The Faith of the Atheist
Stan Cox


Christians have faith in God.  Basically, we believe that God exists though we have not seen Him.  Despite our inability to prove the existence of God by the use of our physical senses, we accept the affirmation of Scripture.  We freely admit that this is faith, "Now fiath is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen" (Hebrews 11:1).

This does not mean that there is no evidence as to the existence of God.  Indeed there is.  "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" (Romans 1:20).  The argument of design is one that cannot be successfully refuted by those who deny God's existence.  If there is no designer, why does structure and organization abound in the physical universe?  Why is it "cosmos" (ordered) rather than "chaos"?  Design demands a designer.

An article in the December 2002 issue of Wired Magazine entitled The New Convergence: Science + Religion, notes that scientists are becoming increasingly more willing to consider the possibility of the supernatural as an explanation of the ordered universe.  Why?  Because the more they learn about the way the universe works, the less tenable the idea becomes that "blind chance" can be the driving force behind all that exists.

Some scientists, though not strictly Bible believers, have allowed that the universe demands a designer.  Albert Einstein is famous for the quote, "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."  The famous astronomer Fred Hoyle in 1953 calculated the conditions necessary to create carbon (a necessary building block of life).  He believed the odds of this occurring by chance to be so phenomenally low that he converted from atheism to a belief that the universe reflects a "purposeful intelligence."  Notice the following quote about Hoyle from the previously mentioned article, written by Gregg Easterbrook:

Hoyle declared, "the probability of life originating at random is so utterly minuscule as to make the random concept absurd."  That is to say, Hoyle's faith in chance was shaken by evidence of purpose, a reversal of the standard postmodern experience, and one shared by many of his successors today.

Of course, not all scientists are jumping on the supernatural bandwagon.  Many scientists continue to look for an explanation of how chance could have led to an ordered universe, supporting life.  A leading theory propounded by many of these scientists is stated by Easterbrook as "the emerging theory of the multiverse, or multiple universes."  The basic theory is that the "Big Bang" was not a unique event.  The claim is made that "Universes bang into existence all the time, by the billions.  It just happens in dimensions we can't see."

Here we find a delicious irony.  Scientists make fun of the Christian's belief in what we cannot see, as we accept God by faith.  They determine that the evidence supplied by nature which testifies to a designer is an insufficient basis for such faith, and thus we are intellectually deficient, relying on "hocus pocus" rather than reason.  Then, they attempt to explain the same structure using a theory that has no support either from the scientific method, or from the observance of the natural world.  Consider:

  1. They must assume that Big Bangs happen all the time, becuase no one has ever observed one.

  2. They must assume the existence of such universes, because their theory demands their existence, though there is no physical evidence of them.
  3. They must assume that these universes exist in "alternate dimensions" because there is no evidence that other dimensions (beyond the familiar four dimensions that are readily observed) are even possible.

Physicist Charles Townes, in discussing this theory, has said that speculation about billions of invisible universes "strikes me as much more freewheeling than any of the church's claims."  The major proponent of this theory, Stanford researcher Andrei Linde, admits that we can't observe or verify other universes in any way; for that matter we can't even explain how they might occupy alternate dimensions.

Evolutionists are quick to claim for themselves the realm of reason.  They seek to contrast their "hard science" with the "superstitious" and "closed minded" believers of the Genesis account of creation.  But, while the Bible believer holds to the existence of an invisible first cause whose work can be seen in the visible cosmos, the atheistic evolutionist is forced to believe in multiple universes for which there is no evidence of existence whatsoever.  Further they must admit that not only is the evidence lacking, but it will never be possible to verify it in any way.  In effect, it must be accepted by blind faith.

Contrast the unreasoning speculations of the atheistic evolutionist with the beautiful words of the Psalmist, "The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows his handiwork.  Day unto day utters speech, and night unto night reveals knowledge.  There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard" (Psalm 19:1-3).

It is not unreasonable to believe that God exists and that He designed the universe.  Amazingly, even the scientists are beginning to figure it out!


top of page