Sheila Weber

December 21, 2025

GOD IS LOVE

Sheila Weber

December 21, 2025

Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. (1 John 4:8-10)

[NOTE: I lost my original notes. This recreation does not have the many footnotes I usually have. I apologize for all the quotes without a source of attribution.]

When Scripture says God is love, it is not offering a mere description—it is giving us a definition of God’s very nature. God does not have love the way we have attributes. God is love. I increasingly lean toward the idea that every attribute we ascribe to God is an attribute of His love. God’s love is:

· omnipotent

· all-knowing

· holy

· just

· merciful

· gracious

These are not competing qualities such that we would have to say, “God is love -but God is also Justice!” as if somehow God stopped loving when God acted justly. There is no expressions of whom God is or what God does that is not a reflection of divine love.

Right away in Scripture, we learn that a key aspect of God’s love – and the attributes of it - is that it endures. It’s in some of the most ancient confessions of Israel. I’ve introduced you before to The God Creed in Exodus 34:6–7. When God reveals Himself to Moses, He also tells Moses what He is like.

“The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin.”

This is Scripture’s own summary of who God is. We see versions of it scattered throughout the Old Testament.

Psalm 103:8 - “The LORD is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love.”
Psalm 138:8 - “The LORD will fulfill his purpose for me; your steadfast love, O LORD, endures forever.”
Lamentations 3:22–23 - “The faithful love of the LORD never ends! His mercies never cease. Great is his faithfulness; his mercies begin afresh each morning.”

Notice what is absent in these texts. There is no expiration date. No asterisk. No sneaky clause that says, “Well, unless you fail Me one too many times!!!” God’s love is not presented as fragile, or easily revoked, or dependent on our consistency. It is presented as durable, stubborn, even relentless.

There are many images the Old Testament gives us to create a picture in our minds of what this loving God is like. These are two that stood out to me this week.

God’s Love Looks Like a Shepherd (Psalm 23)

“The Lord is my shepherd, I lack nothing. He takes me to lush pastures, he leads me to refreshing water. He restores my strength. He leads me down the right paths for the sake of his reputation. Even when I must walk through the darkest valley, I fear no danger, for you are with me; your rod and your staff reassure me.
You prepare a feast before me in plain sight of my enemies. You refresh my head with oil; my cup is completely full. Surely your goodness and faithfulness will pursue me all my days, and I will live in the Lord’s house for the rest of my life. (NET)

So what does this shepherd do?

· The shepherd provides

· The shepherd leads

· The shepherd restores

· The shepherd protects

· The shepherd pursues

There is nothing that chases away the shepherd’s presence. And notice how the psalm ends—not with the sheep clinging to God, but with God’s goodness and faithfulness pursuing the sheep. This reminds of something Paul wrote:

“I am sure that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor ruling spirits, nothing now, nothing in the future, no powers, nothing above us, nothing below us, nor anything else in the whole world will ever be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Romans 8:38-39)

This next image is going to sound like a stark contrast, but it’s not. It is still an expression of love.

God’s Love Looks Like a Crucible

Proverbs 17:3 - “The refining pot is for silver and the furnace for gold, but the Lord tests the hearts.”
Zechariah 13:9 - “And I will bring the third part through the fire, refine them as silver is refined, and test them as gold is tested, they will call on My name, and I will answer them; I will say, ‘They are My people,’ and they will say, ‘The Lord is My God.’”
Malachi 3:3 - “He will sit as a smelter and purifier of silver, and He will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, so that they may present to the Lord offerings in righteousness.”

Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest provides a beautiful illustration.

“The picture here is of an ancient goldsmith who puts his crude gold ore in a crucible, subjects it to intense heat, and thus liquefies the mass. The impurities rise to the surface and are skimmed off. When the metalworker is able to see the reflection of his face clearly mirrored in the surface of the liquid, he takes it off the fire, for he knows that the contents are pure gold…. This, above all, God the Father desires to see. Christlikeness is God’s ideal for His child.”

God does not refine in order to discard. He refines because He intends to keep. The fire is not a sign of rejection—it is a sign of commitment. He who has begun a good work in us will be faithful to continue it. (Philippians 1:6)

Fast forward to the incarnation, in which the ultimate expression of God’s love has a human face. What God’s people had previously only confessed in word is now revealed as a person: the Word become flesh. This Incarnation of God, Jesus, is what we celebrate at Christmas. And as far as a revelation of God goes, this one could not be better.

