science and creation

science or miracles

Before you tell me how you believe in science and not creation (as in God), tell me how it is that your logic, reasoning, and technology each exist and function to uncover scientific laws in the first place. You pride yourself in your ability to learn and understand, but it makes no sense that you have those abilities at all. So the question is this: Is science itself not a product of a miraculous creation? Inexplicable events and phenomena we will never fully grasp?

I’ve come to view science like Tinker Toys or LEGOS given to us by God to play with. With each discovery, scientists and mathematicians think they’ve created some grand formula that explains the world more completely. But they didn’t create it. The formula existed all along, and by no accident, either. A toddler cannot dig up a Tonka bulldozer in a sandbox and proclaim that he is the reason the toy exists.

Likewise, being able to explain something more completely doesn’t change the fact that it was created. It’s a classic illustration: you might find a wristwatch on the beach and take it home to disassemble and discover how it works. You might even succeed. But knowing how it works doesn’t change the fact that the watch was meticulously created by a watchmaker–someone who inserted the battery, calculated the gears, and put into motion all the things you later discovered.

Our existence consists of incalculable miracles every day– down to the cellular and molecular levels. Every part of every cell has a vital purpose, dictated by a set of laws which themselves have no natural origin. Without every group of cells working within these laws together, in a very specific and endless way, we all die. But to say that our existence is by accident means that no cell, or part of that cell, has an inherent purpose. It’s to say that it spontaneously woke up and decided on its own to function in the exact way that life would require of it. 

So a group of mitochondria cells all decided to start functioning on their own. After a closed door meeting, they figured out how to single-handedly produce energy that would fuel every other cell in the (yet-to-be-formed) human body. This happened at the same time that a different group of cells woke up and decided to dedicate their entire lives to filtering out waste and toxins. And vuala: liver cells. All of this was happening without a brain, by the way. Those cells were in a separate room planning their brilliant strategy for how to dominate and control everyone else.

For some evolutionary atheists, their rejection of God might be a deeper issue of control. They don’t like to think they aren’t in control of this gargantuan rock that’s full of things we don’t understand (they don’t like to focus on those things). God is one of those “things” that’s uncomfortably out of their control, but I’m failing to understand how believing in cells that spontaneously, needlessly, and independently appear and function is within their control (or scientific). Cells don’t consult scientists about what they should do.

Maybe it’s a moral problem. We often don’t want to function with anyone else’s set of rules. It’s our life; we want to do whatever we feel like doing. But there’s a problem with this as well. The cellular matter making up our bodies have rules to follow– rules that we didn’t come up with. And if those cells ever decide to reject the standards or general set of principles that define them, our bodies die. So it doesn’t work to wishfully proclaim that matter is free to do whatever it pleases. If that were true, we couldn’t depend on our bodies to exist for five nanoseconds, let alone 90 continuous years.

The very definition of science opposes “freedom of matter.” Science consists of universal laws of cause and effect. It relies on things to behave a very certain way, and continue in that predictable behavior. You can argue that you should be free to create your own truth and morality all day long, but your argument falls apart when you recognize that nothing in the universe exists, or can exist, under that principle. There’s a medical term given to cells that stop doing what the body depends on them to do: cancer. And it does mainly one thing: kills people.

Does it sound too ridiculous to believe what Christians say about God having no beginning or end? Well, yeah I can see how that’s pretty absurd when everything we see has a beginning and end. But it really comes down to two options: either the universe has always existed or there was a point when nothing existed. Considering the first option, our Tinker Toys (sciences) have discovered that the universe had a beginning. We could not have always existed, which forces us to choose the second option. But how can we, with sound, scientific minds, explain how something very clearly began to exist out of nothing purely by chance and with no purpose at all? Such a claim goes against basic thermodynamics. Newton discovered that nothing can come from nothing. Every piece of matter needs a cause. So if there was a point when nothing existed, then the universe and life in general each requires a miracle (a supernatural act with no natural explanation) from a Being who existed before we did, which is “eternal” by our standards since it is outside of the time we can measure with. 


What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s