SCIENTIFIC PROOF FOR INTELLIGENT DESIGN

 

When the militant skeptic demands that I give him proof that God exist, I merely say:

·       We are surrounded by the evidences of His creations. Even the atom and planetary motion display intelligent design. If you are not willing to regard what your eyes see, there is nothing more I can tell you that might make a difference.

 He then demands, “I want scientific proof.” I therefore respond:

 ·       You already have scientific proof. Observations are the basis of science. Even the ancients were able to scientifically observe that if you planted a seed, it would have to be watered if it is to grow. If the seeds were simply scattered on top of the soil, the birds might eat them, or they might not receive enough moisture. It was even logically plain to them that the creation required a Creator. Any effect requires an adequate cause!

 ·       Besides, every scientist should know that without the unchanging laws of science there can be no science. However, there is no cause within our universe of molecules-in-motion to account for their stability.

The skeptic then repeats, “I want to see scientific evidence—peer-reviewed studies!” But where are their peer-reviewed studies to support their belief that anything is natural?

 

 

An agnostic friend just sent me this quotation by Albert Einstein:

·       “I’m not an atheist. I don’t think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations.”

 

Einstein correctly observed a “universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws.” He also correctly noted that a child observes that someone must have designed it all. However, Einstein claimed the this is the “attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God.” I suspect that, on some level, the greatest minds must realize this. However, what is apparent is that many such minds deny this.

 

Why? I don’t think that it is because of their intelligence or even their education. Nor do I think that any scientific findings have surfaced that have undermined the many apparent appearances of design that children gladly note. If anything, science has continued to reveal what had first been noted in greater detail—" a universe marvelously arranged.”

 

How then do we explain the presence of atheists? I think that it is simply a matter of will over ID, as NYU Emeritus Professor of Philosophy and avowed atheist, Thomas Nagel had observed:

 

·       For a long time I have found the materialist account [that the world consists of nothing more than molecules in motion] of how we and our fellow organisms came to exist hard to believe, including the standard version of how evolutionary process works. The more details we learn about the chemical basis of life and the intricacy of the genetic code, the more unbelievable the standard historical account becomes…The current orthodoxy about the cosmic order is the product of governing assumptions that are unsupported, and that it flies in the face of common sense. (Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False, 5)

 

Why then does the theory of evolution still hold sway in the halls of science? I think that it is merely a matter of will.

USING GOD TO DISPROVE GOD

There are no sound arguments against the existence of the God of the Bible, a good and just God. However, the Late Christian philosopher, C.S. Lewis, had been convinced that he had had one:

·       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. (The Joyful Christian, 7)

The concept of “just” was Lewis’ absolute measure or the straight line, which would have enabled him to call the universe “unjust.” However, he realized that he had no basis to call the universe “unjust” unless justice existed independently from his own subjective thinking. If justice was no more than his own personal idea, he couldn’t call the universe “unjust” in any real sense:

·       Of course, I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too—for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it do not happen to please my private fancies. This in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist—in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless—I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality—that one part of reality—namely my idea of justice—was full of sense.

Lewis found that he was assuming the reality of justice, something that only exists if God exist, to disprove God. Without God, justice is merely a concept that we create. Consequently, we are using the reality of God to disprove God.

This is the fundamental problem of atheism. Whenever the atheist tries to disprove God, he must make use of the things that can only come from God. When he tries to claim that science makes God irrelevant, he ignores the fact that all of the tools and objects of science are the products of an intelligent Designer. Even the smallest atom exhibits unfathomable design, and so too the elegant, immutable, and universal laws of science.

The intelligent atheist counter that it is impossible to disprove that something exists, like trying to disprove the existence of fairies or the Lock Ness Monster. However, God is a necessary Being, unlike the Lock Ness Monster. He is the Person to which all His creation points and is the only explanation for such things as life, consciousness, freewill, the fine-tuning of the universe, or the elegant and immutable laws of science. The only other possible explanation is that everything just happened naturally, out of nothing, without intelligence and design, a desperate attempt to avoid the obvious – the Creator and Sustainer.