By JOHN YOUNG
A popular argument for the existence of God through the ages has been from the order we find in the universe. But since the theory of evolution has become popular this argument is often dismissed on the grounds that the apparent order in the world can be explained through evolution, with no intelligence guiding the process.
Actually the argument is stronger today than in the past because of our present understanding of the almost unbelievable complexity of even the smallest particles of matter. That these could form by blind evolution the almost unimaginably complex universe shown by science is out of the question. Even the tiniest cell is immensely complicated, and each cell has its own tiny part in contributing to the whole organism.
In his famous example of the 747 aircraft, Professor Fred Hoyle illustrated the impossibility of the order in the universe occurring by chance. He imagines all the parts of the aircraft scattered about in a junkyard, then a tornado sweeps through the yard and by sheer accident assembles the scattered parts into a complete aircraft. It just couldn’t happen.
Yet if we think about that scenario there is something even more incredible than the assembling of the numerous parts. And that something is the order of each part to the whole aircraft. Each has its own function if the aircraft is to be functional; each makes its own unique contribution to the totality.
So it is not just a question of whether chance could bring about the assembling of the parts, but also whether the diverse parts could arise without a designer. They could not; and to say otherwise is to assert an effect without any proportionate cause, which is irrational.
Professor Hoyle posited intelligent beings from another world causing this order. But that wouldn’t really answer the question, but would only push it further back, because the same difficulty would arise regarding the cause of these extraterrestrial intelligences. Who or what caused them?
Another suggested explanation is based on the conjecture that there are an infinite number of universes, and that consequently our world, like the others, has come about by sheer chance. Sooner or later, it is assumed, with worlds without end arising by chance, our world must happen.
This is the old “monkey on the typewriter” explanation: the assumption that, given long enough, the monkey will produce by accident every combination of words, including that combination which is Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
In reality, the monkey would never produce any combination even remotely similar to Shakespeare’s play. The assumption that he would is based on the implicit fallacy that he must go through all the possibilities. But in fact the monkey could get no further than repeating simple combinations of letters.
So not only is the assumption of an infinite number of universes merely a guess, but if true it would not provide even a remotely possible explanation of the almost unbelievably complex universe in which we live.
Could the survival of the fittest be the answer? Through innumerable ages, with the fittest surviving and the less fit dying out, could this have resulted in the vast ordered universe of today?
Various considerations rule this out. For one thing, wouldn’t the tendency be toward simple forms rather than complex ones? Complexity gives rise to greater possibilities of things going wrong. So, for example, a rock will last longer than an elephant.
Also, a development from the simpler to the more complex will often involve stages where the creature is more vulnerable, as when partly developed wings would seriously impede the creature’s movement for many generations until it was finally able to fly.
Further, the fossil record not only does not support such gradual development, but seems to conclusively contradict it, as species appear quite suddenly in the fossil record. A very important study that confirmed this was done by the Geological Society of London and the Paleontological Association of England, where 120 scientists prepared a monumental work on the fossil record for plants and animals divided into about 2,500 groups.
Dr. John N. Moore reported the findings of the investigation: “Each major form or kind of plant and animal is shown to have a separate and distinct history from all the other forms or kinds. Groups of both plants and animals appear suddenly in the fossil record” (John N. Moore, “Should Evolution Be Taught?,” 1970; New Scientist, September 15, 1983, p. 798).
Every reality must have a proportionate cause, and the cause in this case must be an Infinite Intelligence. But an objection to this is that our ordered universe, even though immensely complex, is still finite; so a Designer capable of this task need not be an Infinite Intelligence.
This takes us back to Fred Hoyle’s hypothesis of an intelligent race producing our world. How could we account for the intelligence of that race if it was finite? We would need to posit an even more intelligent race that produced it. And so on.
Put it this way. Order implies an orderer. But if this being was itself, or Himself, designed and ordered by a higher being, and that by an even higher one, we have not reached an ultimate explanation.
The only explanation is a Being different from all others in that it, or really He, does not receive existence and intelligence, but is infinite existence and intelligence.
This truth, established by reason, is also revealed by God. When He appeared to Moses in the burning bush, and Moses asked Him what he should tell the Israelites, God replied: “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I Am has sent me to you’” (Exodus: 3:14). He is, with the fullness of infinite existence.
All other things receive existence from the One who is existence. This truth is established directly by the Third Way of St. Thomas Aquinas, but it is implied in all of his Five Ways, including this one from the order in the world.
Skepticism about the existence of God is clearly not based on evidence but on preconceived ideas which rule out the possibility of God. The proofs of theism, developed by great minds through the ages, are not taken seriously or even clearly understood, and instead fantastic notions such as the positing of an infinite number of universes are taken seriously.
Scientism is at the root of this: The notion that the highest and best knowledge is that attained by the empirical sciences. But in fact these sciences, wonderful as they are and providing such benefits for mankind, are confined to observable and measurable phenomena.
Philosophy is a higher form of knowledge, for it delves more deeply into reality, and sound philosophy establishes the existence of God beyond any doubt.
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress