MORALITY: Is there a standard of right and wrong?

Most people have an instinctive awareness that they should do good and avoid evil. Why is this? Is it because there is a knowledge of right and wrong written on our hearts?

Previously I have written on two scientific arguments from cosmology that point to a Creator. These two powerful explanations for God’s existence are the Cosmological and Teleological arguments. In this post I would like to briefly explore another compelling philosophical line of evidence pointing to God’s existence. This is the Moral Law.

In essence, it goes like this:

1. Every law has a law giver

2. There is a moral law

3. Therefore, there is a Moral Law Giver

If the first two premises are true, then it would follow that the conclusion would be true, there is a Moral Law Giver.

BEHIND LEGISLATION IS A LEGISLATOR

I think everybody would acknowledge the first premise is true. It is obvious that every law has a law giver. I personally work for a governmental agency in the County of San Bernardino that enforces the California Building Codes. Building and Safety’s primary responsibility is the enforcement of building standards adopted by the County and approved by the California legislature. There would be no laws or “codes” if we did not have a body of lawmakers or legislature.

When we hire a new employee they sign a contract. One of the many things this entails is a “code of conduct”. There are certain rules and regulations that must be adhered to as part of their conditions of employment. It is very obvious to the employee that someone or more than one, created and wrote these rules.

When a police officer gives you a ticket for speeding, he must appeal to an established law that allows him to cite that specific violation. There are many examples we could give to reinforce this point.

So if there is a Law Giver behind the law, how does that apply to morality? If there really is a Moral Law then something or someone must be behind it. Is premise two correct? There is a Moral Law.

IS THERE A MORAL LAW?

It seems obvious that all people are impressed with a fundamental sense of right and wrong. However, there are some that try and deny this.

Well know atheist Richard Dawkins wrote the following in his book The God Delusion,

“There is at the bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good. Nothing but blind pitiless indifference.”

Is this really true? Does this line up with our human experience? Is there really no evil or good? Are we living in a world without a God? Are we just highly evolved animals with no purpose?

In the wild a coyote will kill a rabbit because it needs to eat. It has not done anything morally wrong. There is a “circle of life” in the animal kingdom that we all recognize. Many times only the strong survive. Animals have no moral obligation to one another. The are just doing what animals do. If God doesn't exist, we should view human behavior in the same way. If Mr. Dawkins is correct, we should be able to kill someone and it shouldn’t really matter right? No action should be considered morally right or wrong. He says there is no evil and no good. So “murder” is just a personal decision and there should no ramifications. This is absurd right? But why is it absurd?

This is a problem for Atheists. They want to do away with God, but they must admit there are moral standards. However, without God, these standards do not exist. Here is a quote from Michael Ruse - Atheist, Philosopher of Science at Florida State University:

"The man who says that it is morally acceptable to rape little children is just as mistaken as the man who says 2 + 2 = 5"

We all know it is wrong to hurt or torture an innocent child. Even though some do this horrible act, deep down they know it is wrong. You see without an objective standard of meaning and morality, then life is meaningless and there is nothing absolutely right or wrong. Everything is a matter of opinion. You may as well just eat drink and be merry for tomorrow we die. Again, we know this is a faulty concept.

“Former” atheist C.S. Lewis once struggled with the problem of evil. However, this subject eventually caused him to realize there had to be a higher standard and he eventually became a Christian. He made the following observation:

“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?”

Francis Collins was a “former” noted atheist and scientist. He wrote the following:

“Why would such a universal and uniquely human hunger (for God) exist, if it were not connected to some opportunity for fulfillment? Creatures are not born with desires unless satisfaction for those desires exists. A baby feel hunger: well, there is such a thing as food. A duckling wants to swim: well, there is such a thing as water.” {Source: “The Language of God”, 38}

The Law written in our hearts

The Bible addresses this “hunger” or truth stamped upon our hearts.

“…The work of the law is written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness…”

“Because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse!” Romans 1

Regardless of people’s opinions or what our culture may say, we have this “built in” understanding of what is morally right and wrong.

