OCCAM'S RAZOR AND INTELLIGENT DESIGN (Part II)

OCCAM’S RAZOR AND INTELLIGENT DESIGN (Part II)

In its simplest form, Occam’s Razor contends that “When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better.”  The simplest explanation is usually correct.

Although much of the scientific community (certainly not all) has embraced the theory of Darwinian evolution, there is a much simpler way to view the origins of all that we see around us.  The simpler view is INTELLIGENT DESIGN, the idea that “certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an INTELLIGENT CAUSE, not an undirected process such as natural selection. 

In our previous devotional, we commenced an examination of the ‘holes’ in Darwinian theory.  We have discovered at least five major problems with the current theories of biological and chemical evolution.  Two of them, in the scientific disciplines of genetics and biochemistry, have already been addressed.  Today, we will highlight the remaining three.

1.        Paleontology: The fossil record lacks intermediate fossils. The fossil record’s overall pattern is one of abrupt explosions of new biological forms, and any possible candidates for evolutionary transitions are the exception, not the rule.  This has been recognized by many evolutionary biologists such as Ernst Mayr who explained in 2000 that “new species usually appear in the fossil record suddenly, not connected with their ancestors by a series of intermediates.” Similarly, a zoology textbook observed that “Many species remain virtually unchanged for millions of years, then suddenly disappear to be replaced by a quite different, but related, form. Moreover, most major groups of animals appear abruptly in the fossil record, fully formed, and with no fossils yet discovered that form a transition from their parent group.”

2.       Taxonomy: Biologists have failed to construct Darwin’s so-called “Tree of Life.” Biologists hoped that DNA evidence would reveal a grand tree of life in which all organisms are clearly related. It has not done so. Trees describing the alleged ancestral relationships between organisms based upon one gene or biological characteristic very commonly conflict with trees based upon a different gene or characteristic.  As the journal New Scientist put it, “different genes tell contradictory evolutionary stories.” The eminent microbiologist Carl Woese explained that such genetic conflicts “can be seen everywhere in the universal tree.” This conclusion implies a major breakdown in common descent, the hypothesis that all organisms share a common ancestor.

3.       Chemistry: The chemical origin of life remains an unsolved mystery.  The mystery of the origin of life is unsolved and all existing theories of chemical evolution face major problems. Basic deficiencies in chemical evolution include a lack of explanation for how a primordial soup could arise on the early earth’s hostile environment, or how the information required for life could be generated by blind chemical reactions. As the evolutionary biologist, Massimo Pigliucci, has readily admitted, “we really don’t have a clue how life originated on Earth by natural means.”

We need to explore the deeper root cause for the scientific perspective that spawned evolutionary theory.  George Gamow, a Russian-born scientist who became an American citizen, was a nuclear physicist and the foremost advocate of what is known as the big-bang theory.  This theory states that the universe was formed following a colossal explosion that took place billions of years ago.

One of the foundational arguments for the big-bang theory is that the universe continues to expand in all directions at the speed of light, which is 186,000 miles per second or approximately 299,000 kilometers per second.  The scientific community drew the ‘logical’ conclusion – that a huge explosion must have occurred, causing the accelerated distribution of matter throughout the cosmos.

While their logic seems sound, their conclusions are questionable.  Let’s employ Occam’s razor here.  If indeed an ‘explosion’ did occur, as scientific evidence seems to suggest, why is it necessary to presuppose it to be an entirely spontaneous and random event?  Is it not just as easy and reasonable to conclude that such a primordial event was the first act of an intelligent design for the universe?

Let’s consider the perspective of the philosopher, Aristotle, who was absolutely convinced that GOD was involved in the formation of the universe.  Aristotle contended that since we live in a universe that is characterized by the governing principles of cause and effect, something must have started the ‘universal ball rolling’, so to speak.  And since no other original cause is either provable or demonstrable, it can just as rationally and rightly be concluded that “GOD is the FIRST CAUSE” or “the prime mover” of the universe.  Wow!

So, if there was a primordial explosion that caused the universe to begin and to expand continually, why would it be more probable that a random event caused it than to believe that Almighty God conceived and executed it?  I firmly believe that if there was such a primordial explosion, OUR GOD SET THE CHARGE AND LIT THE MATCH!

The principle problem underlying Darwinian theory is that it is a GODLESS view of reality.

As I stated at the outset, I believe that, in every case, the Word of God is right.  The Bible clearly states that “In the beginning, GOD created the heavens and the earth.” (Genesis 1:1) The mere fact that humans cannot comprehend the ‘how’ of divine creation does not cause it to be false or untrue.  It is virtually impossible for me to accept the possibility that all that we see (including us) is the result of an extraordinary series of random events.

In the interest of intellectual integrity, it is acceptable to allow for legitimate discourse regarding the literal account of creation, as set forth in Genesis. Indeed, the fossil record could challenge the given time frame (6 days) for creation. However, this does not at all contradict the foundations of our faith. How so? The ways of God are infinitely transcendent, therefore largely unknowable to us. And, most importantly, GOD’S SCALE OF TIME cannot be reckoned by referencing human clocks and calendars. (Isaiah 55:9 – Psalm 90:4 – II Peter 3:8) Indeed, HE is “the High and Lofty One Who inhabits eternity.” (Isaiah 57:15)

As such, it is improbable that we will attain full understanding (in our frail and finite world) of the infinite plans and purposes of God.  According to the Apostle Paul, “Now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face [with HIM]: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.” (I Corinthians 13:12) My conclusion and conviction is that if I am required to make a ‘leap of faith’ based on the option of either embracing the Word of God or the speculations of men, I choose to believe GOD.  Both Occam’s razor and my GOD-GIVEN FAITH lead me to this conclusion.  It’s my story – and I’m sticking to it!

Sisters and brothers, be continually blessed, and please (above all else) MAKE SURE YOU ARE READY TO MEET OUR SOON COMING KING. Maranatha!