Home  |  Search  |  Contact  
Order Book   |  Read Book Online  |  Testimonials  
 You are in / Foolish Faith / Read Book Online / Conclusion - Part 1
"Regular experience, not negligible probabilities and remote possibilities, is the basis of science."
»  Conclusion of Foolish Faith
- Part 1 2 3 4 5 6


Part 1

The answer to the question of the origin of the universe has been sought after for many thousands of years. Ancient paganism suggested that the Sun God was somehow responsible. Later religions attributed the creation of the universe to a Supreme Being outside of the universe. Today, many of us think that science can explain it all, eliminating the need for a belief in God.

But no explanation can be without philosophical and religious overtones. Modern physics says that the universe in which we live originated, or began to exist, at some finite point in the past,[1] yet the cause of its origin is completely unknown to science. Cosmologists are still asking the questions: Is our universe all that there is, just the lucky result of a single spontaneous explosion? Or is ours only one of many parallel universes, and just by chance one that happens to be life-permitting? Or even more daring, is our universe the handiwork of an expert Creator, intended exclusively for the existence of life on earth, showing remarkable craftsmanship and design?

If our universe was purposefully designed by a God, we would expect it to be filled with evidence of design as opposed to randomness and disorder. After decades of research and scientific exploration, that is precisely what is being found. A growing number of scientists are beginning to view the “coincidences” of the “anthropic principle” as extraordinary “evidence to support the argument that the universe has been designed for our benefit — tailor-made for man.” Indeed, despite the public’s general unawareness, the idea that a God created this finely tuned universe seems perfectly consistent with what we do observe in the cosmos. However, “most scientists prefer to shy away from the religious side of it,” as Stephen Hawking expresses.

With the success of scientific theories in describing things, most people have come to believe that the idea of God is ultimately unnecessary to explain natural phenomena. In other words, the notion of a supernatural Creator is less necessary today because we are now more knowledgeable in the ways of science.

But the problem with this type of reasoning is that, in reality, just the opposite seems true: as science progresses, so does the appearance of design in nature; the more we learn from science, the more complicated we realize nature is. What was once thought to be simple, such as a simple cell, is now known to be more complex than even the most advanced piece of machinery yet created by mankind.

So as we increasingly understand how nature works, we also increasingly realize the depth of complexity and the appearance of design in nature. In effect, the more we progress in science, the less likely it seems that the universe is the product of a mere accident, and therefore the stronger the evidence seems to become for the involvement of a Master Designer. Thus, rather than diminishing the idea that the universe was intentionally designed by a God, the continual progression of science seems to strengthen such a notion.


 Back  |  Next