Are Science and God are in conflict? The metaphor warfare or conflict started in 1896 when the president of Cornell University Andrew Dickson White published a book entitled, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. Later this notion is being propagated by few scientists like Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawkins, Peter Atkins etc.,   

This idea itself is simply false. Let us take two world famous scientists. One is Stephen Hawking; the most brilliant scientist of this century who is confined in the wheel chair due to a motor-neuron disease. And the other Sir Isaac Newton, the father of Physics.  Both had been honored with the most prestigious chair in science, the post of Lucasian professor Mathematics at Cambridge University, a position that has been held by only 19 men from the day of Isaac Newton also called Newton’s chair. Sir Isaac Newton was a Christian who discovered the law of gravity. When Newton discovered his law of gravitation he wrote the most brilliant/ famous book in the history of science, Principia Mathematica, expressing the hope that it would convince the thinking man  to believe in God. He said: ‘The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.’  Stephen Hawking is an atheist and he recently said Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. What a contrast. For one scientist the discovery of the law gravity is making him to look to heavens and for the other, it shows that there is no God.

The universe is amazingly beautiful. On the Christmas Day of 1968, three American astronauts, Bill Anders , Jim Lovell, and Frank Borman  of Apollo 8 were the first human beings to go around the dark side of the moon away from the earth. Having fired their rockets, while they were homebound as they looked at our planet in a way that human eyes had never witnessed before; they saw earth rise over the horizon of the moon, draped in a beauteous mixture of white and blue, bordered by the glistening light of the sun against the black void of space. And in that awe-inspiring experience, nothing came to their mind to explain the beauty of it; only what they could do as they orbited the moon, is just to open the pages of the Book of Genesis and read for the world to hear from verses 1 through 10, using the King James Version text, ‘In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.’ I am reminded of the exchange between Napoleon and Laplace.  Napoleon while reading Laplace’ book on ballistics inquired “How is it that, You have written this huge book on the Universe, without once mentioning about God, the author of the universe?”. Laplace responded, “I don’t need that hypothesis.”  This is what you will hear from the majority of scientists today. “We don’t need the God hypothesis.” One can easily understand the crux of the problem that lies in this. These scientists frame it as if there is some sort of hostility between belief in God and the scientific endeavor. Dawkins states in his book that “God is a delusion … like Santa Claus,” whilst Hawking claims that “religion is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.”   It looks like we are forced to choose between God and science. Our younger generation are facing enormous pressure when scientists like Prof Stephen hawking says that we must choose between science and God, their young mind believes that If you want to remain intelligibly credible you have got to choose science and reject God because the two are mutually incompatible.

But, when you trace back the origins of modern science, it is utterly fascinating what you will find that up until the late 19th  century, scientists were typically Christian believers: Kepler, Boyle, Maxwell, Faraday, Kelvin, and others. Modern science exploded in the 16th and 17th centuries in Western Europe under men like Galileo, Kepler and Newton because of their conviction that the laws of nature that were then being discovered and defined reflected the influence of a divine law-giver. CS Lewis said,  ‘Men became scientific because they expected Law in Nature, and they expected Law in Nature because they believed in a law Giver. Science became the motor that drove their belief in God.

Historically, science has a theistic legacy, but few believe that there is no need of the idea of God as a ‘crutch’ to help science as now we are more modern, and God isn’t relevant. John Lennox says:  Suppose I have a Ford Galaxy car. Let’s suppose, that I wanted to give you two explanations of its origin. Now I take you near the car; lift the hood, and explained about the law of internal combustion and its engineering design. Then I told you about Henry Ford the man who discovered it. Suddenly I turn towards you and ask “Now, Choose between the two – Henry Ford or the law of internal combustion? .” Even a child will tell you this is silly.  Henry Ford doesn’t and cannot compete with the explanation in terms of law and science. One is an explanation in terms of an agent, and the other is an explanation in terms of mechanism. God doesn’t compete with science as an explanation at all.

