Letter to the Editor

God is still creating

Friday, January 13, 2012

Dear Editor,

This is an open letter to all the "arm chair scientists" who believe that the earth, the cosmos and all the inhabitants were created by chance. Thank you for allowing me to express my beliefs.

The DNA molecule is more complicated than the most complex machine ever imagined or assembled. To say that DNA "just happens" over billions of years is like saying that a billion explosions in a billion wrecking yards will produce a Lincoln Continental that is gassed up, washed and waxed, idling with the emergency brake on, ready to roll. Explosions don't create.

Scientists, for years, have been trying to prove that there is no God. Then they discover a new galaxy that wasn't there last week! There is a God and His name is Jesus. He is still creating. He is still healing. He is still accepting every application, even though none of us imperfect humans is qualified. Prove me wrong if you dare to try!


George R. Anderson,

McCook, Nebraska

View 24 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • I won't try, because I agree. There will never be a greater Scientist, than Jesus/God. AMEN

    -- Posted by Navyblue on Fri, Jan 13, 2012, at 11:00 PM
  • Count me in with Navyblue! Amen

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Fri, Jan 13, 2012, at 11:24 PM
  • A few things about your new galaxy. First you should really provide a link or atleast a name for it. It is pretty hard to check that fact with a lack of reference due to the amount of galaxies. You do also realize that there are new galaxies discovered all the time due to imaging advances and viewing techniques. We are barely scratching the surface of the viewable universe. Another possiblity is that the light has just finally reached us, but again due to not knowing which galaxy you are referring to I can not check its distance.

    I respect your view of God, just try to include more information next time. As a bit of a space freak I must have missed this news, and would have enjoyed reading about this discovery but can only speculated if I find the one your are talking about.

    -- Posted by carlsonl on Sat, Jan 14, 2012, at 7:01 AM
  • For me I believe.

    -- Posted by dennis on Sat, Jan 14, 2012, at 9:10 AM
  • i have to assume george is a christian. what scientists are out there trying to prove that there is no god? a list please. so that i can check to see if you are right about that. a list.

    -- Posted by bob s on Sat, Jan 14, 2012, at 12:18 PM
  • Bob, you don't truly expect a response to your question do you? It's not in the nature of believers to do so. You're just supposed to accept their assertions and assumptions and go on. I'd like to see that list as well along with the research projects, methodology and means by which they seek to realize this goal. I don't expect to hear a word other than a repetition of the assertions.

    -- Posted by davis_x_machina on Mon, Jan 16, 2012, at 9:27 AM
  • no - he cant respond. i cant think of any scientists who try to prove that god does not exist. plus his notion that because they just spotted a galaxy that they had not seen before shows that god is still creating things and , in fact, just created that , is a lot like saying that if they find a new species of insect in the rain forest , it is because god just now created it. strange view of things. so strange that you really dont see many of his fellow christians rallying around him on this.

    -- Posted by bob s on Mon, Jan 16, 2012, at 12:16 PM
  • Like Comet Lovejoy. Even NASA can't explain it.

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Mon, Jan 16, 2012, at 6:19 PM
  • lol CPB That is a hard one to explain because it doesn't fit a pattern that they know about. This comet is exactly why so many study the skies. It is the pursuit of knowledge and learning. I am sure everyone at Nasa would acknowledge that they don't have all the answers. This is the fascination with space there is always a new question and a new answer just over the horizon.

    Also I would be willing to bet their are a few out there that try to find answers in space to disprove god. I am also sure there are some that are just curious. There are also others that probably study space to understand their God's design. All I see when you have these groups with their reasons for study is a check and balance of the science.

    -- Posted by carlsonl on Tue, Jan 17, 2012, at 3:15 PM
  • Many scientist are trying to prove/disprove the "God thing" Here are just two articles showing that-ever heard of Darwin?


    What it boils down to is simple faith, the faith of a child. God gave is one and only son, so that whoever believes may have everlasting life.


    Salvation is a free gift from God available for all. It is YOUR choice whether you open this amazing gift.