Moral Relativism

Many will say that is just your personal value or opinion. They will assert that morality is relative. They will argue that there are no universal values that help us determine what is right and wrong. They will claim, “that is your moral truth” or “everything is relative.” They may point out that different cultures have different standards therefore there are no standards. They argue moral relativism makes us more “tolerant” of other people’s beliefs. When challenged with truth and logic, these arguments do not stand up. When evaluated you will discover even different cultures have common moral standards. We should definitely be tolerant of others but our culture has re-defined the definition of “tolerance”.

This is why it is so critical for parents and influencers of the youth of our generation to be equipping them with a Biblical Worldview. In his book “The Closing of the American Mind” professor Allan Bloom says the following,

“There is one thing a professor can be absolutely certain of; almost every student entering the university believes, or says he believes, that truth is relative…The students, of course, cannot defend their opinion. It is something with which they have been indoctrinated.”

Because of this, our culture has become close-minded to the possibility of knowing truth. The truth is that this objective morality is common to all people and given by God. It has nothing to do with our personal opinion or beliefs. Even though our culture may express this relativistic view, they do not live that way. Their actions contradict their “beliefs”.

If you treat someone who believes morality is relative unfairly you will find out real quick that they must admit there is a standard of right and wrong. Try stealing money from them. Take their cherished car or burglarize their house. If there is no standard, then I should be able to do that. After all I am just exercising “my truth” and morality. Like the animal kingdom, if I am stronger than you I will just take it from you. You have no right to complain if you adhere to your relativism. Again, we know this is absurd and if given the chance, they would try and defend themselves against you.

This view just does not match our intuitive understanding of right and wrong. If we take this concept to its ridiculous conclusion, a mass murderer should be no different than the sweet God-fearing lady who obeys the law and tries to help others. Almost no one would make that claim.

DOES MORALITY REQUIRE A MORAL LAW GIVER?

We have provided evidence that there is an objective morality that applies to everyone. Where does this come from? Since this law is written on everyone’s heart, it must come from a source greater than ourselves. The best explanation is for the existence of a Moral Law Giver (God).

For evil to exist good must exist, and for good to exist God must exist. An Atheist may say, I don’t need God in my life to be good. In a sense they are right. People can be good without knowing or believing in God. That is not the argument. There would be no standard of goodness without God. Even though they don’t “believe” in Him, they really need God to make their case. It is like someone who reads a book but does not know the author. This happens all the time. You can read a book and not know who wrote it personally, However there would be no book if there wasn’t an author!

CONCLUSION

We have provided ample evidence that premises one and two are both correct. Every law has a Law Giver. There is a Moral Law. Therefore, the last premise is true. There is a Moral Law Giver and He is God. He is the standard of goodness. Without Him there would be no objective right or wrong. However, God does exist and you can know Him.

The Moral Argument is just one of many reasons that add to the vast cumulative case of evidence that points to our Creator. Jesus said in the Bible:

“I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6

“For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Romans 3:23

“For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Romans 6:23

“That if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved. For with the heart man believes unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” Romans 10:9-10

“For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Romans 10:13

If you haven’t done this, now would be a good time!

A DESIGN SPEAKS OF A DESIGNER

One of my favorite things to do is to spend time outdoors enjoying the beauty of nature. From the majesty of the skies to a simple wildflower it seems like there is a master painter or designer behind it all. Even in the most seemingly simple creation there seems to be such complexity, order and purpose built into it. Who, or what is behind it all?

Recently, I was walking on the sand with my family in beautiful San Diego. We came upon a very intricate sand sculpture. The artist or creator of this amazing piece of art was just putting his final touches on his masterpiece. Even if the architect of this creation had not been there, it would have been obvious that this was created by an intelligent mind. We would not have assumed that this was just a result of the wind or the waves arranging the sand into this beautiful form. This was definitely the product of intelligent design.

This is consistent with our everyday experiences. We see things designed for a purpose all around us and instinctively understand there was a designer behind it. This common sense type of observation and inference was made famous by William Paley, the English theologian and moral philosopher (1642-1805) when he stated that every watch requires a watchmaker. If you were walking out in nature and you discovered a Rolex watch in the dirt, what would be your reaction? First, you would probably be excited to find something so expensive and valuable. But beyond that what would be your conclusion about the cause of the watch being there? Would you think this was a product of erosion? Maybe it was the result of many years of wind and rain reacting with the natural forces of nature? We all know this would not be our reaction. We know someone at some time in the past accidentally left or dropped it there. We know that the watch was designed by an intelligent watchmaker.

