark 10:6: “But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’”  All believers should rejoice with Paul when he says, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation.  The old has passed away; behold, the new has come” (II Corinthians 5:17). I may be wrong, but I doubt the term “rejoicing” is found in the evolutionist’s literature.

Happy Dogs

Now, let us conclude by looking at this dog thing.  As I said, God created dogs, with tails, early on the sixth day of creation, which was good, but not yet very good.  I was not present, but I suspect that their tales were limp and well, just there.  They had food, squirrels to chase, and plenty of trees at which to aim, but something was missing.  They had several hours to wonder if God had missed something.  Then later on the sixth day, something happened!  All of a sudden, there was this biped who called them by name, who petted them, who threw things for them to find and bring back (AKA “fetch”), and who actually had the faith in them to say, “Get that squirrel!”  So, I am convinced that that is why dogs wag their tails; because God gave them the very best.  I challenge any evolutionist to rebut this.

1. Entropy: A measure of the disorder or randomness in a closed system.