A unique way of looking into the existence of God

The Argument from Multiverses

Just the fact that the only way an atheist can explain away the fine-tuning of the universe is by postulating a supernatural-like explanation of their own is strong evidence itself of God’s necessary existence.  The fine-tuning of the universe is so well-established that atheists like Richard Dawkins say that the universe “appears designed”.  However to be an atheist no answer that leads to God is acceptable (a preconceived bias) so they need to grasp at straws for a new explanation of this appearance of design.

The multiverse is one of these explanations.  It has also been called the Many Worlds Hypothesis and a World Ensemble.

For the atheist, the multiverse is:
  1. Unobserved / un-evidenced—a cosmos absconditus
  2. Intangible
  3. Non disprovable
  4. Not subject to reproducible experimentation
  5. Produces no testable predictions—it predicts anything/everything
  6. Able to discredit the “uni”verse (the one, single) by mere assertion
  7. Believed upon by “faith”
  8. Held to as a consoling delusion—to escape the inconvenient reality that is supported by evidence
  9. Concocted as an escape mechanism—escape from scientific evidence and theological implications*

And still God cannot be replaced with this “consoling delusion” of a multiverse model.  Human personality proves that a Personality must have created the world, since no effect can be greater than its cause.  A personal first cause also explains the rationality of this universe.  In the multiverse model we shouldn’t expect a rational universe with laws and the predicable behavior of nature.  We should expect random occurrences of and random events of things popping in and out of this universe.

As William Lane Craig says: “Science and rational behavior itself would become impossible if virtually everything can be written off as a random occurrence in a World Ensemble.” **

So we couldn’t even attempt science if the Many World Hypothesis was true and we wouldn’t be able to expect order in our universe either.  Saying that it ‘just happens to be a world that’s orderly’ is question begging.  The odds of our solar system’s being formed instantly by the random collision of particles is about 1:10 10(60)  and the odds of obtaining our universe’s low entropy condition by chance alone are on the order of 1:10 10(123) .  Explaining away a world with no Designer with this data comes off as desperation and fact-ignoring.

But even in the unlikely event that the multiverse theory was correct it still wouldn’t disprove the need for God!  Even Stanford cosmologist Andre Linde, a well-known contributor to multiverse theory says: “Expanding this area of positive knowledge does not remove the question of god, it just pushes it further away.”  The multiverse itself still exhibits design which would require a Designer. 

Furthermore, people would still require redemption as another multiverse expert Robin Collins tells us:  “If you had Klingons somewhere  — of course a very fallen race, as we know from Star Trek, God takes up their nature, and there’s a Klingon version of the Son.”  The Designer is real and people need to be reconciled to Him – multiverse or no multiverse.

The Argument from Natural Selection

It’s common for people to confuse natural selection with evolution. Definitions are important.  And because of this definitions need to be specified before a word is used. The concepts of natural selection and evolution are so vast that many scientific papers on the topics can be easily taken out of context to say what the author is not actually saying. While one person may be talking about an accurate form of evolutionary change, the other person may be thinking they mean “microbes-to-microbiologist” or “macro” evolution (Darwinian Evolution).  

While natural selection does lead to speciation (changes in species), Darwin’s idea was that natural selection gives rise to entirely new creatures, not just variations.  In fact, the word species itself has evolved (heh!). It originally was considered to be the same as the biblical kinds. Now there are several definitions of the word species, and scientists will sometimes argue whether or not something is a different species. In fact, the word species used to be considered the same as the biblical word kind. (In the Latin Vulgate, species was translated as kind). Once again that goes to show how much definitions are important.

A common straw man argument used against creationists is that we do not believe in natural selection. Not true!  Ironically, the term natural selection was developed by Edward Blyth, a creationist, several years before Darwin appropriated and corrupted the term for his own purposes. Many people do not have a proper understanding of natural selection and simply assume that it is the same as molecules-to-man evolution (Darwinian Evolution).  The point behind many creation ministries is to educate people to what science actually teaches and what has to be believed on faith.

When prompted to provide observable evidences of “macroevolution” that did not need to be accepted by faith, students and professors alike were unable to do so, as was seen in the video “”. Instead, they provided “evidence” from viruses, fish and so on. But viruses were still viruses, fish were still fish.  Ken Ham once pointed out when Darwin visited the Galapagos Islands what did he see? Big finches, little finches, big beaks, little beaks. What do we see now? Big finches, little finches, big beaks, little beaks. There are variations in species, but there are definite boundaries and genetic limitations.
 And all of this fits with the biblical creation viewpoint!

God created everything to reproduce “after its kind”, not to turn into an entirely new creature. The biblical “kind” is often considered to be genus, but at any rate, a good indication is the ability to interbreed (you don’t want your  prize-winning Russian Blue cat getting out and breeding with the alley cat, for instance). But genetic limitations, as well as natural selection and adaptability, were programmed by our Creator to help survivability in changing environments. Rapid speciation has been observed, and fits creationist models of repopulation after the Flood.

God knows what he is doing, and has planned for changes. He has also planned for the biggest change of all, for us to accept Jesus Christ as Lord of our lives and be transformed as children of the living Creator! This is a certain thing, not a slow, random process (2 Corinthians 5.17, John 1.12).

In a nutshell.

Using equivocation people have tried to hijack originally a creationist concept of Natural Selection to mean a philosophical theory.  But the truth behind natural selection speaks much more to God than to non-God.

The Argument from the Golden Ratio

Through out the centuries the Golden Ratio has been discovered and rediscovered again, although it is an inbuilt factor of the universe – not by any origin known to man.  It makes sense to believe that the author of the world must have put it there.  It has been called the Golden Section, the Golden Mean, the Golden Cut, the Divine Proportion and the Golden Ratio. It is mathematically represented as the Greek letter phi (φ) or 1 : 1.618 (etc) and has inspired many applications, including the Golden Rectangle, the Fibonacci Spiral, the Golden Angle, and the Fibonacci Gauge.  Leonardo Fibonacci is cited as having discovered this ratio and therefore the sequence derived from the Golden Ratio is named after him.

The Golden Ratio is expressing perfection, the ratio that is the most visually pleasing.  Luca Pacioli in his book De Divina Proportione (The Divine Proportion) explored the mathematics of the divine proportion (or golden ratio) and how remarkably similar it is to its designer God.  He found it amazing that ‘it is one and only one and not more’ yet the geometric expression of divine proportion involves three lengths.  This is like God who also contains three persons (the Holy Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Ghost) in one Godhood. 

God is also like the Golden Ratio as both are a mystery.  God cannot be properly defined nor understood through words and the Golden ratio can’t be designated by any intelligible number nor by any rational quantity.  It ‘always remains concealed and secret, and is called irrational by mathematicians’ just the way the belief in God is often scoffed at.  Furthermore the omnipresence and invariability of God is like the Golden Ratio because its value is always the same and does not depend on the length of the line being divided or the size of the pentagon in which ratios of lengths are calculated.

The thing is that if the biblical God existed we should expect to see evidence of who that God is in Creation.  The Golden Ratio shows up all over everything.  Shells, sunflowers, pine cones, spiral growth in leaves and other things, moths, butterflies, daisies, the size of DNA molecules, ants, dolphins, pineapples, cactus, Romanesque cauliflower, fruit seeds, the size of Saturn's ring, and the orbital periods, mean distances, and orbital velocities of the planets in the solar system.  Furthermore it’s remarkably patterned all over the human body (down to the way the foetus is curled inside the womb) and appropriated in architecture, art and music. 

The existence of the Golden Spiral throughout nature and throughout the universe is very difficult to explain if you believe in a random chance universe (plus this beautiful shape has no real survival advantage), but this naturally occurring symmetry is very easy to explain from the point of view that everything was created by a logical and consistent God who created everything in an orderly fashion. 

Expectantly there are ties to Jesus and the Golden Ratio too.  The ‘Golden Ratio’ of latitudes on Earth would be the locations of Judea and Bethlehem – ‘the Navel of the Earth’.  As Jesus is perfection himself, only this location for his birth would have made sense. The pyramids, Noah’s ark and Solomon’s temple were built using this divine ratio too and it was not something handed to the ancients by aliens, because that opens up a whole new box of problems.  The best explanation is truly that this deep knowledge of God was given by God himself just as the dimensions for the ark and the temple were and that is discoverable only by discipline to mathematical truths that are as intrinsic and as timeless as God himself is.

In a nutshell.

At the height of all mathematics is the Golden Ratio and there is truly something divine about this just as Pacioli discovered.  Not only does the ratio share God’s most important qualities but it witnesses to the perfection of our creator in a way that is rarely done elsewhere in nature.

The Argument from DNA

In every cell, there is one indispensable molecule and this is DNA. Deoxyribonucleic acid is a molecule in the cells of living organisms which contains the assembly instructions for the molecular machinery in the cell. How the protein parts are assembled is absolutely critical for the machinery and thus the living cell to exist.  It therefore is known as one of the building blocks of life, or the blueprints to life.  These ‘assembly instructions’ constitute a precise software code written in a genetic language using a set of four nitrogenous base “letters”: A, G, C & T. (Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine & Thymine).

Hence by using these four basic units called nucleotides they store immense amounts of information, and those are formed from twenty amino acids. These are like the letters of a genetic language to produce the proteins for living things.  The stored information is immense. There is a picture from 1956 of a hard drive being unloaded from a plane with a fork lift. This huge hard drive was only 5 MB, which makes you appreciate the fact that you can carry a flash drive of 128 GB in your shirt pocket and forget that it’s there. Computer memory technicians would be thrilled to have anywhere near the storage capacity of the information in one pinhead amount of DNA. If printed on books, they could stretch to the moon 500 times.

In addition to the huge storage capacity of DNA, its complexity and functions are still being discovered. It copies itself, encodes genetic material that determines what an organism will be and look like, is involved in gene regulation, self-repair and more. Decades ago when scientists took a sampling of the genome (which included DNA and more), they decided that non-coding DNA sequences were “junk” based on evolutionary biases and assumptions. Since then, the creationists who said, essentially, “not so fast, that’s not junk” were proved right.  Since we have found that other things like the ATP synthase, circular RNA and further functions of DNA have been discovered.

Now the existence of a software code that necessarily predates any life is enough to conclude that an intelligent creator must have provided the information, but there is one other interesting twist (literally!), and that is the container for that information.  A DNA molecule is completely unique from all other molecules. Its double helix design is perfectly constructed to contain the 750 meg of information in a single molecule. In fact, if the tightly twisted double helix were stretched completely out, it would be 700 feet long.

The tricky part is that this molecule could not have evolved – it predated life itself since a cell cannot be constructed without the instruction molecule.  “If proteins appeared first, so that they could eventually catalyze the formation of nucleic acids, how was the information necessary to produce the proteins themselves coded?  On the other hand, if nucleic acids came first, thereby embodying the information necessary to obtain proteins, how were acids replicated and translated into proteins?” said Dr. Massimo Pigliucci.  To dumb it down he is saying there is no way the DNA and genetic code could have evolved by chance.

Sir Fred Hoyle even called the idea of these building blocks of life arriving by chance “nonsense of a high order”.  The chances of amino acids forming by chance (which is complicated by needing the proper conditions and sequence) are so small, they are impossible. Therefore many scientists when faced with this turn to panspermia - the belief that aliens seeded life on earth - but that causes its own set of problems and has zero evidence for it.  Meanwhile the God who is the author of the Bible has numerous supernatural and prophetic evidence which gets ignored.  With chance out of the picture, DNA is a testimony of the certainty of the Creator, who has given us his self-revelation in the Bible.

And here’s the truly amazing part.  In the Bible it does not use the word DNA but it does give a hint to how humans are formed in the womb which would have been impossible to tell without our current technology.  Psalm 139 describes us as being “knit” in the womb and the Hebrew could be translated as “needlework” which is like how the DNA works – a needle that fashions all parts of our bodies together in the womb, a design that takes place stitch by stitch.  This Psalm describes the human “substance” that God individually knows, the uniqueness of each person and their unique blueprint for life stored in the DNA.

So there are two undeniable proofs of the existence of an intelligent creator in: Firstly, the genetic code itself with its specific, complex and very precise information and secondly, the incredible storage container for this code – the double helix designed DNA molecule. Both are indispensable to the living cell and both predate life itself needing a spectacular source for their origin and what better source than the one who claims to be the author of this remarkable building block of life?

In a nutshell.

The blueprints for life baffle scientists and yet testify to just how much God has pre-planned all of life and has a plan for each created being.  He has mapped it all out and each person is vastly more complex than anything we could conceivably create, as we are just a shadow of our own Creator.

The Argument from Astronomy

The dictionary says that Astronomy is “the branch of science which deals with celestial objects, space, and the physical universe as a whole.” Related to this is Cosmology – the study of the structure of the Cosmos – and Cosmogony – the study of the history of the universe. In reality much of what is presented as Cosmology is actually Cosmogony which is highly dependent on ones philosophical and religious worldview.

When I look up at the night sky and see the moon, the stars, and easily visible planets like Venus and Jupiter, I feel a sense of awe at the God who made all of these things. Isn’t it amazing how God made so many stars? For God it wasn’t difficult at all – the Bible simply says, “He also made the stars.”  Of course when we look at the night sky we can only see a limited number with the naked eye, and up until a few hundred years ago we had no idea of the fact that there are actually billions and billions of stars that God made.

These days when many people look at the stars and think about the vastness of the universe they feel insignificant and alone on a small and insignificant planet existing in an atheistic universe where everything came into being all by itself over billions of years.

According to the vocal atheist Lawrence Krauss, “Every atom in your body came from a star that exploded… You couldn’t be here if stars hadn’t exploded, because the elements - the carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, iron, all the things that matter for evolution and for life - weren’t created at the beginning of time. They were created in the nuclear furnaces of stars, and the only way for them to get into your body is if those stars were kind enough to explode. So, forget Jesus. The stars died so that you could be here today.”

Forget Jesus? Krauss seems to take delight in mocking Christianity and praising the stars as if they created us. Our bodies are not made of star dust. That is just a man-made conjecture based on the fact that much of our body is made of water (H2O) and therefore we contain hydrogen atoms in our body. The Bible says we were made by God from the dust of the ground – which our bodies also share a lot in common with chemically.  Just one of many amazing things the Bible was ahead of science with.

If we look back just 50 years or so we find that the majority of scientists believed that the universe was eternal and did not have a beginning, but now most scientists accept that the universe did have a beginning. This confirms what the Bible says in Genesis 1:1, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the Earth.”

Thousands of years ago some cultures believed that the Earth was resting on top of elephants and tortoises. In contrast around 1500 B.C. we see a clear description of the Earth’s free float in space:

“God stretches the northern sky over empty space and hangs the earth on nothing.” (Job 26:7)

The Bible is also clear that the earth is a sphere:

“God sits above the circle of the earth… He spreads out the heavens like a curtain and makes his tent from them.” (Isaiah 40:22)

The above verse uses the word circle but it can also mean sphere (there isn’t a separate word for sphere in Hebrew). This verse also talks about God spreading out the heavens. This spreading out (expansion) was discovered in 1929 by Hubble.

“Look up to the skies above, and gaze down on the earth below. For the skies will disappear like smoke, and the earth will wear out like a piece of clothing. The people of the earth will die like flies, but my salvation lasts forever. My righteous rule will never end!” (Isaiah 51:6)

Or take the number of stars. Today we know that there are billions and billions of stars in the universe. In Genesis 22:17 God said to Abraham, “I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore…”

In the time of Abraham the number of stars had been counted at around 3000. So it’s possible that the astronomers of Abraham’s day argued with his assertion that the stars were uncountable. We need to realise that when the secular wisdom of the day contradicts the Biblical wisdom given to us from God it is always the ‘wise’ men that are wrong and not the Bible.