    -- Posted by mccookie on Tue, Jan 17, 2012, at 8:06 PM
  • too bad mccokie can't read. what a nut.

    -- Posted by bob s on Tue, Jan 17, 2012, at 8:59 PM
  • yeah its funny a lot of people refer to Steven Hawking as someone who says/try to prove god doesn't exist. Although I have not read everything he has ever said or watched every program he has been on I have never heard him state either. All I have ever heard him say was that God doesn't have to exist. Basically saying that the universe and everything in it could have happened without the existence of god.

    -- Posted by carlsonl on Tue, Jan 17, 2012, at 9:45 PM
  • *

    Hmm... Perhaps there are no scientists that are trying to disprove god as bob s seems to be trying to point out. However,I do see that there are quite a few people that put their faith in science that are trying to disprove god. Well, mebbe that is too harsh, but many of the ones that hang around here that appear to put all their faith in science sure seem to like to denigrate those that have faith in God.

    Just calling it like I sees it.

    -- Posted by Sir Didymus on Tue, Jan 17, 2012, at 10:30 PM
  • Not sure if you are referring to me or not Sir D, but I don't believe I have tried to "denigrate" anyone who believes in god. I just try to point out the false points thrown around. No one has bothered to back up their claims of this so called out of no where galaxy with the report. I also do not have any proof that God doesn't exist. I personally don't think he does. You are free to believe, that is your choice. By no means is it a bad way to live your life.

    -- Posted by carlsonl on Tue, Jan 17, 2012, at 10:49 PM
  • I'm waiting for the first believer who understands the difference between faith- the belief in something you cannot prove the existence of-and confidence in a system of investigation and inquiry that has resulted in the knowledge that's built our modern world including the ability to spot galaxies that may, or may not have, previously been there.

    -- Posted by davis_x_machina on Fri, Jan 20, 2012, at 7:55 AM
  • I'm right here waving my arms, davis_x_machina. Yes, I have noticed the incredible discoveries of space this past 15 years or so. I am fascinated how the stars and galaxies create from destruction, much as we see as life here on Earth. I am fascinated how the stars and galaxies, as well as life here on Earth, are so dependent of the delicate interwoven intricacies each body has on one another.

    The question is, did God create this for our enjoyment, as stated in the Bible, or is this the result of chaos. In terms of observational science, where has chaos led to order?

    God has revealed Himself, in His creation, and in Jesus Christ. My faith in Him is He will always be here for me. He has.

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Fri, Jan 20, 2012, at 5:40 PM
  • Faith in God vs, faith in science. To truely have faith in God, one must be convinced the world was created as the God inspired Bible explains it. It is good to have a healthy dose of critical thought and question everything. Not just the first 11 chapters of Genesis, but the entire Bible. You will find God is consistent, just, and loving. God revealed Himself as Jesus, and taught us there is so much more to life than just me. The consequences of sin are laid out clearly, and history always repeats itself.

    To have faith in science, one must believe that the world has been constant, if not, then science must be malleable and constantly changing. This is observed. To look at science critically is to find holes in every argument. We use theories in an attempt to patch those holes, only to springing new leaks, and new hole form. Usually the patch itself washes out as well. Often times, when the theory looks bleak, scientist rely on consensus to bolster the argument. This is theoretical science, not provable or repeatable. Not good science at all.

    But yes science has changed our world, for the better or for the worse. That form of science is called observational science. It is provable and repeatable. Most of it is taking we already have and making it better. Something God has provided us.

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Fri, Jan 20, 2012, at 7:19 PM
  • when you needed a good brain , jesus was not there for you - you got short changed

    -- Posted by bob s on Fri, Jan 20, 2012, at 7:51 PM
  • This kind of nonsense makes me so angry. Isn't there anything better for the people of McCook to worry about? Maybe you guys could try to boost the economy with better industry, or maybe just spruce the place up a bit so that it's bearable to look at. Nobody can prove or disprove the existence of god, and that is that. "Scientists," as some of you have put, whatever the hell that's supposed to mean...be more specific, don't know the answer to this question any more than we do. However, in most cases they at least carry with them a fair share of humility in regards to their analysis. All this guy is doing is declaring that he is superior via his own elucidation. What's really sad about george is that not only does he think of himself as superior to others, but he's also allowed his own vice, that being religion, to discredit his own self worth. It's no wonder he's seeking such validity.

    george r. anderson, and I don't capitalize his name for a reason, is nothing more than a parody of both religion and himself. He is trying to cope with his own futility by exposing other people to his diluted rationale, in hopes that somebody will agree with him and make his life more bearable. Face it, george, you're going to die and you don't know what will come of it. You may have wasted your life on this nonsense, but it's never too late to wake up. Suck it up and make yourself more useful to the world by, at the very least, forming a more vivifying argument instead of effusing half-wit claims.

    -- Posted by Matthew Fulton on Fri, Jan 20, 2012, at 8:21 PM
  • Obviousely it caught your attention Matthew, or you wouldn't have responded. It certainly appears you have a lot of idle time on your hands. What have you done to boost the economy? I would say, as your venomous anger shows, not much. What have you done for your fellow man today? What ever it was, it must have been frustrating, as the tone of your post shows.

    Is your life completely without any joy, that you have to enter a discussion with people you obviously dislike greatly, and on a subject that you truely seem to hate.

    My advice to you, get on with life.

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Fri, Jan 20, 2012, at 8:58 PM
  • matthew looks at something important here. george seems to be demonizing people in science. if someone comes to your farm , takes samples from your soil or from your crop and brings them to a lab for analysis, how is he working to prove that a god does not exist? again here . 10's of thousands of scientists are working on cancer cures. are they evil or do they have cross purposes to the christians? what is george trying to do here? what kind of wedge between people would he like placed? who , in his attempt, is he trying to appeal to and and what techniques is he using? what group of people is this likely to appeal to? for what reasons? matthew invites us to look at some of these types of questions. what's george's real motivation here? is it problematic? is it benign? could it possibly be benign? what's behind his ideas? of course chunky attacks matthew on other issues. that is to be expected.

    -- Posted by bob s on Sat, Jan 21, 2012, at 9:42 AM
  • Thank you, Bob. I'm well aware that most would look at my reply and only see the disdain, but perhaps that's what needs to be displayed and brought forward in opposition to certain stupidities that exists in the world. Change does not always develop through complacency and a quiet nature. I would never come on here just to argue for argument's sake, but this piece was forwarded to me through e-mail and I couldn't ignore how blatantly ignorant and audacious the post was. There can never be efficiency and good standard when a common correspondence exists that is baseless.

    To chunky boy, why would you try to imply that I should not be a part of an open discussion? Perhaps you think the world would be a better place if only one side of an argument was presented on such topics? Also, how did your brain reason that "venomous" anger is an indicator of someone's productivity and contribution to the world? You're way off-base and I suggest you read a few more books or go to school to develop. Just take my advice on this one.

    -- Posted by Matthew Fulton on Sat, Jan 21, 2012, at 8:16 PM
  • "george r. anderson, and I don't capitalize his name for a reason, is nothing more than a parody of both religion and himself." Posted by Matthew Fulton on Fri, Jan 20, 2012, at 8:21 PM

    Not venomous? Explain please.

    Nowhere Matthew Fulton did is say you shouldn't be a part of the discussion, just asked why.

    Are you implying Christianity is complacent and quite in nature. It isn't and should never be. Please elaborate.

    If you didn't come here to argue for argument's sake, why are you here?

    The first sentence of the first paragraph make no sense. Please rephrase so it can be debated.

    I have plenty of education. I have read plenty of books. And I have lived a life with my fellow humans. I know, from experience, what works and what doesn't. Can you say the same.

    And what happened to your second post from last night? Did you violate some rules?

    -- Posted by Hugh Jassle on Sat, Jan 21, 2012, at 11:09 PM
  • i see parody of one's self much as this -- http://marlomc.wordpress.com/2010/05/26/a-caricature-of-himself/ --- probably the best explanation. it's a new type of expression.

    -- Posted by bob s on Sun, Jan 22, 2012, at 12:36 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: