Section 9: Human Origins in Science and Scripture
Overall Summary of Findings
I am on a coral island in Fiji on holiday as I write this. The variety, colour, beauty and inventiveness of underwater life – coral and fish – and their complex relationships are astonishing.
I can see the following remarkable elements which may speak to some of design, to others of drama (see below):
- The complexity of specific information embedded in the ecosystem of the reef
- The sense of beauty and awe I feel
- My brain’s ability to see, recognise, classify and appreciate the fish with no need to exploit them for food or other physical needs
- My brain’s ability to understand to some degree how the fish body works, the coral ecosystem works, how the oceans, the land, the atmosphere and the moon interact, and how the solar system, galaxy and universe operate.
Just imagine that all of this was a cosmological fluke! These elements all point to something other than a lucky gigantic lotto draw among universes and planets, and a lotto draw without a sponsor or a guaranteed winning ticket at that. If the Multiverse Hypothesis is true it seems to me to demand more than just an infinite improbability drive, but intelligent intervention.
If, on the other hand, this Universe just is, and is all there is, it begs the question – why does something exist, rather than nothing? And why did information and intelligent life arise?
Whether we are here by God’s grace against enormous odds, or by a developmental process God set in place according to a predetermined plan, I am happy to let the cosmologists debate it out, and I will watch with interest. I am convinced that the more they find out, the more evidence of ultimate purpose they will encounter. Scientists who hold to their atheistic a priori beliefs will continue to deny this and to produce convoluted explanations to get around any implication of purpose or design. Scientists who are Christians will continue to be tempted to see design too easily and just stop there, without pursuing the mind and methods of God as far as they can. But they could also believe in God’s Grand Design, without letting any particular example of design, or temporary theory, stop them from probing for more truth. This is what James Dana, geologist and editor of The American Journal of Science, said in 1883 in a lecture series:
- That it is not atheism to believe in a developmental theory, if it be admitted at the same time that Nature exists by the will and continued act of God.
- That we cannot tell when we have ascertained the last limit of discovery with regard to secondary causes.
- That God is ever near us, ever working in and through Nature.
Am I My Keeper’s Brother? pp 386-387. Order your copy of the book here.Previous Next