· Colossians 1:15, 19 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation… in him all the
fullness of God was pleased to dwell,
· Colossians 2:9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,
· John 10:30 I and the Father are one.”

So we can expect to see in the life of Jesus the full expression of God’s love. If you want to know what God is like, look at Jesus. If you want to know what God’s love looks like in action, look at Jesus. Now we don’t just hear words and envision images about the Shepherd and the Crucible and all the other things, we see them in action.

Let’s take three main events in Jesus’ life, as well as the final vision in John’s Revelation, to see what God’s love is like as expressed through the life, death, resurrection, and return of Jesus.

God’s Love Is Like a Manger

John 1:14 “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
Isaiah 9:6 “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
Titus 3:4–7 “But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”

I like this summary from Thomas Watson:

“See here [in the Incarnation]… the infinite love of God the Father; that when we had lost ourselves by sin, God, in the riches of his grace, sent forth his Son… to redeem us. And behold the infinite love of Christ, in that he was willing thus to condescend [and] did not disdain to take our flesh. Oh, the love of Christ!”

In Bethlehem, the first statement God makes about Himself in Christ is not aloofness, but proximity. Not distance, but nearness. In the Incarnation, God leads by displaying that God’s love shows up in vulnerability, humility, empathy, and genuine relationship.

God’s Love Looks Like a Cross

Romans 5:8 “But God commended his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.”
John 3:16 “For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.”
1 John 4:9-10 “God’s love was revealed among us in this way: God sent his one and only Son into the world so that we might live through him. Love consists in this: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.”

A scholar named William Barclay wrote,

“The coming of Christ and the death of Christ, is the proof of God’s love. Sometimes the thing is stated as if on the one side there was a gentle, loving Christ, on the other an angry and vengeful God; and as if Christ did something which changed God’s attitude to [people]. Nothing could be further from the truth…. Jesus did not come to change God’s attitude to [people]; he came to show what it is and always was.”

Philip Keller grew up in a missionary family in Africa, and later became a pastor and prolific author who often focused on Jesus as the Good Shepherd. He once wrote this.

“Here we commemorate the greatest and deepest demonstration of true love the world has ever known. For God looked down upon sorrowing, struggling, sinning humanity and was moved with compassion for the contrary, sheep-like creatures He had made. In spite of the tremendous personal cost it would entail to Himself to deliver them from their dilemma He chose deliberately to descend and live amongst them that He might deliver them…

He knew He would be exposed to terrible privation, to ridicule, to false accusations, to rumor, gossip and malicious charges that branded Him as a glutton, drunkard, friend of sinners and even an imposter. It entailed losing His reputation. It would involve physical suffering, mental anguish and spiritual agony.

In short, His coming to earth as the Christ, as Jesus of Nazareth, was a straightforward case of utter self-sacrifice that culminated in the cross of Calvary. The laid-down life, the poured-out blood were the supreme symbols of total selflessness. This was love.”

It's important to remember that the cross did not persuade God to love us (see John 3;16). The cross reveals that God already loved us. If, “while were yet sinners Christ died for us,” and Christ died because He loves us, it follows that God loved us before the cross. And on that cross, we see that God’s love is cruciform. It is selfless, life-giving sacrifice on our behalf, so that those who are far from God will come near to Him.

God’s Love Is Like an Empty Tomb

Raising yourself from the dead is a pretty convincing way of demonstrating that you have the power to do whatever you claim to be able to do. Jesus claimed to be able to love us in all the ways we have already covered. Contained in His death and resurrection is a promise. C.S. Lewis once wrote:

“In the Christian story God descends to re-ascend. He comes down … down to the very roots and sea-bed of the nature he has created. But he goes down to come up again and bring the whole ruined world up with him.”

This empty tomb is the culmination of Jesus’ life ministry. It’s another variation on the theme we have been covering. I know some of you enjoy reading A.W. Tozer’s devotionals. He has this to say about the life of Jesus:

“When Jesus died on the cross the mercy of God did not become any greater. It could not become any greater, for it was already infinite. We get the odd notion that God is showing mercy because Jesus died. No--Jesus died because God is showing mercy. It was the mercy of God that gave us Calvary, not Calvary that gave us mercy. If God had not been merciful there would have been no incarnation, no babe in the manger, no man on a cross and no open tomb.”

God’s Love is Like A City Whose Gates Are Never Shut

John writes of a city whose gates are never shut in Revelation 21 and 22.

And in the city, there is no need for the sun to light the day or moon the night because the resplendent glory of the Lord provides the city with warm, beautiful light and the Lamb illumines every corner of the new Jerusalem. And all peoples of all the nations will walk by its unfailing light, and the rulers of the earth will stream into the city bringing with them the symbols of their grandeur and power. During the day, its gates will not be closed; the darkness of night will never settle in.

He’s describing the unending, welcoming, and secure nature of divine love. There is no fear, sin, or sorrow, only perpetual invitation and rest for the redeemed.

(21:3-6) And I heard a great voice, coming from the throne: “See, the home of God is with His people. He will live among them; they will be His people, and God Himself will be with them. The prophecies are fulfilled: He will wipe away every tear from their eyes. Death will be no more; mourning no more, crying no more, pain no more, for the first things have gone away.” And the One who sat on the throne announced to His creation, “See, I am making all things new.”

(22:16-21) Then Jesus said, “I, Jesus, have sent My messenger to show you and guide you so that you in turn would share this testimony with the churches. I am the Root and the Descendant of David, the Bright Morning Star. The Spirit and the Bride say, “Come.” And let everyone who hears these words say, “Come.” And let those who thirst come. All who desire to drink, let them take and drink freely from the water of life.

* * * * *

So what is God’s love like?

· It is like a Shepherd who pursues us even when we wander.

· It is like a Crucible that refines without rejecting.

· It is like a Manger, choosing nearness over aloofness

· It is like a Cross, laying itself down for the sake of the beloved.

· It is like an Empty Tomb, refusing to let death, sin, or fear have the final word.

· It is like an Eternally Open City, inviting all into the Light of Christ with joyful entry and eternal rest.

When Jesus arrived, it was The Light of the World shining into the darkness. And the darkness did not—and will not—overcome it. This is the love we celebrate this Christmas, and all the year.

Guest User

November 11, 2016

All Blog Posts, Sermon Blog

Biblical Theology - Getting to the Theological Heart of the Bible

Guest User

November 11, 2016

All Blog Posts, Sermon Blog

Biblical Theology is concerned with the big picture of the Bible. This message is a look at why that should matter to every Christian and how they can learn to apply it themselves.

Anthony Weber

August 14, 2013

GC:engage, Sermon Blog

GCengage: Is God A Monster?

Anthony Weber

August 14, 2013

GC:engage, Sermon Blog

Richard Dawkins famously wrote: “The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

That kind of accusation makes sense coming from someone who wants to discredit Gd and the Bible. However, it's not just the atheists who struggle with the Old Testament. I was raised in a pacifist Mennonite community, and there were just large sections of the Old Testament that nobody talked about in polite company. We read the story about David and Goliath with as much detachment and inner condemnation as we could. We wondered how much we should cheer for David’s mighty men, who were the elite forces of their day. We cheered when Sampson brought the temple down, but with some guilt. So what do you think we did with all the God-ordained wars in the Old Testament?

Nothing.

We loved Jesus when he said “love your enemy” and “turn the other cheek,” but God? God in the Old Testament was sometimes treated like the crazy uncle who shows up at family reunions. Nobody really knows how to interact with him or explain him to others.

From a Christian apologetics standpoint, this issue is important. I think many Christians remain as confused as I was. But this is an crucial topic to address because those outside the faith aren’t letting this one slide – and rightly so. How could God be “good” if he commanded so much evil? This is the question we must be prepared to answer.

So how do we understand a sometimes confusing Old Testament God, and how do we respond to critics such as Dawkins? Let's tackle this issue by looking closely at this critique of God. In the process, we will see that the God of the Old Testament is not a God for which we need to apologize, but is rather a God who loves the world.

___________________________________________________________________________

The accusation: "God’s actions as seen in the Bible are incompatible with his character as described in the Bible (with genocidal wars, etc). Either he doesn’t exist, the Bible is hopelessly muddled, or God is a monster.”

First Response: “Is it possible that God knows things and/or has reasons that our beyond our ability to understand, but would make sense if we knew them?”

Sometimes we read stories about alleged police brutality or wartime atrocities, then find out later that the police were justified in what they did. We didn’t have the whole story. Of course, we get in trouble in a lot of situations precisely because we are not God – we don’t have perfect knowledge, and justice, and mercy, etc. But if God has all these things (which is the Christian claim), isn’t it possible that if we knew what God knew, we would understand? This is a modest point, but an important one.

Second Response: “Let’s clarify what we are talking about before we go any further. What do you mean by good and evil?”

The most popular atheist writers today are very outspoken about things they think are wrong, while at the same time claiming there either is no such thing, or that morality is just a personal or cultural preference.

“Morality is a collective illusion of humankind put in place by our genes in order to make us good cooperators.” – Michael Ruse
“The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect of there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.” - Richard Dawkins
In an interview with Skeptic, Frank Miele asked Mr. Dawkins,“How do you determine whether something is good or not, other than by just your personal choice?” Dawkins responded, “I don’t even try.”

In other words, atheists are criticizing God for being evil when compared to some sort of universal standard - which they don’t believe in. I point this out not to belittle the people holding this position, but to highlight the problem with the criticism. Not liking what God does is very different from God being evil.

Third Answer: "When the Old Testament is read properly, it becomes clear that God in not a monster at all."

Paul Copan has written a book called Is God A Moral Monster? In it, he notes some key things to remember as we think of God in the Old Testament, specifically when it comes to the issue of war. I have written on this in detail at TC Apologetics, but I will summarize here:

There were justifiable reasons for cultures to be judged.
God waited and warned the people involved (for example, the high priest Mechizadech lived in Canaan in the city of Salem).
The Jewish nation exercised lex talionis (a principle which says that punishment cannot exceed the crime). What other nations had done to others was now being done to them.
Biblical “war texts” record a dispossession of people and destruction of worldview centers. God was destroying sinful cultural strongholds and their perpetrators (priests and military) while dispersing the population.
God commanded the Israelites to accept immigrants from these nations, clearly showing God was not interested in genocide.
We continue to see favorable references to people from all nations living in Israel after the wars.

This is not a history of genocide, but of the salvation of an area of the world from specific cultures that were some of the most brutal on record in human history. In an interview with Lee Strobel, Paul Copan quoted Miroslav Volf, a Croatian who lived through unspeakable violence during ethnic strife in the former Yugoslavia. I think his perspective contains great insight into the nature of God:

“I used to think that wrath was unworthy of God. Isn’t God love? Shouldn’t divine love be beyond wrath? God is love, and God loves every person and every creature. That’s exactly why God is wrathful against some of them. My last resistance to the idea of God’s wrath was a casualty of the war in the former Yugoslavia, the region from which I come. According to some estimates, 200,000 people were killed and over 3,000,000 were displaced. My villages and cities were destroyed, my people shelled day in and day out, some of them brutalized beyond imagination, and I could not imagine God not being angry. Or think of Rwanda in the last decade of the past century, where 800,000 people were hacked to death in one hundred days!

How did God react to the carnage? By doting on the perpetrators in a grandfatherly fashion? By refusing to condemn the bloodbath but instead affirming the perpetrators’ basic goodness? Wasn’t God fiercely angry with them? Though I used to complain about the indecency of the idea of God’s wrath, I came to think that I would have to rebel against a God who wasn’t wrathful at the sight of the world’s evil. God isn’t wrathful in spite of being love. God is wrathful because God is love.”

This is one of the messages of the anger of God in the Old Testament: God is not indifferent with respect to those who suffer human cruelty. Is it possible to conceive of a being who embodies love but does not become outraged at injustice? And while not every injustice in this life is addressed immediately, God’s plan offers at least a hope that justice will have its day, if not in this life then the life to come.

“Human anger at injustice will carry less weight and seriousness if divine anger at injustice in the service of life is not given its proper place. If our God is not angry, why should we be? That God would stoop to become involved in such human cruelties as violence is…. not a matter for despair, but of hope. God does not simply give people up to experience violence. God chooses to become involved…so that evil will not have the last word.” – Terence Fretheim

___________________________________________________________________________

Recommended Resources

Tactics, Greg Koukl

Is God A Moral Monster? Paul Copan

“How Could God Command Genocide in the Old Testament?” Justin Taylor, at the Gospel Coalition

“Killing The Canaanites,” Clay Jones

TC Apologetics: God of War Series (tcapologetics.org)

TC Apologetics: The Shape of Reality (Identifying Evil)

Anthony Weber

July 26, 2013

All Blog Posts, GC:engage, Sermon Blog

GCengage: Do All Roads Lead To God?

Anthony Weber

July 26, 2013

All Blog Posts, GC:engage, Sermon Blog

Religious people generally choose one of four different positions when talking about God: exclusivism, inclusivism, pluralism or universalism.

Exclusivism (particularism). There is one true religion. An exclusivist follower of Christ claims Christianity is the only true religion, and salvation is impossible without explicit trust in Christ.
Inclusivism. Others can experience the benefits of the one true religion in spite of following a false religion. An inclusivist follower of Christ claims there is no salvation outside of Christ, but God will extend grace to those who have partial or distorted knowledge and implicitly - perhaps unknowingly - believe in him. God can be sought and found in other religions in spite of their flaws, and that will be salvatory.
Pluralism. All religions are capable of leading to God (think Life of Pi). This is the basic idea behind the imagery on bumper stickers like “CoExist."
Universalism. Eventually, all will be saved no matter what they believe.

The claim that all roads lead to God is a pluralist position, though some forms of inclusivism may claim this as well. There are two basic claims that the religious pluralist makes: All of us are right because we know something about God, and what we see will be sufficient to lead us to God.

The first claim is often explained by using The Parable of the Elephant.

Some disciples went to the Buddha and said, "Sir, some are saying that the world is infinite and eternal and others that it is finite and not eternal, some saying that the soul dies with the body and others that it lives on forever, and so forth. What, Sir, would you say concerning them?"

The Buddha answered, "Once upon a time there was a certain raja who said to his servant, 'Gather together all the men of Savatthi who were born blind... and show them an elephant.' 'Very good, sire,' replied the servant, and he did as he was told. To one man he presented the head of the elephant, to another its ears, to another a tusk, to another the trunk, the foot, back, tail, and tuft of the tail, saying to each one that that was the elephant.

"Then the raja went to each of them and said, ‘Tell me, what sort of thing is an elephant?'

"The men who were presented with the head answered, 'Sire, an elephant is like a pot.' And the men who had observed the ear replied, 'An elephant is like a winnowing basket.' Those who had been presented with a tusk said it was a ploughshare. Those who knew only the trunk said it was a plough; others said the body was a grainery; the foot, a pillar; the back, a mortar; the tail, a pestle, the tuft of the tail, a brush.

"Then they began to quarrel, shouting, 'Yes it is!' 'No, it is not!' 'An elephant is not that!' 'Yes, it's like that!' and so on, till they came to blows over the matter.

"Just so are these preachers and scholars holding various views blind and unseeing....."

(paraphrased from cs.princeton.edu)

Unfortunately for the pluralists, the parable doesn’t support their position. It requires one person to be in a position to judge whether or not all the other competing claims are true. So, it requires a qualified judge who sees all and knows all. In fact, this parable is compatible with a Christian view of God. Sure, other people know some true things about God. Christianity simply claims to be the religion that offers a unified perspective of the Big Picture.

In addition, this parable shows a misunderstanding of what religions actually claim. Pluralism claims all religions are superficially different, but fundamentally the same, but that’s not the case at all. Religions are often superficially the same, but fundamentally different.

Here are ways in which religious claims around the world are different:

Jesus’ Death and Resurrection: he didn’t die (Islam); he didn't rise (Judaism); it was spiritual enlightenment (some Eastern religions); he did both (Christianity)
The Afterlife: We functionally cease to exist (Buddhism); we are reincarnated (Hinduism); we are snuffed out (Jainism) continue in personal existence (Christianity)
God: We are god (New Age); God is everything (pantheism); God is Unitarian (Islam and Judaism); God is Trinitarian (Christianity); God is Many (Hinduism); God is a Force (some branches of Buddhism)

Stephen Prothero,author of God Is Not One, does not profess to be a religious person. Nonetheless, he wrote a book after he became increasingly frustrated with the shallow cultural conversations about religion. In an interview with The Huffington Post, he said,

“I don't think pretend pluralism is the way to go. All religions are not one. They are neither the unified beauty the multiculturalists want them to be nor the unified ugliness the new atheists insist that they are… As any ordinary Muslim in Indonesia or Christian in Nigeria can tell you, Islam and Christianity are not one and the same. It is just as false to say that all religions are poison as it is to say that all religions are beautiful and true.”

The inclusive “all roads lead to God” pluralist wants to take the people of all religions seriously, but this is done at the expense of the claims. Hard-line exclusivists (if they are not careful) can take the claims seriously at the expense of the people.

Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father, except by me." This message must be said with grace and humility. The goal of Christianity is to take people seriously (treating others with honor and respect as image bearers of God) while taking their beliefs seriously – which requires affirming or challenging what people believe with honesty, boldness, and a commitment to truth.

Anthony Weber

July 9, 2013

All Blog Posts, GC:engage, Sermon Blog

GC:engage - Does God Exist?