Every system has three parts: the source or the idea behind the system; the process of creating or designing the system and then the system itself.  A watch/ pen cannot exist without a watchmaker. As a user, I only use the watch/pen and neither do I know who made it or the source nor the process behind it. Similarly we can distinguish science and faith. Science generally points to the process not the source, while faith points to the source, the Ultimate reality. They work in parallel not discounting each other. Can someone say they don’t believe in God because of science. Or in science because of God.

The more science reveals, the more I find myself worshiping the genius of the God who did it. I love science; and love God more who made that possible.   Think about this. The more I learnt about Aeronautical Engineering, the more I understood and admired a space shuttle. The more you learn to paint, the more you learn to admire Picasso.  It’s not about the lesser, it’s about the more! As Galileo, Kepler, and Newton become more knowledgeable in science and unraveled the mysteries of the universe, they came to admire the creator even more.

Then where is the battle?  Is there really a battle between science and God? The battle is much deeper. It is the battle between two different worldviews. The materialism or naturalism and the world of theism which are two diametrically opposed world views. Materialists believe that Ultimate reality is just mass and energy and there is no such thing like transcendent. They believe that science is the only way to truth. The very statement, “Science is the only way to truth” is not a scientific statement, it is a false statement. This is the philosophy of scientism which is logically incoherent. Science is not the only way to truth, it is not the way to find the most profound truths of all–namely, meaning and significance.   While pointing the limitations of science, the Nobel laureate Peter Medawar says that science cannot even answer the basic question of a child: “Why am I here? Where do I come from? What is the purpose of life?” We are all looking for those answers, but science cannot give us answers.

When these atheistic scientists are are referring to God, which god are they referring to? what do they mean by God?  For them he is the god of the gaps. This is simply, God as an explanation for the things that science hasn’t yet explained.  In the ancient world, before there was any understanding of atmospheric physics, they heard a roaring in the skies, and assumed a “thunder-god.”  Now that we have immense information on atmospheric physics, God has been pushed out of the picture. This is the idea. If I can’t explain it, God did it.  The more God, the less science, and the more science, the less God. This is the idea being pushed on us by the “intellects.” The rub is: I have never met an intelligent true Christian who believes in a God-of-the-gaps.  John Lennox says often, “I don’t believe in a God of the Gaps. I Believe in a God who is the God of the whole show.” He is the God of the things we understand and the things we don’t understand. This God-of-the-gaps doesn’t apply at all to the God who was revealed to us in the Bible.

There is a vast difference between the gods of the Egyptians, Assyrians, Greeks, Babylonian and Romans, and the God of the Bible and the difference is  He created the universe and they descended from it. If you analyse the gods of the ancients, they all evolved from the primordial matter of the universe and they are material gods. The God of the Bible created the matter of the universe. That puts Him in absolutely different category. The more I understand science, the more I understand the sheer wonder of the God who created it. Our God is not a tiny vanishing deity who will disappear the moment science makes a slightest advance/ discovery forwards. Hence the main crux is  This question science and God friend or foe is of great significance because the answer can be in affirmative or in negative and that depends only based on which God you worship. Science and God are friends or compliment each other only if that God is the God of the Bible as the God of the Bible is also the God of Science. I would like to take you to a small voyage into my life to explain this how I understood.

I took up bachelors in Physics initially but ultimately became an electronics and communication engineer. I joined the Ministry of Defense as a Scientist, I was involved from the beginning to do research in the field of computational electromagnetics and microwaves;  but due to my interest in space and rocket science, I later took up masters and Ph.D in the field of Aerospace engineering in Indian Institute of Scince, Bangalore. Space exploration interested me because of the vastness of the space that was almost close to infinity.  The billions of galaxies and the distance of the space brought chills within me. To travel from one end of our Milky Way galaxy to the other end, it takes 100000 light years, with light traveling at the speed of 186000 miles per second. Can you fathom it? The understanding led me to many more questions – What powers the stars in the galaxy? Why is the night sky dark? Were all the chemical elements formed inside stars?  Is the universe static or eternal or is it dynamically changing and finite?

