No Intelligent Design, No Creation, No God, Novel Ideas!
Yuval Noah Harari in his novel Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind presents a modern take on the Big Bang theory. He starts at the very beginning of the book weaving a story that should have started with the words “once upon a time.” The context for the opening is creatively constructed with no references. A broad sweeping brush of humanistic views that draws off opinions and theories of so many different people. Very engaging writing and story-telling but most novel works have that element.
The author completely aligns himself with the evolutionary thought process. He identifies that there is no intelligent design: “For billions of years, intelligent design was not even an option, because there was no intelligence which could design it.” (446) He declares openly that there is no God, instead claiming that is a myth. (122) and he attacks the “story” of creation.
Creation
“Animals are said to belong to the same species if they mate with each other, giving birth to fertile off-springs. Horses and Donkeys have a recent common ancestor and share the same physical traits. But they show little sexual interest in each other. They will mate if induced to do so, but their off-springs, called mules are sterile. These two types of species are considered two distinct species, moving along evolutionary paths”. (4)
“Homo sapiens too belong to a family, one of history’s most guarded secrets. Homo sapiens long preferred to view itself as set apart from animals, an orphan bereft of family, lacking siblings or cousins and most importantly parents. (Biblical view)
But that is just not the case. Like it or not we are part of a large and noisy family called the great apes. 6 million years ago, a single female ape had two daughters. One became the ancestor of all chimpanzees, the other is our own grandmother.” (5)
Hold on a minute. Your creation story has some real holes in it. Didn’t you just say that some things don’t go together? The sign that they don’t go together is that they don’t produce fertile off-springs? So if you induced a human to have sexual relations with an ape, it would produce a fertile human? Why would apes have a family and why would humans not have one? Your explanation for family is really sterile. Novel thoughts.
The Big Bang give us stories that all of this happened by chance and is explained by theories of science? It happened over millions of years. Apes went to being men. It took so much time for this to happen, but then the author in the middle of all these incredible historical stories and scientific facts about the past states: “it is doubtful whether homo sapiens will be around a thousand years from now, so 2 million years is really out of our league.” (7) What? All these historical realities about humans in the past going back billions of years but the future is less than a thousand? What species are going to have time to evolve if we have less than a thousand years? Is it all over? Are you predicting that the end of the world is coming? Sounds like the Bible to me.
So I will not belabor the point. The novel ideas that are presented as fact and the open disdain for creation with an intelligent creator is where I must draw the line.
Anything that is created against a creator has to address the fact of creation.
So here is the real crux of the book. “There have always been a chasm between theological theories and historic realities.” (244) So in the middle of the book there has to be an argument to address the facts of creation. That there is a creator. That there is an intelligent creator. The attack goes something like this.
- Most people have found it difficult to digest the monotheist idea fully.” (244)
- Christianity for example (244)
- “Syncretism might in fact be the single great world religion.” (Believing in a kaleidoscope of monotheistic, dualist, polytheist and animist legacies,)
Hold on just a second. You have presented so many theories and ideas as fact. There is an expectation that I will just believe ALL of those as the truth.
So once you take on a creator you have to build an argument against everything that involves a creator, like the American Declaration of Independence.
We hold to these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The foundation for a nation.
Here is the authors argument:
According to the science of biology, people were not created. Novel
They have evolved and certainly they did not evolve to be equal. Novel
The Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God.
However, if we do not believe in the Christian MYTHS about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all people are created “equal?” (122) Novel
JUST AS PEOPLE WERE NEVER CREATED, NEITHER IS THERE A CREATOR. (123) Novel
So that is where we have to disagree. Your novel ideas are not aligned with my Biblical belief.
But my source addresses your take: A fool has said in his heart there is no God. {Psalm 53:1)
I can read this book to understand where other people are coming from. I have read it very critically. I can be introduced to all kinds of thought, but on this one I don’t have to embrace it in any form.
I have that right which the author said no one has.
Sorry to tell you this but on this one,
You are wrong.
Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens, A Brief History of Humankind, London, Vintage Books, 2011
About the Author
Kevin Norwood
My name is Kevin Norwood and I have been in youth ministry for the past 34 years. On February 14th, 1994, 27 years ago, we moved to Owasso OK and wow what a ride. My wife, Ann, is an RN and specializes in Clinical Documentation working from home. Maci is a my 21 year old daughter and she loves and shows horses. Her horse's name is Charlie. She is currently working with animals and loves to go on trail rides with her horse. London is my 10 year old son and he keeps me young. He absolutely loves life!! Golfing, baseball and Hawaii is his latest adventures. He skied for the first time in Colorado this year. I have started a coaching business for pastors at www.kevinnorwood.com and it is exciting the doors that God is opening. I earned my Doctorate in Leadership and Global Perspectives from George Fox on Feb 10, 2018.15 responses to “No Intelligent Design, No Creation, No God, Novel Ideas!”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Kevin. Looks like you really read this book in detail. Well done!
You wrote, “The Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God.” How do you reconcile that fact the framers of our Constitution didn’t really think all people were equal. For example, Jefferson owned slaves.
Aaron,
I took it from the aspect that ever person is divinely created and has a soul. The soul doesn’t match up with biology. The authors argument was that there is no soul. The Bible addresses the issue of being slave or free but this book did not believe there was a soul.
Kevin
Kevin,
I love the picture at the top of your blog!
I’m with you; his theories are full of holes.
What would you say if I said that Harari wasn’t writing as an evolutionist (or to push evolution), but was simply giving his history of humankind from an atheistic (and evolutionary) viewpoint? In other words, his goal was to write (alleged) history, and that his version of history has no explanation for our origins other than evolution, since he doesn’t believe in a Creator.
Thoughts?
Marc
That might have been his idea but history is based on fact. I wish I could write my dissertation with his style and story. No references just assuming that this narrative is accepted by everyone.
Kevin
Kevin:
Great apologetics on a subject that is increasingly becoming accepted as past truth and a nebulous future. You called Harari out with his own “poison”.
Why is that educated people seem to purposely try to undermine the Creator God and we His creation? What good comes from dehumanizing man, the crown of God’s creation?
Phil
Phil,
I thought it was really interesting that this author took the time to go all the way to creating super humans. Or as he referenced “gods”. The only problem that I see is that he stated that the time line of this current age is less than 1000 years left. We become gods and the world ends. Isn’t it interesting that his narrative lines up with the real time line? That is my thoughts.
Kevin
Hi Kevin,
I’ll pose to you the same question that I posted to Pablo (http://dminlgp.com/the-power-of-shared-stories/#comment-41231) – what strategy you might suggest for relating the Christian story to someone inhabiting Harari’s world? You seem to try to show that Harari is consistent and dismiss claims about the factuality of evolutionary biology and cosmology.
Loren,
I have a prepared answer to this question because both you and Claire asked me the same thing. But before I add that. A couple of things. If I can write my dissertaion with the same support as the beginning of this book, I am ready to turn it in now. Facts? What facts?
Second I did not post my most scathing thoughts about this author because it had to do with his absolute disrespect for the subject of abortion. Humans are more than biology. I didn’t think it was the time or place with our political landscape to take that subject on. I completely disagree with this author. I would not argue with him. He has his mind set and in much the same manner that Jesus did not chase after the rich young ruler who had his mind made up, I would not go after this one.
Now on to my response:
What I do take away? Facts are an interesting thing. Facts without reference, I am taught as a writer of a dissertation, are irrelevant. Facts are whatever you choose to believe. When you string together a whole bunch of thoughts and declare them as fact. You are an author of a novel.
If your beliefs have anything to do with God or creation, then you are, according to this author, completely stupid and wrong because all of those things are myths. Very bluntly and blatantly, the author says that as a Christian, I am mindless and believe in a myth. Everything that I believe is completely discredited by his facts or arguments. For me to be politically correct, I must embrace his way of thinking. That is being pressured and pushed on Christians.
I have a belief that is completely opposite of his. So when I stand by my beliefs: then I am holding to FACTS that have been documented over 1600 years with multiple authors and multiple languages aligning. 1 book with 66 smaller books that are connected together with the inspiration of God. 39 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. The prophetic statements that have been inspired by God (about 3200) and then fulfilled by God, are the facts that I hold on to. Who else could do that? It is the mostly widely published and read book ever. It has been translated into more than 1200 languages. 40 different authors wrote this inspired book.
It has divided countries and men for years. God has been declared not real by leaders and by country leaders. They are dead and he still exists. God has been declared to not exist and the countries and belief systems that have stood against Him no longer exist. ( Cuba and the Soviet Union just to mention two) Their beliefs go the way of the world but God’s word still exists and men hold to it and die for it. It causes men to walk in humility, even in death, instead of proud arrogance. Jesus did not give in to the Pharisee and the “leaders” of his day when they challenged him about what was correct and what should be believed. He presented the Word in a new way with power and questions that caused them to shut up and not ask any more questions. He asked them how they could claim to know God and not know anything about Him.
So to be politically correct? I politely disagree with this author. What I take away is that my belief system has been created by THE author (Christ/ God). He said that there would be people who don’t believe and come against it. He then spoke, in story, (so it would be clear) about their eternal destiny.
There would be those who use their talents for him and there would be those who wouldn’t.
Well done was one response and here is the other response.
Matthew 25:30 30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
There would be sheep and goats. (Matthew 25:31-46) A division of those who believed and those who did not believe. Their eternal destiny was explained in verse 46” Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
There would be those who would be ready. There would be those who were foolish that would not be ready.
Mathew 25 “At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. 2 Five of them were foolish and five were wise. 3 The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. 4 The wise ones, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. 5 The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
6 “At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’
7 “Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. 8 The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’
9 “‘No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’
10 “But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.
11 “Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, ‘open the door for us!’
12 “But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’
13 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour. He pointed out that those who walk in the light with are with Him: 1 John 5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all[b] sin.
So really Matthew chapter twenty-five addresses those who don’t believe and how foolish they are.
I guess that I should have politely declined to blog my thoughts, because the Bible (which is my fact base) tells us to deal with knowledge instead of being a fool who opens up his folly. I have found it is better not to argue with a fool. Who is a fool? Someone who has said there is no God.
Proverbs 30 MSG
1-2 The skeptic swore, “There is no God!
No God!—I can do anything I want!
I’m more animal than human;
so-called human intelligence escapes me.
3-4
“I flunked ‘wisdom.’
I see no evidence of a holy God.
Has anyone ever seen Anyone
climb into Heaven and take charge?
grab the winds and control them?
gather the rains in his bucket?
stake out the ends of the earth?
Just tell me his name, tell me the names of his sons.
Come on now—tell me!”
5-6
The believer replied, “Every promise of God proves true;
he protects everyone who runs to him for help.
So don’t second-guess him;
he might take you to task and show up your lies.”
I wrote that down on purpose in the Message Bible because it is truly a “brief history of humankind” in a language that anyone can understand.
So to help with this issue I will quote from an authority on this subject, Josh McDowell.
“If one discards the Bible as unreliable historically, then he or she must discard all the literature of antiquity. No other document has as much evidence to confirm its reliability.”
― Josh McDowell, More Than a Carpenter.
“The first to speak in court sounds right—until the cross-examination begins” (Proverbs 18:17).”
― Josh McDowell, More Than a Carpenter
“I spent months in research. I even dropped out of school for a time to study in the historically rich libraries of Europe. And I found evidence. Evidence in abundance. Evidence I would not have believed had I not seen it with my own eyes. Finally, I could come to only one conclusion: If I were to remain intellectually honest, I had to admit that the Old and New Testament documents were some of the most reliable writings in all of antiquity.”
― Josh McDowell, More Than a Carpenter
“I am writing these things to warn you about those who want to lead you astray. But you have received the Holy Spirit, and he lives within you, so you don’t need anyone to teach you what is true. For the Spirit teaches you everything you need to know, and what he teaches is true—it is not a lie. So just as he has taught you, remain in fellowship with Christ. (1 John 2:26–27)”
I think you see where I am coming from on this discussion.
If this author, Harari, sees God as a myth, then we are going to be at opposite ends. I believe He exists and is worth following. It will not make common or even scientific sense. It will contain mysteries that have no explanation (the trinity, the resurrection, communion, etc.…) You get my point. So when I stand by my facts and he stands by his facts, here is what I know. I would much rather risk my eternity with my beliefs than his.