Anthony Weber

July 9, 2013

All Blog Posts, GC:engage, Sermon Blog

(Part 1: Becoming An Effective Ambassador For Christ)

Christian theologians often cite three classic reasons for believing the Christian God exists. Theologians do not claim that these arguments lead to final, complete truth, only that their cumulative impact (through the use of abductive reasoning) presents a reasonable, compelling case for God’s existence.

1) The Cosmological Argument

Why is there something rather than nothing? Cosmological arguments have to do with the origin of the universe. Not the universe as in planets and stars, but the universe as in everything that is. It is often presented in this simple syllogistic style:

Everything that begins to exist has a cause
The universe began to exist
The universe has a cause

In short – something outside of the universe caused the universe. As Greg Koukl likes to say, “a big bang needs a big banger”.

2) The Moral Argument

What is the foundation of morality? C.S. Lewis wrote one of the most well-known summaries:

“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line.”

In a more formal syllogism, the argument takes this form:

If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist.
Objective moral values and duties do exist.
Therefore, God exists.

3) The Teleological Argument

How does one explain the overwhelming impression of design? You may have heard the terms teleological argument, argument from design, or the fine-tuning argument. These have to do with the likelihood that anything exists, the likelihood that any life exists, or the likelihood that humans exist.

It seems incredibly unlikely – and perhaps impossible – that undirected processes would result in human life. Take an aquarium, for example. There is a range of acceptable salinity that is quite narrow. The same applies to light, temperature, food, air, size of tank, etc. The human living environment on earth and in the universe is almost unimaginably more complex: Gravity, temperature, nuclear forces, atmosphere around us, distance from sun and moon, ozone layer, existence of water, etc…. Roger Penrose, the Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, recently noted:

“The likelihood of the universe having usable energy (low entropy) at its creation is ‘one part out of ten to the power of ten to the power of 123.’ That is ‘a million billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion billion.’”- as quoted in “Why Some Scientists Embrace the Multiverse,” by Dennis Prager

The syllogism looks like this:

The universe appears to be designed (specified complexity).
This happened either by chance, necessity, or design.
Not chance or necessity.
Therefore, it was designed.

These arguments, as well as others Christian theologians have presented, have certainly not convinced everyone. Antony Flew* once raised a challenge in the form of a story called The Parable of the Gardener. Here is a version cited by Flew in “Theology and Justification”:

"Once upon a time two explorers came upon a clearing in the jungle. In the clearing were growing many flowers and many weeds. One explorer says, “Some gardener must tend this plot.” So they pitch their tents and set a watch. No gardener is ever seen. “But perhaps he is an invisible gardener.” So they set up a barbed-wire fence. They electrify it. They patrol with bloodhounds. (For they remember how H. G. Wells’ The Invisible Man could be both smelt and touched though he could not be seen.) But no shrieks ever suggest that some intruder has received a shock. No movements of the wire ever betray an invisible climber. The bloodhounds never give cry. Yet still the Believer is not convinced. “But there is a gardener, invisible, intangible, insensible to electric shocks, a gardener who has no scent and makes no sound, a gardener who comes secretly to look after the garden which he loves.” At last the Skeptic despairs, “But what remains of your original assertion? Just how does what you call an invisible, intangible, eternally elusive gardener differ from an imaginary gardener or even from no gardener at all?”

In response, John Frame wrote the following parable in “God and Biblical Language: Transcendence and Immanence”:

Once upon a time two explorers came upon a clearing in the jungle. A man was there, pulling weeds, applying fertilizer, trimming branches. The man turned to the explorers and introduced himself as the royal gardener. One explorer shook his hand and exchanged pleasantries. The other ignored the gardener and turned away: “There can be no gardener in this part of the jungle,” he said; “this must be some trick. Someone is trying to discredit our previous findings.” They pitch camp. Every day the gardener arrives, tends the plot. Soon the plot is bursting with perfectly arranged blooms. “He’s only doing it because we’re here-to fool us into thinking this is a royal garden.” The gardener takes them to a royal palace, introduces the explorers to a score of officials who verify the gardener’s status. Then the skeptic tries a last resort: “Our senses are deceiving us. There is no gardener, no blooms, no palace, no officials. It’s still a hoax!” Finally the believer despairs: “But what remains of your original assertion? Just how does this mirage, as you call it, differ from a real gardener?”

___________________________________________________________________________________

*Antony Flew late became a Deist, citing design as a compelling reason to believe that God in some fashion existed. He never embraced the beliefs of any particular religion.

RECOMMENDED RESOURCES