It also brought a question within me whether God who created this vast universe can still care and love a tiny speck like me? This question was of paramount importance to me at that time because I was into deep depression because of many unanswered prayers in my personal life.  I even doubted the existence of God and was trying to search out that even if there is a God, who can He be? This search for the Creator who created me and the vast Universe made me to dig into various religious and scientific literatures.

Being born as a Jew, Albert Einstein originally a mathematician became a revolutionary influence of the 20th century, and changed the realms of theoretical physics for years to come. Having a humble beginning from a Swiss patent office, he published his special theory of relativity and later his general theory of relativity, most famously known by the equation E=mc2 (which stands for energy equals mass times the speed of light squared).  This publication not only earned Einstein the Nobel Prize in physics in 1922 but later facilitated two main discoveries: the atomic bomb and the big bang theory. A large amount of energy can be released from a small amount of matter. Hence his Theory of relativity, i.e. E=mc2, which is commonly known as the “death equation,” due to the atomic bomb at Hiroshima and Nagasaki,  can also be labeled as the equation of life as it has become the underlying principle of the “big bang,” and our existence.

From the days of Sir Isaac Newton to till that time, the scientists believed on the steady state theory, a belief that the universe had no beginning or end, but always existed and would continue to exist. This steady state theory was in good agreement with Hindu cosmology, Buddhist cosmology and Bahai teachings that believed in an eternal universe, the existence of cyclical nature of the universe and everything within it.  Space and time are considered to be Maya (illusion) and the universe is cyclically created and destroyed and this universe represents only one turn in the perpetual “wheel of time”, which revolves infinitely through successive cycles of creation and destruction. Many other pantheistic faiths have similar oscillating universe topology. It was rather a shock to the scientific community when Einstein’s equations predicted that the universe, in fact matter and energy and space and time itself had a beginning.  Einstein himself could not accept the fact that the universe is not static and he was struck with his own revelations. Einstein expressed the general opinion in 1917 after the Dutch astronomer Willem de Sitter produced equations that could describe a universe that was expanding, a universe with a beginning. Einstein wrote him that “This circumstance irritates me.” In another letter, Einstein added: “To admit such possibilities seems senseless.” So he introduced a “fudge factor”, a simple constant term to the equations called a cosmological constant. Due to this constant, the universe could remain static without collapsing under its own gravity and in fact he theoretically retrofitted to keep the universe in steady eternal equilibrium.

Some years later, in 1925, the American astronomer Edwin Hubble stunned the scientific community by demonstrating that there was more to the universe than just our Milky Way galaxy and that there were in fact many separate islands of stars – thousands, perhaps millions of them, and many of them huge distances away from our own. Then in 1929, Hubble announced a further dramatic discovery which completely turned astronomy on its ear. With the benefit of improved telescopes, Hubble started to notice that the light coming from these galaxies was shifted a little towards the red end of the spectrum due to the Doppler effect (known as “redshift”), which indicated that the galaxies were moving away from us. After a detailed analysis of the redshifts of a special class of stars called Cepheids Hubble concluded that the galaxies and clusters of galaxies were in fact flying apart from each other at a speed which is in direct proportion to its distance, known as Hubble’s Law, so that a galaxy that is twice as far away as another is receding twice as fast, ten times far away if it is receding ten times as fast, etc. If the galaxies were flying apart, then clearly, at some earlier time, the universe was smaller than at present. Following back logically, like a movie played in reverse, it must ultimately have had some beginning when it was very tiny indeed, an idea which gave rise to the theory of the Big Bang.

