In order to defend our faith, we have to tear down godless worldviews. Without God, it’s impossible to make sense of our world. In the last article, I shared stage one of Operation Worldview Destruction; without God there is no ultimate justification for reason and knowledge. In stage two, we need to demonstrate that without God, there is no ultimate justification for doing science.
Many atheists argue that science proves we don’t need God. Ironically, that belief is self-refuting because we need God to do science!
God not only created the world, He sustains it with universal, unchanging natural laws like gravity, laws of thermodynamics, and laws of physics. God asked Job, “Have you ever in your life commanded the morning, and caused the dawn to know its place?” (Job 38:12). The sun rises in the east because God designed it that way! It’s predictable because His laws of nature are constant. “Who enclosed the sea with doors?…I placed boundaries on it and set a bolt and doors, and I said, ‘Thus far you shall come, but no farther; and here shall your proud waves stop.’” (Job 38:8-11). The earth is 70% water, yet the water stops at a certain point and doesn’t drown us. God is the One doing that!
He keeps our world together with universal, unchanging laws. This principle is referred to as “the uniformity of nature.” Since God designed gravity to keep us grounded and the sun to rise in the east, we have no concern that tomorrow we’ll float away or that the sun will come up on the other side of the world. The uniformity of nature gives us certainty that the future conditions of our universe will be like the past, enabling us to do science. Without it, we couldn’t run experiments to make predictions about the world.
For instance, if I see a man walking his dog by the coffee shop every day at 7:30 a.m. for a month, it may seem reasonable to predict he’ll do the same thing tomorrow. However, there are too many variables to trust that prediction. He could sleep in, he could go out of town, the dog could get sick, he could get sick, he could change his schedule, he could move, and so on. I can’t have certainty because I have no idea what the conditions will be like for him tomorrow.
Scientists, however, don’t have that problem. They can predict things with certainty because of the uniformity of nature. Without it, they would have no justification to believe future conditions will be like the past. The variables would wreck their work.
In the Godless worldview, there is no ultimate justification for believing those laws won’t change tomorrow. Without God, there are just as many variables to account for in making scientific predictions as the man with his dog. If the universe came from nothing and everything we see today is a result of billions of years of unintelligent, unguided, purposeless chemical reactions, then what justification is there to believe in the uniformity of nature?
In the atheistic worldview, even laws like gravity, laws of physics, and thermodynamics are the result of evolutionary (changing) processes, so who’s to say they won’t keep changing? We couldn’t live in that world, and atheists know it. They it for granted these laws can be trusted.
Steven Hawking, one of the smartest men on the planet, speaks of gravity as if it were an eternal law. In his book “The Grand Design” he said, “Because there is such a law as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.” Hawking believes gravity is constant, unchanging, universal, eternal, immaterial, and responsible for creating the world! That sounds suspiciously like belief in God doesn’t it?
Understandably so, since gravity was designed by a constant, unchanging, universal, eternal, immaterial Being. But the atheistic worldview can’t account for universal, unchanging, immaterial laws; neither for their creation nor their uniformity. Without God, there’s no basis for trusting the future will be like the past and science is rendered useless.
Now, those with a godless worldview might say, “We believe the future will be like the past because it’s always been that way. We’ve observed the uniformity of nature for so long, it’s reasonable to conclude the conditions won’t change tomorrow.” I agree, but there’s a major problem with this argument that atheists won’t appreciate. It’s an argument from faith. It’s like me trying to predict the man’s trip to the coffee shop simply because he’s been going for so long.
Without God, atheists have no idea that tomorrow will be like today, but they “believe” it will because of how it’s always been in the past. The atheist must admit he/she too is living by faith. The question is, “Which faith actually makes sense of the world we live in?” Faith in a Designer who created and maintains unchanging, universal, immaterial laws that can be relied upon as a foundation for scientific experimentation? Or faith that we came from nothing, were formed by purely physical, mindless processes, yet we can somehow still rely on unchanging, universal, immaterial laws to make science possible? I’ll let you decide, but, to me, to ask is to answer.