A watch is very complex and there are many components working together to allow it to function properly. However, the universe we live in is much more complicated and precise than a Rolex watch.

For many years our family has taken a summer camping trip in Northern California near Lake Tahoe. We found a spot that is located far from the highway and separated from civilization. Our camping spot is in a large meadow that is surrounded by miles of forest. One of my favorite things to do is go out into this meadow late at night and stare up at the heavens. It is incredible to see the vastness of our galaxy and observe the brightness and precision of all of the stars. It looks like jewels that have been poured out on a black velvet canvas. In many ways it makes me feel very small and like a tiny speck in the grand scheme of things. But then I think of Who created it all, and that I am a part of His creation, it leaves me in awe.

Isaac Newton once wrote,

“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”

In a previous post I discussed the evidence for God’s existence. The conclusion was that God is the best explanation for the beginning of the universe, or the Cosmological Argument. However, the universe did not explode into some chaotic form. The universe came into existence with extreme precision and has a very complex design. This is another very compelling line of evidence for God’s existence. In this post we will focus on the evidence of design that speaks of a designer.

TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

Teleological comes from the Greek word “telos” which means design. The Teleological or design argument for God’s existence goes like this:

1. Every design has a designer

2. The universe has a high complex design

3. Therefore, the universe had a designer

We have already briefly explored the first premise which seems to resonate with our experience and common sense. Every design has a purpose and designer behind it. So, what about the “bigger picture” such as the universe we live in? We will spend the majority of this post on premise number two. The universe has a high complex design.

THE UNIVERSE IS DESIGNED FOR LIFE

In essence, there are very specific requirements or conditions for life to exist and thrive. In my previous example, the “watchmaker” built-in very specific requirements for the watch to work and display consistent accurate time. Our universe is “designed” in a way that has just the perfect conditions for us to even exist. A more technical term for this is called the fine-tuning of the universe. There are certain constants in nature that have very precise values and if they even varied slightly life would not exist.

There is a wealth of scientific knowledge that demonstrates the requirement of fine-tuning for life to exist. Scientists call these constants “anthropic constants”. Anthropic is a Greek word that just means “human” or “man”. This “Anthropic Principle” describes the evidence that our universe is extremely designed or “fine-tuned” to allow and support human life to exist on our planet earth.

In Jeremiah 33:25, God declares,

“I have established…the fixed laws of heaven and earth.”

This is one of many passages of Scripture that demonstrate once again the Bible got it right. For thousands of years the Bible has recorded that the laws of physics do not vary.

To give an example of how incomprehensibly fine-tuned our universe is, consider the following: If the gravitational force were different by one part in 10(with exponent of 40), our sun would not exist and neither would we. To give some perspective to this number, imagine if you stretched a tape measure across the entire vast universe. If the gravitational force were represented by a particular mark on the tape measure, we would not exist if the mark varied by more than one inch. That is only one example of many precise values in our universe. Any variation and life would not exist.

{Source: The Case for a Creator - Strobel}

Astrophysicist Hugh Ross has calculated that there are over 100 defined constants that strongly point to an intelligent Designer. I will just list a few here. The following in an excerpt taken from “I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist” by Norman Geisler and Frank Turek.

Anthropic Constant 1: Oxygen Level On earth, oxygen comprises 21 percent of the atmosphere. That precise figure is an Anthropic Constant that makes life on earth possible. If oxygen were 25% fires would erupt spontaneously, if it were 15%, human beings would suffocate.

Anthropic Constant 2: Atmospheric Transparency If the atmosphere were less transparent, not enough solar radiation would reach the earth’s surface. If it were more transparent we would be bombarded with far too much solar radiation down here. (In addition to atmospheric transparency, the atmospheric composition of precise levels of nitrogen, oxygen, carbon dioxide and ozone are in themselves Anthropic constants).

Anthropic Constant 3: Moon-Earth Gravitational Interaction If the interaction were greater than it currently is, tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period would be too severe. If it were less, orbital changes would cause climatic instabilities. In either event, life on earth would be impossible.