As a result of Hubble’s discoveries and the works of other scientists, whose solutions to Einstein’s theory implied an expanding universe, Einstein repented of his cosmological constant, famously calling it the greatest blunder of his career.  Even after Einstein conceded his error in the late 1920s many scientists like the British astronomer Fred Hoyle were not ready to accept the implications of an expanding universe and that it came into existence sometime in the finite past. Fred Hoyle called or nicknamed such an event- the big bang in derision and the name stuck to it. Hoyle was a strong humanist and he could not accept any theory that seemed to teach a beginning for the universe, because that would point to a Beginner. He believed in a steady state universe.

A powerful blow against steady state theory was struck in 1965, when two engineers at Bell Telephone Labs, Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson noticed excess noise in a radio antenna at seven centimeters wavelength. They found it coming from all directions of the sky with equal strength, and couldn’t attribute it to any known sources of radiation. Cosmologists interpreted this finding as the long sought relic radiation from the Big Bang. Because it was detected in the microwave part of the electromagnetic spectrum it is called the cosmic microwave background radiation. Penzias and Wilson’s discovery eventually sounded the death knell for the steady state theory and this became crucial evidence in favor of the Big Bang model. The new Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy probe has measured the microwave radiation with unprecedented precision.  With the latest telescopes available, universe can be viewed now much better and hence the big bang is proved beyond doubt.

Recently when I went to NASA’s space research centre near Washington DC, I was amazed looking at the giant mirrors of the space telescopes and was amazed.  When the first ever space Telescope the Hubble was launched with a budget of 1.5 billion dollars, in April 1980, there was a major setback as the images sent by it were blurry due to the wrong  curvature of the 2.4 m mirror of the telescope. This setback was turned into a major comeback when 7 engineers did space walk for 5 days to set up a series of coin sized mirrors to cancel out the primary mirror’s detection on the Hubble telescope while it orbits at a speed of around 5 miles per sec, which is almost more than 20 times that of the speed of sound. After this the Hubble started sending dazzling array of images, that is breathtakingly beautiful, revealing around 3000 galaxies too distant to be detected by others. After that many other telescopes have come like James Clerk Maxwell and Spitzer’s space telescope and these telescopes by penetrating far into the vastness of outer space, shows that there is more beyond- much more and that we are simply scratching the edges of what is an exceedingly huge universe with billions and billions of galaxies. Take the case of our own galaxy, the milky ways; to travel from  one end of the galaxy to the other end, it takes around 100000 light years, ie. 100000 years if we travel at the speed of light, which is 186000 miles per second.

An agnostic, George Smoot, the Nobel Prize winning scientist in charge of this Cosmic background experiment, also admits to the parallel. “There is no doubt that a parallel exists between the big bang as an event and the Christian notion of creation from nothing.” Arno Penzias who won the Nobel Prize for discovering the microwave background says: “Astronomy leads us to a unique event, a universe which was created out of nothing. The best data we have [concerning the Big Bang] are exactly what I would have predicted, had I nothing to go on but the five books of Moses, the Psalms, the bible as a whole.” And this is precisely the point that Christian apostle John makes at the beginning of his gospel: “In the beginning was the Word. The Word was God and the Word was with God. All things came to be by him.

Herbert Spencer an avowed evolutionist in his book ‘First Principles’ outlines five categories that are the ultimate scientific ideas namely: time, force, action, space and matter and said that no real existence is possible ‘outside’ of these categories. However, what  is striking is that the declaration in the majestic opening verse of the Bible Genesis 1:1 accounts for all of Spencer’s categories. “In the Beginning (Time) God (Force) created (action) the heavens (Space) and the earth (Matter).” Interestingly, what Spencer could not understand that these categories originated from the Bible. It was an infinite-personal God who created the finite space-time-mass continuum.

When the big bang theory turned out to be a winner and the steady state theory was wrong, scientists like Stephen Hawking who could not attribute a Creator to the beginning now says that by quantum fluctuations or by Quantum gravity, big bang came into existence. He says that it is not necessary to invoke God to set the universe going.” Richard Dawkin says that it’s almost impossible to be a scientist and believe that Jesus was born of a virgin or that Jesus turned water into wine,  healing the sick, raising the dead and eventually coming back from his death. 

But the Science what they think as deterministic or has strong objectivity many times are not so. We have come to believe so much that objectivity is an essential part of the scientific method and that without this most solid kind of objectivity science would be pointless and arbitrary. However, quantum physics denies that there is any such thing as a true and unambiguous reality at the bottom of everything. This weirdness is one of the reasons why quantum mechanics is so fundamentally different from classical mechanics – suddenly, a lot of the world becomes wholly different from what we are used to at our macroscopic level, and especially our intuitions about “empty space” and such fail us completely at microscopic levels. Things are not empty space. Our classical intuition fails at the quantum level. We say objects like the ground are composed of molecules and those molecules are composed of atoms. Here is a simple illustrations of atom. Center is the nucleus and that has protons and neutrons and around the nucleus there are electrons. You also might observe that there are void space can you estimate the amount of void space in an atom. It is 99.9% void space. The ground seems solid but it is 100% nothing.

 I would like to show through two simple principles of Quantum physics that how it is not objective.

  1. Do you know that there is something in science called the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that states, that the position and the velocity of an object cannot be known obviously at the same time either the position is definite or the velocity but not both. Now you may wonder is this uncertainty a function of our ignorance or inabilities or is it a characteristic of the system. This question is the content of the debate between two well known scientists, Albert Einstein and Neil Bohr. Einstein argued that the uncertainty was about a function of our inability and our ignorance to describe truths for the realities. On the other hand, Bohr argued that the uncertainty was the characteristic feature of the system. In this case, Einstein was wrong. There is no state in science with a definite position and velocity. The uncertainty is an innate fundamental characteristic feature of our system. So much so that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle is commonly taught in the introductory chemistry and physics classes. When science has within it the feature of uncertainty principle. For example, the uncertainty in position of a thrown baseball is 10-30 millimeters.The depth of the uncertainty principle is realized when we ask the question; is our knowledge of reality unlimited? The answer is no, because the uncertainty principle states that there is a built-in uncertainty, indeterminacy, unpredictability to Nature.

  2. The next is probability. In the atom, there is a probability that a particle in the atom can leave the atom and at the same time violate the law of conservation of energy. This law says that energy is neither created nor destroyed. Yet a particle in the atom without having the energy to do and with no available energy overcome an energy barrier and just leave.

It is interesting theologically we wonder how can God acts in these seemingly miraculous ways. God is omniscient, all knowing omnipresent, everywhere present. We wonder how its possible. What if there is a finite probability that God could act miraculously that is not impossible. God does not oversteps the bounds of science, but works within the bounds of nature and science. If modern science can tell us that there is a probability for unusual activities happening we are okay with it. Then we should not be surprised that God can do miraculous things.

As Christians we know that God has given us two ‘books’: Nature and Science .God has disclosed himself chiefly in two ways – through his created world and through his revealed word. Theologians refer to this as General revelation and Special revelation respectively. From the perspective of Christian theology, science is the study of General revelation (Nature). Theology on the other hand is the study of Special Revelation (Scripture). Since both scripture and nature are God’s two dynamic channels of self-disclosure, they cannot have any ‘final conflict’. The apparent conflicts that arise are perhaps due to faulty theology or half-baked science.

The Bible is not a science book, yet it is scientifically accurate. We are not aware of any scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible. The questions what Bible can answer Science cannot and also Bible is not a Science text book however the information it gives about science facts are true. And the real conflict is not between Science and Bible but between materialism and Biblical theism. Now if a person is a real truth seeker and wants to know the right path – which is true-  the Biblical faith or naturalism. He can get an answer to his question by finding out which way Science is pointing to or which way the modern discoveries of Science is pointing to?

Three revolutionary discoveries from the fields of astronomy and molecular biology has stunned and baffled the greatest scientific minds of this century, and has caused them to rethink about the Creator of this Universe. They are:

  1. The BIG BANG: The universe had a beginning
  2. THE FINE TUNING: The universe is just right for life. Fine Tuning towards

     – The beginning state of the Universe

     – Nature’s physical Constants

  1. DNA : The Understanding of the coding that reveals intelligence

These three discoveries clearly points to a personal supernatural Creator.

This fine Tuning requires the surprising precision of nature’s physical constants that finally converge as a potential pointer to a divine designer making every skeptic to think that the universe is not an accident but the Miracle of God. The physical laws and parameters governing our universe like the force of gravity, the energy density of empty space, the difference in mass between neutrons and protons, etc. are so exquisitely fine-tuned to permit the emergence of life. Astrophysicist, Dr Hugh Ross, for instance, has identified 148 astrophysical parameters that must be ‘just so’ for a planet to exist that can support human life. Even the tiniest alteration in any of these laws and parameters would not have allowed life to emerge or the big bang to happen.

Let us take few examples:

  • The famous Coulomb’s Law, that says the force between  two charged bodies are inversely proportional to the square of the separation distance between the two charges. The  Newton’s law of gravitation where the Gravitation force is inversely proportional to the square of the separation distance between the two masses.  Gravitation force is the fundamental force holds the universe together, controlling the orbits of all members of our planetary system. Why it is the distance squared; that is exactly 2  and why not the power of 1.995 or 2.01? because any value other than 2 would lead to an eventual catastrophic decay of orbits and of the entire universe.

  • Our sun is located between spiral arms of the Milky Way Galaxy where there are fewer stars and hence less harmful radiation and disruptive gravity and less gas and dust.

  • Earth rotates at 4 times much slower today than life first appears. Scientists determined that a more radical change in the earth rotation rate would be catastrophic for life.

  • Jupiter’s positioned and dimensioned to shield earth from collision. Planets nearness and mass typically deflects comets and asteroids that move on a collision course with earth. Comet shoemaker Levi hit Jupier. 21 of them made fireballs and made earth size brises on jupiter’s  surface. Its size and postion are very important. If Jupiter is larger than what it is or closer than now it is, its gravity would make deadly havoc on earth’s orbit. Jupiter is right size protector in just right location.

  • Do you know that our sun’s distance from  earth is ~400 times the moon’s distance and sun’s diameter is ~400 times moon’s diameter. This beautiful total solar eclipse where the sun is completely obscured by moon possible because of this design. Is this by design or an accident? So only the Bibly says only a fool can say that there is no God. And the Psalmist cries out in Psalm 19:1: “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.”

This new understanding of how miraculous human life is in our universe led the agnostic astronomer George Greenstein to ask, “Is it possible that suddenly, without intending to, we have stumbled upon the scientific proof of the existence of a Supreme Being?” The former agnostic, Paul Davies acknowledges, There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all. It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature’s numbers to make the Universe…. The impression of design is overwhelming. Fred Hoyle the atheist astronomer who coined the term “Big Bang.” confessed that his disbelief was “greatly shaken” by the undisputed science, writing that “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology.” Robin Collins, an American scientist with many doctorates says: “The extraordinary fine-tuning of the laws and constants of nature, their beauty, their discoverability, their intelligibility – all of this combines to make the God hypothesis the most reasonable choice we have. All other theories fall short.”

Recent scientific research which indicates that our minds are indeed independent of our brains. An example of this is the work of the father of modern neurosurgery, Wilder Penfield.

“Through my own scientific career, I, like other scientists, have struggled to prove that the brain accounts for the mind,” he writes, but he has had to change his mind after performing surgery on more than a thousand epileptic patients. In the course of this, he encountered concrete evidence that the brain and mind are actually distinct from each other, though they clearly interact. To quote another neuroscientist, Lee Edward Travis: “Penfield would stimulate electrically the proper motor cortex of conscious patients and challenge them to keep one hand from moving when the current was applied. The patient would seize this hand with the other hand and struggle to hold it still. Thus one hand under the control of the electric current and the other hand under the control of the patient’s mind fought against each other. Penfield risked the explanation that the patient had not only a physical brain that was stimulated to action but also a non-physical reality that interacted with the brain.” To quote Penfield’s own summary of his findings: “To expect the highest brain mechanism or any set of reflexes, however complicated, to carry out what the mind does, and thus perform all the functions of the mind, is quite absurd…What a thrill it is, then, to discover that the scientist, too, can legitimately believe in the existence of the spirit.” (The Mystery of the Mind, Princeton University Press, 1975, pp.79 & 85).

Penfield’s conviction that the mind is not reducible to the brain and points to the existence of the soul is shared by two Nobel Prize-winning neuroscientists. One of them, Sir Charles Sherrington, described by the British Medical Journal in 1952 as the “genius who laid the foundations of our knowledge of the functioning of the brain and spinal cord,” declared five days before his death: “For me now, the only reality is the human soul.” The other Nobel laureate, his former student, John C. Eccles, confessed: “I am constrained to believe that there is what we might call a supernatural origin of my unique self-conscious mind or my unique selfhood or soul.” DNA Take a look at just ONE facet of creation: DNA. The DNA in your cells contains the complete instruction manual of how to build and maintain—YOU. It is an unimaginably complex, encoded system of information storage, averaging around 3.1 billion bits of data. DNA is not a complexity that is born out of randomness, but it is a complexity that is highly sophisticated and ordered. Human DNA contains more organized information than the Encyclopedia Britannica. In fact, the complexity of DNA transcends the realm of science and ushers us into the realm of the miraculous. Scientists agree despite themselves. Francis Collins, the director of the National Human Genome Research Institute says “When you have for the first time in front of you this 3.1 billion-letter instruction book that conveys all kinds of information and all kinds of mystery about humankind, you can’t survey that going through page after page without a sense of awe. When I look at those pages I get a vague sense that this is giving me a glimpse of God’s mind.” DNA has a captivating  double helix structure and is packed and stacked on a amazingly small scale within chromosomes in the cell and a human being has 23 pairs of Chromosomes. DNA is so small that 6 feet of DNA can fit into the nucleus of each cell in our body. To get an idea how small one nuclei is  . 10000 nucleic can fit into the tip of the needle. When we talk of the DNA and the information it contains, we are talking about the intricacies of function and sophistication on a breathtakingly minute scale. The steps of the ladder are the DNA bases containing the four different chemicals A T C G, – adenine thymine guanine cytosine The precise arrangement of these chemicals and its sequence specificity allows all lives to function. It these chemicals are not arranged in the correct order, there will be no life. Because , proteins are made up of chains of amino acid and the amino acid much be in the proper order and sequence for the protein to form which can happen only if the chemical bases ATGC is in the proper order. If you are looking through a stereoscopic microscope, and you see a double helix encoding unfurling…and you see the letters, CGAATTGGAATTC.  It is more than 3 billion letters long. —You conclude it is the longest word you have ever discovered! If I were to ask you, “What is behind that?” If you would say, “Obviously, chance and necessity or the workings of random forces.” I would say that you are a fool. That is why Bible says that only a fool says that there is no God.

For decades scientists theorized that life on earth arose from a vast collection of nonliving molecules called the pre-biotic soup. A process that requires many billions of years but now research has shown that life arose quickly a few million years after the late heavy bombardment. In addition there is no evidence for pre-biotic soup. If there is prebotic soup we can expect to find the remains of it in ancient carbonaceous materials like graphite. Sir Frederick Hoyle the great astronomer, and Chandra Wickramasinghe, the Sri Lankan scientist came up with “the mathematical probability that all the functional proteins necessary for life, forming in one place by random events, as one in one followed by 40,000 zeros”. This is much greater than the entire atoms in the universe put together, since there are only 10 to the power 80 atoms in the entirely universe.  Hence they concluded that it is an outrageously small probability and that mathematically the odds of time plus matter plus chance arriving at complex human protein formation cannot happen even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup.

