There
is a new convergence occurring between science and religion. Basically,
science has hit a brick wall and is starting to realize that all these odd
little gaps in evolutionary theory, quantum theory, intelligence theory,
biology, cosmology, psychology, and philosophy can only be described by the idea
of a creator. One of the basic premises of science is that one should look
for the simplest explanation to a problem because truth is inherently simple.
Ever got caught in a web of truth? The basic state of things should
be nothingness. But there isn't nothing. There's something. A
universe full of something (1). And even more amazing is the fact that
everything in the universe is operating on laws. This solar system, this
galaxy, this neighbourhood of galaxies, and the farthest observable objects are
all obeying the same set of laws. Gravity works the same here on earth as
it does a trillion light years from here. So all in all, we have an
orderly universe which is the opposite of the expected default: chaos.
Something must have ordered the universe in this way. Once one says that
however, the inevitable response arises: maybe it's just a random
occurrence. But that is impossible. Not improbable.
Statistically impossible. Maybe a particle would have formed here or
there by chance but think of how many particles there are in the universe and
you'll see what I mean.
My favorite analogy is the 'monkey's on the typewriters' bit. If you
have a million monkeys on a million typewriters eventually you'll get the
Complete Works of William Shakespeare. Suppose it was your job to check on
these monkeys everyday. So on the first day you run down to check what the
monkeys wrote and you start to read: "takljdhfDJFKLSDJFKJDfndf$%#%LKjdfdnDF#L%Efdsaldlksdfj;^".
The next day you go down and read the same thing. You do that for years
never noticing more than a word here or there or maybe even a full sentence.
That is what is expected. But suppose one day you go down and you begin to
read: "Act I. Scene I. A street in Rome. Flavius:
Get away from here! home you lazy, creatures go home!" and it was followed
by every play and sonnet Shakespeare wrote without any errors in spelling and
punctuation. What would you think? You would think "This
is a miracle." (2) If you didn't think that you'd at least think that
maybe someone was playing a trick on you or something has happened to the
monkeys and you would start investigating. If you thought nothing at all
except that here is a one of many expected results then you would be a
believer in a totally random universe. Extending this analogy a little,
we're to believe that the pre-big bang universe was unordered but that after an
infinite number of years had passed, it finally stumbled into order by
accident. Randomly. Because after a certain amount of time an
ordered universe is bound to occur or that after a certain amount of time the
monkeys will produce classic literature. The problem here is that time is
a property of the universe--the universe would have to be created and ordered
beforehand! There must be more to the story.
Of course, science has realized that there is something more and randomness
can't account for the order found in the universe. Thus, searching for the
simplest explanation some scientists have determined that there is a creator.
That has upset a lot of people who would rather believe in a random universe.
However, these people have come to the understanding that getting to
an ordered universe by chance alone is impossible--unless they add more
universes. Then you have multiple universe theory wherein there are an
infinite number of universes and one single ordered universe is just one of the
infinite results available. However, this is against a normal scientific
theory. Which is a simpler solution? A single being that keeps order
or an infinite number of universes? Obviously the infinite universe
theory is a silly one and is easily exposed with a question such as "Where are
all these universes?" and you'll get the reply: "They're very tiny.
They're here in the room, in the street everywhere, curled upon themselves and
are no bigger than an atom." or "They're in hyperspace." You can see
where we're headed; more complicated and unprovable theories. Yes, a
creator is unprovable too but there is evidence. There is no evidence
whatever for infinite universes. Besides, the whole infinite universes
theory was only created as an ad hoc solution to the fallacy of the random
universe theory. So now you've got layer upon layer of made up junk
designed to explain something that is easily explained by Einstein, Copernicus,
Kepler, Descartes, Galilei, Newton, Boyle, Farraday, Mendel, Kelvin, and
Planck--all men of science but also men of faith.
Then it gets really good. Not only is an ordered universe random but so
is life itself. Some still cling to the idea that life is nothing more
than a random occurrence. Not only is life random but so is intelligent
life and--even better--since there are so many planets in the universe there
must be millions of intelligent civilizations out there. Which begs the
question: where are they? Why haven't we observed them or heard from
them? If only one percent of one percent of all planets in the universe
are randomly producing intelligent life then shouldn't our skies be black with
visiting craft? I mean, after all the universe is billions of years old
and we're relative newcomers to the scene so all these other civilizations have
had quite the head start on us. Where are they all? I can answer
that question easily: we're alone. There is no other intelligent
life in the universe. This is it. But people seem to like to
believe in randomness producing things so Darwin did everyone a favor and came
up with evolution.
Evolution is another name for "Random changes happen and only the best ones
are kept." Evolution is a big fat lie that Darwin created to sell clever
t-shirts and bumper stickers. And once he had made all kinds of cash
he died. But before he did he said "I was only kidding." Anyway,
evolutionists say that every once in awhile a fish will decide to start walking
around on the beach breathing with its new lung it grew... because it wanted to
walk
on
the beach... with the legs it grew... because it wanted to walk on the beach.
They don't even try to explain why the fish decided to grow a lung or a set of
legs because they don't have to: it happened randomly silly! And it
was a good thing. Because even though fish seem to like the water and
breathing through gills and eating things fish like to eat, once they tasted
grass and had the hot sun beating down on their skin and started getting eaten
by wolves instead of living safely in their fish caves, fish decided that the
ocean was for suckers and they'd rather live in caves or something. Even
better was that when that first fish started walking around on the beach it met
the only other fish in the world that had the same idea and thus they were able
to procreate and start a race of beach-walking fish.
Look at a goldfish in a bowl. Can you imagine in any set of
circumstances that that fish would decide to start walking around your floor and
breathing with a lung? No, of course you wouldn't because you're not
insane. Seriously though, if evolution is a theory that random changes
happen to certain animals and the changes that are good are somehow kept by the
species--I guess species meet up and hold meetings and make group decisions:
"Elephant 1: So what do we think of this trunk thing? Elephant 2:
We like it. Let's stick with it." Elephant 1: "Trunk is good.
It stays. Okay. Next on the agenda: Electric asses?
Elephant 2: They're out. I can't even sit down."-- and the changes that
are bad are somehow rejected by the species. Well if that's the case where
are all these individual animals with random variations that didn't quite work
out? Why aren't we up to our knees in fossilized giraffes with eight legs
or pythons with wheels or chickens with heat vision? (And I don't mean
species that didn't work out I mean fossils of individual mutated animals.( An
evolutionist would say: "That's silly. It's not that random!
There is a certain order to it."
Anyway, I could rant on and on forever but basically it should be obvious
that there is way too much complexity and order in the universe to be explained
away by the idea of randomness--no matter how many universes you factor in--and
that something has ordered everything you see. I don't care if you call it
God, Mother Nature, the Force; whatever. There is something
though.
"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or
that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His
thoughts, the rest are details." Albert Einstein.
footnotes:
1. Is There a God? Patrick Swinburne
2. God: The Evidence. Patrick Glynn