Kevin
Loren, I hope this is an answer to your question. If we were to have a discussion, I would share my viewpoint and he would be able to share his viewpoint. Could I change his? Could he change mine? I don’t believe so. The only way his way of thinking could change is through the truth and the power of the Holy Spirit. I haven’t been able to change anyone. The truth of the gospel, still changes people and it is a mystery as well.
Kevin,
Thank you for your critical analysis in dissecting the arguments in Harari’s book. I completely agree with your assessment. Harari allegedly reconstructed a historical timeline of human existence through a biological, evolutionary perspective. I get it that you do not put much stock in what he is saying in this work. Just wondering, what if anything does Harari cause you to take away from his work intentionally or non-intentionally?
Claire,
What I do take away? Facts are an interesting thing. Facts without reference, I am taught as a writer of a dissertation, are irrelevant. Facts are whatever you choose to believe. When you string together a whole bunch of thoughts and declare them as fact. You are an author of a novel.
If your beliefs have anything to do with God or creation, then you are, according to this author, I am completely stupid and wrong because all of those things are myths. Very bluntly and blatantly, the author says that as a Christian, I am mindless and believe in a myth. Everything that I believe is completely discredited by his facts or arguments. For me to be politically correct, I must embrace his way of thinking. That is being pressured and pushed on Christians. (even within this blog environment.)
I have a belief that is completely opposite of his. So when I stand by my beliefs: then I am holding to FACTS that have been documented over 1600 years with multiple authors and multiple languages aligning. 1 book with 66 smaller books that are connected together with the inspiration of God. 39 in the Old Testament and 27 in the New Testament. The prophetic statements that have been inspired by God (about 3200) and then fulfilled by God, are the facts that I hold on to. Who else could do that? It is the mostly widely published and read book ever. It has been translated into more than 1200 languages. 40 different authors wrote this inspired book.
It has divided countries and men for years. God has been declared not real by leaders and by country leaders. They are dead and he still exists. God has been declared to not exist and the countries and belief systems that have stood against Him no longer exist. ( Cuba and the Soviet Union just to mention two) Their beliefs go the way of the world but God’s word still exists and men hold to it and die for it. It causes men to walk in humility, even in death, instead of proud arrogance. Jesus did not give in to the Pharisee and the “leaders” of his day when they challenged him about what was correct and what should be believed. He presented the Word in a new way with power and questions that caused them to shut up and not ask any more questions. He asked them how they could claim to know God and not know anything about Him.
So to be politically correct? I politely disagree with this author. What I take away is that my belief system has been created by THE author (Christ/ God). He said that there would be people who don’t believe and come against it. He then spoke, in story, (so it would be clear) about their eternal destiny.
There would be those who use their talents for him and there would be those who wouldn’t.
Well done was one response and here is the other response.
Matthew 25:30 30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
There would be sheep and goats. (Matthew 25:31-46) A division of those who believed and those who did not believe. Their eternal destiny was explained in verse 46” Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”
There would be those who would be ready. There would be those who were foolish that would not be ready.
Mathew 25 “At that time the kingdom of heaven will be like ten virgins who took their lamps and went out to meet the bridegroom. 2 Five of them were foolish and five were wise. 3 The foolish ones took their lamps but did not take any oil with them. 4 The wise ones, however, took oil in jars along with their lamps. 5 The bridegroom was a long time in coming, and they all became drowsy and fell asleep.
6 “At midnight the cry rang out: ‘Here’s the bridegroom! Come out to meet him!’
7 “Then all the virgins woke up and trimmed their lamps. 8 The foolish ones said to the wise, ‘Give us some of your oil; our lamps are going out.’
9 “‘No,’ they replied, ‘there may not be enough for both us and you. Instead, go to those who sell oil and buy some for yourselves.’
10 “But while they were on their way to buy the oil, the bridegroom arrived. The virgins who were ready went in with him to the wedding banquet. And the door was shut.
11 “Later the others also came. ‘Lord, Lord,’ they said, ‘open the door for us!’
12 “But he replied, ‘Truly I tell you, I don’t know you.’
13 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know the day or the hour. He pointed out that those who walk in the light with are with Him: 1 John 5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we claim to have fellowship with him and yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live out the truth. 7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all[b] sin.
So really Matthew chapter twenty-five addresses those who don’t believe and how foolish they are.
I guess that I should have politely declined to blog my thoughts, because the Bible (which is my fact base) tells us to deal with knowledge instead of being a fool who opens up his folly. I have found it is better not to argue with a fool. Who is a fool? Someone who has said there is no God.
Proverbs 30 MSG
1-2 The skeptic swore, “There is no God!
No God!—I can do anything I want!
I’m more animal than human;
so-called human intelligence escapes me.
3-4
“I flunked ‘wisdom.’
I see no evidence of a holy God.
Has anyone ever seen Anyone
climb into Heaven and take charge?
grab the winds and control them?
gather the rains in his bucket?
stake out the ends of the earth?
Just tell me his name, tell me the names of his sons.
Come on now—tell me!”
5-6
The believer replied, “Every promise of God proves true;
he protects everyone who runs to him for help.
So don’t second-guess him;
he might take you to task and show up your lies.”
I wrote that down on purpose in the Message Bible because it is truly a “brief history of humankind” in a language that anyone can understand.
So to help with this issue I will quote from an authority on this subject, Josh McDowell.
“If one discards the Bible as unreliable historically, then he or she must discard all the literature of antiquity. No other document has as much evidence to confirm its reliability.”
― Josh McDowell, More Than a Carpenter.
“The first to speak in court sounds right—until the cross-examination begins” (Proverbs 18:17).”
― Josh McDowell, More Than a Carpenter
“I spent months in research. I even dropped out of school for a time to study in the historically rich libraries of Europe. And I found evidence. Evidence in abundance. Evidence I would not have believed had I not seen it with my own eyes. Finally, I could come to only one conclusion: If I were to remain intellectually honest, I had to admit that the Old and New Testament documents were some of the most reliable writings in all of antiquity.”
― Josh McDowell, More Than a Carpenter
“I am writing these things to warn you about those who want to lead you astray. But you have received the Holy Spirit, and he lives within you, so you don’t need anyone to teach you what is true. For the Spirit teaches you everything you need to know, and what he teaches is true—it is not a lie. So just as he has taught you, remain in fellowship with Christ. (1 John 2:26–27)”
I think you see where I am coming from on this discussion.
If this author, Harari, sees God as a myth, then we are going to be at opposite ends. I believe He exists and is worth following. It will not make common or even scientific sense. It will contain mysteries that have no explanation (the trinity, the resurrection, communion, etc.…) You get my point. So when I stand by my facts and he stands by his facts, here is what I know. I would much rather risk my eternity with my beliefs than his.
Kevin
Kevin,
I’m glad you did submit your blog and respond with an abundance of biblical texts to back up your argument. It is not possible to find a better authority than the Word of God for one’s theological perspective and worldview in general.
Kevin,
I really enjoyed your blog and loved your title. I found the book to be very “fictional” in apporach to its’ subject. Why do the think the author took a “novel” approach?
Aaron
Aaron,
I believe he took a novel approach because he knew that he could get away with it. The whole first chapter where he defines history has no references. I as proposing to Loren that I get to write my dissertation with the same “facts.” He posted and asked me about the facts…so I have replied.
Interesting that this week, we were presented with true polls. No matter how you voted this week, the “facts”, that were presented to us, as the American public, were not truly facts: they were opinions. How this could possibly happen is the elephant in the room.
I think part of it is what is accepted in our society. The truth is very irrelevant and opinions are very entertaining. So when you try and present the truth it is not an easy matter.
Kevin
Kevin,
In reading your blog, I sense that the writer touched a nerve. I too found the use of theories to be overwhelming for my Christian belief but I do understand that others could consider Christianity to be a theory because of the parables in scriptures. One of the things I’m challenged to do after reading this book is to ensure I’m confident to defend Christianity in the event I meet people with other convicting beliefs.
Garfield
Garfield,
Some people who write in the manor would not be open to a conversation. It would be an argument.
Some people who would read this would agree with these thoughts but not have their mind made up. A conversation would be great.
Some people would truly be searching to find and answer. With them a discussion which would include proof would be the best.
I can’t change people but God can and there is power in his word. I have to trust as I deliver his word that the power within it is able to change men’s mind and heart.
So I will declare it like it is going to happen.
Kevin