The new rage in cosmology is the search for a convincing argument to “prove” that design does not demand a designer! Why has it become such an issue? Because the effectiveness of the argument is making some longtime atheistic evolutionists look a bit silly.
An illustration: You find a Rolex watch in the woods. It keeps perfect time. Your friend is convinced that its existence is an accident of nature… lightening striking millions of times per year over a billion years has accidentally created the Rolex. You protest that such a fine chronometer could not be a result of random chance because of its evidence of intelligent design. Your friend will not budge, so to convince you of his “truth” he must search for a workable model to “prove” that design does not demand a designer. Mostly he waxes philosophical, but still he lacks evidence.
Such is the state of affairs with the intelligent design (ID) debate. Let’s suppose the Rolex you found is 100 feet in diameter. Could you believe it is an accident? No. Suppose it is 100 miles in diameter and still keeps perfect time (although the neighbors complain about the loud ticking!). Could you believe the massive Rolex is an accident of nature? No. Suppose the watch is 100 light years in diameter and still keeps perfect time. Nope… still can’t believe such massive and intricate design is an accident!
Guess what… the universe is a wonderful watch. You can actually set your Rolex by the movement of the heavenly bodies observed from earth. In fact a ship’s longitudinal position on earth can be found by the observation of the heavens (discerned by the time of local sunset, for instance).
Some of the world’s top scientists agree about ID. Sir Fred Hoyle (world famous astronomer) wrote, “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”
In his book, Superforce: The Search for a Grand Unified Theory of Nature, Australian astrophysicist Paul Davies wrote of the intelligent design in the universe, “…how could it be supposed that those workings are merely a mindless accident, a product of blind chance?” (1984, pp. 235-236).
For further quotes from scientists in their fields, go to: http://www.apologeticspress.org/inthenews/2003/itn-03- 06.htm
For information from John Clayton, whose videos we are watching in Sunday morning class, go to: https://www.doesgodexist.org/index.html
God has evidence. We must learn to recognize it. (See Romans 1:18-22.)
~From: Ray Wallace
0 Comments