Anthropic Constant 4: Carbon Dioxide level If the CO2 level were higher than it is now, a runaway greenhouse effect would develop (we’d all burn up). If the level were lower than it is now, plants would not be able to maintain efficient photosynthesis (we’d all suffocate).

Anthropic Constant 5: Gravity If the gravitational force were altered by 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000001 percent, our sun would not exist, and, therefore neither would we. Talk about precision.

Anthropic Constant 6: Centrifugal Force If the centrifugal force of planetary movements did not precisely balance the gravitational forces, nothing could be held in orbit around the sun.

Anthropic Constant 7: Rate Of Expansion If the universe had expanded at a rate one millionth more slowly than it did, expansion would have stopped and the universe would have collapsed on itself before any stars had formed. If it had expanded faster, then no galaxies would have formed.

Anthropic Constant 8: Speed Of Light Any of the laws of physics can be described as a function of the velocity of light (now defined to be 299,792,458 meters per second). Even a slight variation in the speed of light would alter the other constants and preclude the possibility of life on earth.

Anthropic Constant 9: Water Vapor Levels. If water vapor levels in the atmosphere were greater than they are now, a runaway greenhouse effect would cause temperatures to rise too high for human life. If they were less, an insufficient greenhouse effect would make the earth to cold to support human life.

Anthropic Constant 10: Jupiter. If Jupiter were not in it’s current orbit, the earth would be bombarded with space material. Jupiter’s gravitational field acts as a cosmic vacuum cleaner, attracting asteroids and comets that might otherwise strike earth.

Anthropic Constant 11: The Earth’s Crust. If the thickness of the earth’s crust were greater, too much oxygen would be transferred to the crust to support life. If it were thinner, volcanic and tectonic activity would make life impossible.

Anthropic Constant 12: The Earth’s Rotation. If the rotation of the earth took longer than 24 hours, temperature differences would be too great between night and day. If the rotation period were shorter, atmospheric wind velocities would be to great.

Anthropic Constant 13: Axis Tilt. The 23-degree axis tilt of the earth is just right. If the tilt were altered slightly, surface temperatures would be too extreme on earth.

Anthropic Constant 14: Atmospheric Discharge. If the atmospheric discharge (lightning) rate were greater, there would be too much fire destruction; if it were less there would be little nitrogen fixings in the soil.

Anthropic Constant 15: Seismic Activity. If there were more seismic activity, much more life would be lost; if there were less, nutrients on the ocean floors and in river runoff would not be cycled back to the continents through tectonic uplift. (yes, even earthquakes are necessary to sustain life as we know it).

These are only 15 out of more than 100 constants. Dr. Hugh Ross’ calculations that all of this could have happened without Divine design is an overwhelming number. It is one chance in 10 (with exponent of 138), that is one chance in one with 138 zeros after it. There are only about 10 (with exponent of 70) atoms in the entire universe. In effect, there is zero chance that any planet in the universe would have the life-supporting conditions we have, unless there is an intelligent Designer behind it all.

Can you think of a more reasonable explanation? Why such intricate and purposeful design? It seems clear that it is the product of a powerful, loving, purposeful, intelligent designer that is beyond nature.

Yes, the beauty of design is everywhere. Like an artist who signs his painting, God’s signature is in all of His creation, from the universe as we have been exploring down to a single cell in our body. While the intent of this post was to establish design in the universe, I would like to briefly scratch the surface of showing God is also behind the design in biology as well.

COSMOS TO THE CELL

Biology must ultimately deal with the important question of the origin of life. While much time is spent on evolution and natural selection, ultimately a far more pressing question is how did life get here in the first place? While that is not the topic of this post, it is significant to bring up.

Charles Darwin and other scientists of his day did not have an appreciation or thorough understanding of the “complexity” of the cell. Many thought the cell was very simple. With the advancement of science, we now know they are packed with information. Information is stored in codes of a molecule called deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). In his book “Signature in the Cell” Dr. Stephen Meyer shows that this blue print of information cannot be explained naturally and provides positive evidence of a designing intelligence. {Source: “Stealing from God” Turek}

A couple of years ago I had the privilege of attending a lecture at Biola University where James Tour gave a presentation. He is an American nano-scientist and professor of Science and Nanoengineering and Computer Science at Rice University in Houston Texas. His awards are many including being inducted into the National Academy of Inventors in 2015. He was named one of “The 50 most Influential Scientists in the World Today” and was named “Scientist of the Year” by R&D Magazine in 2013. The list goes on and on.

I remember being amazed at not only his enthusiasm for his subject matter, but also how he described a “simple cell”. It is not so simple. He described things on the molecular level that was astounding. As he described the functions of a cell, it was like he was talking about a large factory. In short, he described these very highly sophisticated molecular machines that control the cellular process. They were extremely complex, highly calibrated and had a purpose and design behind them. This is probably why he confidently says,

“Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God.”

Every cell in our body contains DNA which is packed with information far more complex than a computer. There are four letters in the DNA alphabet and the exact sequence they form is the code that is unique to your body and how it functions. Each cell in your body contains volumes of information. To get a perspective, it has been estimated that the DNA in a single cell contains about 4,000 books and each book would have about 500 pages of information. Think about the chance of this originating from random non-living matter. Information is understood to be created by an intelligent designer.

It must be noted that while many scientists recognize and acknowledge the appearance of design, they differ on what caused or who originated the design. Atheist and evolutionist Richard Dawkins has written, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”

CONCLUSION

All of us, regardless of our worldview, must account for this appearance of design. Purposeful, intentional designs are always the creative product of purposeful intelligent designers. As Christians, when we discover such designs whether in the cosmos or in a molecule our most reasonable of all the explanations is the God of the Bible.

As we review the Teleological Argument, it seems like we have provided that premises one and two are true, thus the conclusion would also be true. The universe had a designer. This designer fits our description of God.

1. Every design has a designer

2. The universe has a high complex design

3. Therefore, the universe had a designer

DOES COSMOLOGICAL EVIDENCE POINT TO GOD'S EXISTENCE?

The first 10 words of Scripture start out with a bang. “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” What a powerful claim! Did the Bible get it right, or are there other more reasonable explanations?

I am convinced there are many compelling reasons that demonstrate the existence of God. My personal favorite set of evidences generally focus on the following explanations:

1. God is the best explanation for the origin of the universe

2. God is the best explanation for the design or “fine tuning” of the universe for intelligent life

3. God is the best explanation for biological organisms that appear to be designed.

4. God is the best explanation for the existence of objective moral truth

These powerful arguments, scientific and philosophical, are more formally referred to as the Cosmological Argument, The Anthropic principle, The Teleological Argument, and the Moral Argument.

Each one of these premises need to be examined in much more depth, however for this post I will review the evidence supporting the first claim. God is the best explanation for the origin of the universe, or more commonly called the Cosmological Argument.

Let’s begin by establishing the premise and then we will come back and examine each line of evidence in more depth.

Cosmological Evidence

1. The universe began to exist

2. Anything that begins to exist must have a cause

3. Therefore, the universe must have a cause

4. This cause must be un-caused (eternal), space-less, timeless, immaterial, extremely powerful and personal.

5. This fits our description of God

Before we examine this evidence, I want to establish my reference point and briefly explore how I believe God reveals Himself to us.

REVELATION IN HIS WORD AND IN HIS WORLD.

As Christians, we believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God. It is literally “God breathed”. We can clearly understand from Scripture about the origin of the universe and who created it.

The physical universe is visible, observable and speaks of a Creator. We know Scripture declares God’s existence and it also thoroughly equips us for every good work. We can learn of His existence, His mighty power, and wisdom. So, God is revealed in His Word and also in his world (nature). Scripture is often referred to as His “special revelation” and his nature as “general revelation”. They will never contract each other. These “two books” come from God who is the source of all truth and they will complement each other.

Consider the following passages of Scripture:

“The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. Yet their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.” Psalm 19:1-4 NIV

“Since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities-his eternal power and divine nature-have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” Romans 1:19-20 NIV

So, whether we consider His written word or His creation, there is overwhelming evidence that speaks of Him. Let’s now look at the evidence I have presented not from His written Word the Bible, but from His creation or His special revelation.

THE UNIVERSE BEGAN TO EXIST

Is this premise true? Did the universe begin or has it always existed? The answer is extremely important and has tremendous implications. If it did begin to exist, then something or someone must have caused it to begin. However, if it is eternal some will conclude there is no need for a Creator.

For years, many in the scientific community held a common belief and had a general consensus that the universe was eternal. However, this began to change as we entered the 20th century. More and more evidence began to suggest that instead of eternal, the universe began at a singular point in the past.

While there are several scientific discoveries that would point to a cosmic beginning, I would like to briefly explore three: The Second Law of Thermodynamics, an Expanding Universe, and Cosmic Radiation.

1. The Second Law of Thermodynamics

Thermodynamics is the study of energy and matter. The Second Law states that the universe is running out of usable energy. It is like a car that starts out with a full tank of gas. If you keep driving (using the energy), it will eventually run out of gas. If you leave a flashlight on, eventually it begins to dim as the energy in the batteries is used up. If the universe was eternal, it would be out of energy by now.

The Second law is also known as the Law of Entropy. With time, things naturally deteriorate or fall apart. Things go from order to disorder. We see evidence of this all around us. All of this points to the reality that the universe had a beginning. Astronomer Robert Jastrow compares the universe to a wound-up clock. “If a wind-up clock is running down, then someone must have wound it up.” {source: I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist. Geisler/Turek page 77}

2. Expanding Universe

The famous E=mc2 equation comes from Albert Einstein who is known for developing the Special Theory of Relativity in 1905. This equation basically describes how matter and energy are converted from one form to another. He eventually showed the relationships between the speed of light, gravity, mass and other factors in regard to the universe. All of this work was consistent with an expanding universe.

Many other scientists were also coming to the same conclusion as Einstein as they calculated and observed an expanding universe.

A Russian mathematician Alexander Friedman and George Lemaitre, working with Einstein’s theory also came to the conclusion that the universe is expanding.

The famous astronomer Edwin Hubble in 1929 using findings from other astronomers and scientists made some of his own amazing discoveries. He measured the Red Shift in light from distant galaxies. His evidence confirmed the universe is not only expanding, but that it sprang into being from a single point in the finite past!

In 2003, three leading cosmologists by the names of Arvin Borde, Alan Guth, and Alexander Vilenkin proved the following:

Any universe which has on average been expanding throughout its history cannot be eternal in the past, but must have an absolute beginning. In Vilenkin’s book “Many Worlds in One” he states, “…scientists can no longer hide behind a past-eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning.”

A simple illustration most would understand is to look at the universe like a balloon. Imagine if you took a marker and drew galaxies on the surface of the balloon. As you blow up the balloon the edges of the galaxies will move away from the center as well as from each other. If you let the air out, the process would reverse. This is basically what science has discovered. Since the universe is expanding, the universe had a beginning.

Robert Jastrow is an astronomer and founder of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies. He also worked at the Mount Wilson observatory and he made some astounding statements, especially in light of his personal agnosticism. He wrote the following:

"Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world. The details differ, but the essential elements in the astronomical and biblical accounts of Genesis are the same; the chain of events leading to man commenced suddenly and sharply at a definite moment in time, in a flash of light and energy." {source: Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, 11.}

Jastrow also made the following statement in an interview, “Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover…That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact.” {source: “A Scientist Caught Between Two Faiths; Interview with Robert Jastrow” Christianity Today, August 6, 1982}

With all of this mounting evidence, most scientist now agree that the universe had a cosmic beginning. However, this is just another piece of the cumulative evidence that the universe had a beginning. Let’s consider one more.

3. Cosmic Radiation

The third line of scientific evidence is cosmic radiation. Two American scientists “accidentally” made an amazing discovery that earned them Nobel Prizes. In 1965 Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson detected radiation on their antenna at Bell Labs in New Jersey. No matter where they pointed their instrument in the universe, they were unable to eliminate the radio signal “noise”. Physicist and cosmologist Phillip Peebles at Princeton University proposed that they may be detecting the residual “background radiation” that was caused when the universe first came into being. After many more experiments and observations Peebles hypothesis was confirmed. It indeed was cosmic background radiation. There has been much additional data that was provided from the Cosmic Background Explorer satellite that was launched in 1989. This was just another line of evidence that confirmed the universe originated from a fixed time in the past.

We have briefly considered 3 scientific discoveries. Does this reinforce our first premise that the universe began to exist? The evidence seems to indicate that it does. Now let’s look at the next premise.

ANYTHING THAT BEGINS TO EXIST MUST HAVE A CAUSE

Is this premise true? Do things that begin to exist have a cause?

I think our everyday experiences confirm this. Things do not just “pop into existence”. If we see a baseball bat, we instinctively know it had a creator and it was designed for a purpose. In this case, to hit a baseball. This is a fundamental principle of science and confirms our premise of cause and effect. The law of causality says everything that had a beginning had a cause.

Francis Bacon (The father of science) said, “True knowledge is knowledge by causes.” Science is a search for causes. To deny the law of causality is to deny rationality.

Since we have already established it is very reasonable that the universe began to exist, and science and experience confirm the law of causality, then the conclusion must be that the universe has a cause.

THE UNIVERSE HAS A CAUSE

If the universe had a beginning then it must have had a beginner. The evidence really leaves us with just two options:

1. No one created something out of nothing (atheist view).

2. Someone created something out of nothing (Theist view).

I ask you an honest question, which one is more reasonable?

There are only two possibilities for anything that exists; Either it has always existed and is therefore uncaused, or it had a beginning and was caused by something or someone else. Since there is overwhelming evidence the universe had a beginning it must have been caused by something outside itself.

THIS UNCAUSED FIRST CAUSE FITS OUR DESCRIPTION OF GOD

The first cause must have the following characteristics:

1. We know that time, space, and matter came into existence, so the first cause must be outside of this and have no limits. It must be nonspatial, timeless, and immaterial. It must be self-existent.

2. The first cause must be unbelievably powerful to be able to create the entire universe out of nothing.

3. The cause must be supremely intelligent to design the universe with such incredible precision.

4. The cause must be personal and have the ability to make choices. A world was created just perfectly for humans to live in.

All of these characteristics are the same ones that we use to describe the God of the Bible. However, we were able to use scientific evidence to confirm once again the Bible did get it right! In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

A BRIEF WORD ABOUT EVIDENCE

In spite of all of this, many skeptics will assert that there is no evidence for God. This statement is clearly false. It may be “possible” that the arguments we articulate and the evidence we provide are false, however they do count as evidence for God’s existence even though it may be unpersuasive to some.

I rarely tell someone I can prove God exists. I think there is a better approach. We need to trust in the power of the Holy Spirit. I like to tell people I can provide evidence that convinces me that God is the best explanation when you consider it with an open mind. You can provide all the evidence or facts but only God can change hearts.

We are all sinners and born with a bad heart. We are selfish, proud, stubborn and are looking out for what is in the best interest of ourselves. We are by nature at war with God. Many do not want there to be a God. They want to be their own God. Because of this, they will grasp at anything to “prove” Him away. We must have an honest heart and seek truth if we are ever going to see the evidence clearly.

In a court of law, there are some explanations that are better than others. However, we need to hear and evaluate all the evidence presented and determine what explanation best explains reality and persuades us beyond a “reasonable doubt”. Remember this, evidence by itself does not “say” anything. We must interpret the evidence. People can listen to the exact same arguments and evaluate the same evidence but come to different conclusions. This can be based on your life’s experiences, assumptions, your paradigm, and other factors.

In reality, the cumulative evidence for Christianity is very extensive and persuasive to those who honestly consider the claims with an open mind setting aside personal “bias”. It is critical that we do not omit possible explanations before we start our investigation. If we rule them out and take them off the table, such as a “supernatural” being, they will never be considered as possible options when in reality they may be the best explanation.

CONCLUSION

Finally, let’s review our premises of the Cosmological Evidence:

1. The universe began to exist

2. Anything that begins to exist must have a cause

3. Therefore, the universe must have a cause

4. This cause must be uncaused (eternal), spaceless, timeless, immaterial, extremely powerful and personal.

5. This fits our description of God

So, does cosmological evidence point to the existence of God? The evidence is reasonable and seems to lead to that conclusion and provide the best explanation. However, the cosmological argument is only one of many that demonstrates compelling and persuasive evidence for God. When you examine the entire cumulative case for God’s existence it is even more convincing and very powerful.