Bodyguard of Lies

Posted by on Dec 14, 2013 in Knowing for Sure Blog, Tough Questions | 0 comments

Bodyguard of Lies

Anthony Cave Brown wrote a fascinating account that explored the clandestine war concerning the D-Day secrets of World War II. The book is full of history, real history, detailing accounts that would make a block buster hit in Hollywood, without their need to embellish the story to hold the viewers’ interest. Deadly cat and mouse games, secret meetings, double agents, code breaking, air, sea, and land missions, heroic men and women who gave their lives in secret, and perished in secret at the hands of the Gestapo. All to keep Hitler from discovering the time and locations of the D-Day invasion.

Winston Churchill said, “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.” 1 Early on in World War II, British intelligence had cracked the German code, (using a machine dubbed ‘Ultra’), and were able to decipher the German communications between the agents of the Third Reich. As important as this was, the Allies could not always act on what was discovered or the Germans would realize that their code had been broken. In fact, any intelligence that was used by Ultra had to have a cover of discovery at least two layers deep. In other words, if the Allies used some intelligence from Ultra, it had to have been disclosed, revealed, observed by at least two other identifiable sources the enemy would assume was the cause. That way the Nazis would continue to use their assumed unbreakable code, and Ultra would not be compromised.

Ralph Ingersoll was an American Intelligence officer during World War II. He was part of an American team that met with British Counter Intelligence in Casablanca. It became obvious to the Americans early on that the British ‘owned’ the intelligence in Europe. Ingersoll wrote, “In matters touching the European Theater, the British had a 100 percent airtight, hermetically sealed monopoly on intelligence about the enemy… They were the sole and unquestioned authority…” 2 It was the code breaker Ultra that gave the British this position of power. It was Ultra that would determine what was actual and what was counterfeit about the strategies and tactics of the Third Reich.

rebeccaliestruthIn the Western World, most view science as being the arbitrator between what is true and what is false. The average person looks to science to answer questions about how the world functions, and to tell us what is important or meaningful, what has value, what serves a purpose, and how best to solve a problem. Often the truth of the human condition is hard to swallow as my daughter Rebecca has drawn. Science tells us that people have value insofar as their contribution to the betterment of society. Some believe animals have as much value as humans, and in certain conditions may be of greater value, because they don’t contribute to polluting our environment. You only need to view The Day the Earth Stood Still remake to see the message where advanced aliens are saving all the life forms on earth, except the humans. Humans do not have any inherent value beyond their position in the family unit, local community, county, or state and how they advance flourishing of life, with the exceptions of human life.

We have come to understand this largely because our public education system has told us so, and the indoctrination to this world view begins early in elementary school, where Darwinian Evolution is first introduced. Students are taught that they are the result of a blind process which has taken millions of years and that there is no purpose to their life. I have no problem with the millions of years, but take issue with the blind and purposeless process atheists propose.

J. Warner Wallace, author of Cold Case Christianity, wrote recently in his daily e-mail about atheist physicists, Krauss, Hawking, and Stenger who would attack Christianity as opposed to other religions. “It’s been a fascinating learning experience for me and I can’t wait to start writing. These authors offer differing naturalistic explanations for what we observe in the universe, but all three are united in their rejection of Christianity. I found it interesting, however, that Christianity became the specific focus of their comparisons.” 3 Not only does Christianity offer an answer to our beginnings, it offers an answer to our purpose in life.

Three examples of lies that surround a Creator are: something came from nothing, Darwinian evolution explains how we came to be, and religion is the cause of all wars.

Starting with religion, we can look at the the wars in recent history that have been the cause of millions of deaths. Lenin, Stalin, and Khrushchev over 66 million; Chinese Communist regimes between 30 and 60 million; all have been atheist governments. Any older copy of the Guinness Book of World Records will have this information for you. How many died in the Salem witch trials? Twenty-five to thirty people. How about the Crusades? You might find some Internet estimates as high as ten or fifteen million, but credible historians agree this is absurd and estimate less than five-hundred thousand and some as low as one-hundred thousand.

Anthony Flew, the life long atheist who turned theist, pointed out in his book, There is a God, “If [atheists] want to discourage belief in God, the popularizers must furnish arguments in support of their own atheistic views. Today’s atheists evangelists hardly even try to argue their case in this regard. Instead, they train their guns on well-known abuses in history of major world religions. But the excesses and atrocities of organized religion have no bearing whatsoever on the existence of God, just as the threat of nuclear proliferation has no bearing on the question of whether E=MC2.” 4

Darwinian Evolution does not answer the question of how life began, only how life evolved. What I don’t understand is how someone can state they finished a race when they never started it. Even if macro evolution ( large changes over time) was true, it does nothing to explain how life started. Even the most basic cells are extremely complicated organisms which depend on very specific conditions to survive. How these cells would first come to exist, then thrive, divide, and multiply is the million dollar question.

To toss more fuel on the fire of doubt concerning macro evolution, Michael Behe proposed the concept of irreducible complexity. Simply put, some organisms, (his examples were bacteria), cannot function with out all the parts in the right place. Even if one protein was missing, the bacteria would not survive. How can evolution answer the question of something evolving that does not work unless it started fully formed and functional? Even Richard Dawkins, Darwinian Evolutions biggest cheerleader, in a debate with John Lennox, admitted that he does not know how life began.

Finally, ending with the first lie is a simple lesson we can be teaching our children at a very young age. Ask them where ‘this’, (motioning to your surroundings), came from. The answer is obviously ‘something’, because you can’t get something from nothing and even a very young child can grasp that. There are only two possible choices, from something, or from nothing. You can point to a tree and ask where it came from. The answer is of course a seed from another tree. And where did that tree come from? The answer repeats itself successively as we turn back time, till time and the limits of science blur the inductive answer. Someone may say that after billions and billions of years, the earth’s atmosphere and elements reached a point where life could begin, but they are missing the point. Where did the earth and the elements come from? Where did our sun come from? Where did our universe come from? When you consider that, and the implications of the second law of thermodynamics which states energy is being expended and used, it then it must have had a beginning.

In conclusion, you can’t get something from nothing, a concept you can teach your young children now. Darwinian Evolution does not answer how life began, because if you don’t begin the race, you can’t finish it. Religion is not the cause of all wars, even if it was, it would have no bearing on the existence of God. Some scientists are not willing to follow where the truth leads them. G.W. Leibniz, who was the co-discoverer of calculus and a brilliant intellect wrote, “The first question which should rightly be asked is: Why is there something rather than nothing?” 5

 

Sources:

1. Brown, Anthony C. Bodyguard of Lies. London: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1975. Print.
2. Ibid.
3. Wallace, James, W. “When the Case for God Is Strong, Skeptics Attack Christianity” J. Warner Wallace Daily e-mail. Cold Case Christianity. 13, December 2013.
4. Flew, Anthony. There Is A God. New York: Harper One, 2007. Print.
5. Craig, William, L. “On Guard”. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook Publishing, 2010. Print.

Feel free to leave a reply. :)

%d bloggers like this: