A common objection to God’s existence is “there’s no evidence.” Lack of any evidence would be a valid reason for a skeptic to reject the claim that a supernatural being like God exists; but many people—skeptics and believers alike—are surprised when they learn there actually is good evidence for God. A lot of evidence.
Using logical arguments—truth claims based on reason and supported by evidence—we can reason from effect back to cause, just like scientists do, to show that God is a reasonable explanation for what we observe in reality. I previously explained one of the three most popular arguments for God, the Cosmological Argument, which is evidence for God as the Cause of the universe. Here, I will explain the Teleological (Design) Argument, which is evidence for God as the Designer of the universe. Both of these arguments are supported by reason and science, and can be especially helpful when communicating with those who are skeptical about anything outside the realm of science.
Designs Need Designers: The Teleological Argument
The term teleological comes from the Greek word telos, which means ‘end goal or purpose.’ The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines teleological as ‘exhibiting or relating to design or purpose especially in nature.’ The Teleological Argument claims that the design observed in the universe can only be explained by a Designer.
In his classic book Natural Theology (published in 1802), English theologian William Paley gave an analogy that is still often used today known as the ‘Watchmaker Argument.’ His argument was that if you were to find a watch in the middle of a field, you would assume that it was designed for a purpose by an intelligent agent—a watchmaker—and not that it had always been there, or that it was created as a result of natural causes. It's not reasonable to believe that all the intricate parts of a watch could somehow come together by unguided natural causes in just the precise order necessary to create a functioning timepiece. You wouldn't think it was just 'dumb luck.'
Paley's Watchmaker Argument is just one of several expressions of the Teleological Argument, or the Argument from Design. Simply stated, the Teleological Argument says:
Anything that is designed had a designer;
The universe has complex design;
Therefore, the universe had a Designer.
The design of the universe is complex indeed and can be observed in both biology and physics.
DNA: Design in Biology
After Charles Darwin’s book On the Origin of Species was published in 1859, new scientific research began to reveal previously unknown information about the highly complex design and function of the living cell. Especially since the 1950s, technological advancements have led to fascinating scientific discoveries such as DNA and the specified complexity found in even single-cell organisms.
The discovery of DNA is particularly compelling evidence for design in biology, because it involves language—specific encoded messages that communicate instructions on a molecular level. The instructions encoded in DNA guide the development and replication of all living organisms. This is significant because every coded message or language in all of known history was produced by an intelligent agent, not by unguided natural forces. Just as a computer program requires a program coder to write it, the encoded information in DNA also implies the need for an intelligent ‘coder.’
Although Darwinists refuse to consider an intelligent Designer, they cannot deny the ‘appearance of design.’ For example, zoologist Richard Dawkins (a Darwinist) acknowledges in his book The Blind Watchmaker (written in response to Paley’s Watchmaker Argument), that living organisms are complex things that “give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose” (The Blind Watchmaker, p. 1). He explains that the information coded into just the nucleus of every living cell is more than the information in all 30 volumes of Encyclopedia Britannica put together. He quips, “When you eat a steak, you are shredding the equivalent of more than 100 billion copies of the Encyclopaedia Britannica” (The Blind Watchmaker, p.17-18). Yet, even though he acknowledges that each of the trillions of cells in a human body is “organized with intricate architecture and precision-engineering” (The Blind Watchmaker, p. 3), he refuses to admit any life is actually designed. He won’t let his own scientific observations lead to any conclusion that includes the possibility of God, no matter how overwhelming the evidence.
While many scientists have no problem concluding that the complexity of biological organisms points to an intelligent Designer, there are many others who, like Dawkins, claim all of life is the result of blind, unguided natural forces. Scientists in both camps have examined the same evidence. The difference is in how they interpret the evidence. Some are willing to follow the evidence where it leads; others exclude any conclusions that don't agree with their presuppositions.
Fine-Tuning: Design in Physics
Our universe is not only vastly expansive (and continuing to expand), it is also precisely fine-tuned to support life on earth. It's difficult to imagine how something so vast can maintain such extreme precision. In light of the fact that the slightest deviation in any one of the finely tuned features of the universe would prevent the universe from existing or make it unsuitable for any kind of life, it would seem our chances for survival are between slim and none. It's a wonder we exist at all.
In order for life to be possible, there are several (more than 100!) physical characteristics that must maintain constant and precise values. These characteristics, or physical constants, are inter-dependent and must fall into extraordinarily narrow parameters in order for life to exist. (I am unable to use mathematical expressions with exponents here, but to give you an idea of how extraordinarily narrow the parameters are, the maximum allowable variance in the expansion rate of the universe is 1 in 10 to the 55th power.)
Astrophysicist Hugh Ross lists 140 characteristics of the universe that must fall within these narrow parameters in order for any life to exist. He lists 154 parameters necessary for life on earth. (Links to these lists are provided below. I encourage you to take a look at them.) Here are a few examples:
If the earth were tilted just slightly more or less than it is, the surface temperatures would be too extreme to permit life.
If the universe had expanded just slightly slower (even one-millionth of the actual rate), it would have collapsed back in on itself; if it had expanded any faster, no galaxies could have formed.
If the earth's crust were any thicker than it is, it would absorb too much oxygen for life to exist; if it were any thinner, there would be too much volcanic and tectonic activity to permit life.
The parameters are so narrow and the degree of precision is so extreme that it's difficult to imagine how this could be the result of anything but an intelligent Designer. In fact, the probability that these constants could exist by chance has been scientifically calculated to be virtually zero.
Astronomer Fred Hoyle (a staunch atheist) was so struck by the fine-tuning evidence, he wrote, “A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature." (Hoyle, F. 1982. The Universe: Past and Present Reflections. Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics: 20:16.) Although he did not identify the 'super intellect,' he acknowledged the need for an intelligent Designer.
Only Two Options
There are only two types of possible causes for what we observe in the world: intelligent and nonintelligent (natural). While any reasonable person would readily admit that Mt. Rushmore was created by intelligent forces, and Mt. Everest was created by natural forces, the cause of design in life and the cosmos remains a highly-debated topic among scientists. As explained above, the evidence is the same. The debate is over how the evidence is interpreted.
Many scientists (including those with no religious interest) have been convinced by the evidence that there must be an intelligent cause for what they observe. Darwinian scientists are so committed to materialism that they reject even the possibility of an intelligent cause before they even weigh the evidence. Their minds are made up ahead of time that the evidence must be explained with a natural cause. As evolutionary biologist Richard Lewontin wrote, “we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”
Final Thoughts
Learning about these arguments for God’s existence can help build up the faith of a believer by confirming what we believe is true. They provide evidence that gives good reasons why we believe Christianity is true. These arguments are also very useful in conversations with skeptics and atheists who don’t view the Bible as reliable or authoritative, and those who mistakenly believe that faith is blind acceptance of beliefs for which there is no evidence.
Christianity is a reasonable faith, and there is much evidence to support the truth of a biblical worldview and the reliability of the Bible. At the very least, it's worth considering.
Coming up next: The Moral Argument
For more in-depth information on the scientific evidence for God, see these recommended resources:
Cancelled Science: What Some Atheists Don't Want You to Know - Eric Hedin
I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist - Norman Geisler and Frank Turek
On Guard - William Lane Craig
God's Crime Scene - J. Warner Wallace
Links to Hugh Ross articles:
In-text quote sources:
The Blind Watchmaker (Richard Dawkins)
Richard Lewontin
Fred Hoyle
Comments