The biggest issue that critics of the Bible have with modern cosmology is in relation to the age of the universe and the Big Bang Theory. The Bible says that God made everything in 6 days. (Exodus 20:11) The Bible presents a history of the Earth and universe as being only thousands of years, whereas the Big Bang teaches billions of years. The current age of the universe is supposedly about 13.8 billion years. However about 20 years ago scientists were just as convinced that the age of the universe was 16 to 18 billion years!

Despite the assertions of secular scientists there is much evidence in support of a young universe. One evidence is comets. It is known from observational astronomy that comets are made of ice and that they gradually disintegrate. Their maximum life span is no more than about 100,000 years at the most. So if the universe really were billions of years old there should be no more comets left in our solar system.

In order to overcome this problem the Oort cloud theory was invented – an imaginary place on the far edge of our solar system that has countless comets that gradually replenish the stock of comets. However there is no observational support at all for this theory. As Dr Jason Lisle says, “It’s very hard to refute something that you can’t see or observe in any way!”

This shows the nature of what really happens in the secular scientific world again and again. Ad hoc explanations are created in order to prop up the prevailing theories. Another term for an ad hoc explanation is a ‘rescuing device’ and we all use them when our worldview is being threatened. (It’s much easier to reach for a rescuing device than abandon your whole worldview – or in this case the unproven and unscientific paradigm of ‘deep time’).

One of the more complex issues in astronomy is distant starlight. When we look up at the night sky we can see stars that are millions of light years away. (1 light year being the distance it takes light to travel 1 year, which is just under 10 trillion kms). Therefore, it is reasoned that it must have taken millions of years for that light to reach earth. Yet the reality is that we have no way of knowing that the speed of light has always been constant. I believe that Danny Faulkner (PhD in Astronomy) has the best solution. His 'Dasha' theory proposes that the speed of light was much much greater during the early days of Creation. We must not forget that the creation of the universe was a divine act, so God wasn’t limited to current natural processes. 

Anyway, the Big Bang theory has its own starlight time problem, called the Horizon problem. It has been observed that the heat in the universe is extremely uniform – and the only way for this to happen is for heat from starlight to travel throughout the universe. However, even given 14.5 billion years there is not nearly enough time for the light to travel far enough to do this.  The Horizon problem is almost identical in nature to the problem Creationists have, therefore it is illogical to reject the existence of a young Earth based on starlight because the Big Bang has essentially the same problem. (See here). Of course secular cosmologists have an ad hoc 'rescuing device' here too - the theory of inflation - an unobserved (i.e. totally speculative) much-faster-than-light early expansion of the universe.

Perhaps the strongest argument for God in Astronomy is related to the laws of nature. Astronomy and cosmology rely on the assumption that the universe obeys the laws of nature, and operates in a uniform and predictable way. Astronomical computer programs are able to accurately predict exactly how the night sky will look on any given night, location, and specific time hundreds of years into the future. This makes sense because God is a logical and consistent God who upholds everything by his power.

However, if there is no God and we just live in a random chance universe that exploded (rapidly expanded) from nothing then why should the universe operate like clockwork as it does? We know where the stars will be tomorrow night, and what time the sun and planets will rise and set (from an earthly perspective) based on the observations made in the past. But to say that the future will be like the past is illogical circular reasoning. This is one reason that we can know that the biblical worldview must be true. If it were not true then we would have no logical reason to expect the sun to still be shining tomorrow. Furthermore, we could not even begin to do astronomy without using our God-given logical minds.

It makes sense that if there is a God, he would try to communicate with us – and he has – through the Bible. In the SETI program scientists are searching for signs of intelligent life out there somewhere. The reality is that there is intelligent life out there – God – and he has given us so much evidence in creation that there must be a God. Not only this, but he came down to Earth – not as E.T. but as Jesus Christ. The Creator of the universe revealed himself as a man, and died for our sins. If you seek him, you will find him.

In a nutshell.

The stars witness of the Creator, as the Bible has been accurate time and time again with regards to astronomy.