Dr Francis Crick who cracked the code of DNA by finding the incredibly ordered appearance of the Double Helix form of DNA and got the Nobel prize says, An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.   Life could not have originated here on earth, nor the biological evolution could be explained within an earth bound theory. So now when someone asked Francis Crick and Fred Hoyle, where do you think it all came from? Do you know what their answer was? A spaceship from another planet brought some spores to seed the earth and here we are and that is the panspermea theory. So he says Panspermea  spores were brought from other planet to seed the earth in order to bring life. A self manufactured spaceship, brought some spores from primordial slime. Is that supposed to be a good reason? The theory of aliens or supreme beings sending life on our planet only moves the question of a intelligent engineer or creator back one step without answering the question at all. We are left to then ask, who was the supreme being who engineered and created the aliens ?

We live in a society that intellectually or ethically or pragmatically rejects God due to their pride and unfortunately, our culture is controlled by atheistic thinking. Reinhold Niebuhr in his book The Nature and Destiny of Man tells that there are three kinds of pride, the pride of  power, the pride of knowledge and the pride of virtue. the pride of power, a pride based on authority and power, pride of knowledge, a pride based on intellect and wisdom and pride of  virtue, a pride due to morality and Integrity. And whereever you see the resistance to God, you will find one of these three prides manifested. Man becomes the master of himself. The metaphysical implications of what these atheistic scientists is saying is huge. The German philosopher, Nietzsche, coined the idea that God is dead and believed that more and more people would realize this death of God, and move closer and closer to Nihilism — the belief in nothing.

 Although many scientists are still bent on squeezing God out of the universe, most recognize the religious implications of these new discoveries. As an agnostic, Jastrow freely acknowledges the compelling case for a Creator. Jastrow writes of the shock and despair experienced by scientists who thought they had squeezed God out of their world.- For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries. In the early 21st century, leading atheist Antony Flew’s atheism came to an abrupt end when he studied the intelligence behind DNA. Flew explains what changed his opinion. Although Flew was not a Christian, he admitted that the “software” behind DNA is far too complex to have originated without a “designer.”  He is now convinced that a Creator has left his “fingerprints” on the universe?

This question of origin is one of the biggest questions in life. The answer to this one question, source of life, our origin, will help us in getting the answer to the other big questions of life, meaning, morality and destiny. This enormous universe proves beyond measure that we are just a speck and a tiny dust in the universal scheme of things and without a creator it is impossible with awe inspiring beauty. So the psalmist says in psalm 8:

Lord, our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth!
You have set your glory above the heavens.
From the lips of children and infants you have ordained praise
because of your enemies, to silence the foe and the avenger.
When I consider your heavens, the work of your fingers,
the moon and the stars, which you have set in place,
what are men that you are mindful of them,
the Son of Man that you care for Him?
You made men a little lower than the heavenly beings
and crowned them with glory and honor.

Two thousand years ago a man set foot on our planet who claimed to have the answer to this fingerprint and life. Although his time on earth was brief, His impact changed the world, and is still felt today. His name is Jesus Christ. The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ tell us that he continually demonstrated creative power over nature’s laws. They tell us he was wise, humble and compassionate. He healed the lame, deaf and blind. He stopped raging storms instantly, created food for the hungry on the spot, turned water into wine at a wedding, and even raised the dead. And they claimed after his brutal execution, he rose from the dead.

They also tell us that Jesus Christ is the one who flung the stars into space, fine-tuned our universe and created DNA. Could he be the one of whom Einstein unknowingly referred to as the “superintelligence” behind the universe? Could Jesus Christ be the one of whom Hoyle unknowingly referred to as having “monkeyed with physics, chemistry and biology?” Has the mystery of who was behind the big bang and the intelligence of DNA been revealed in the following account from the New Testament?

Now Christ is the visible expression of the invisible God. He existed before creation began, for it was through him that everything was made, whether spiritual or material, seen or unseen. Through him, and for him, also, were created power and dominion, ownership and authority. In fact, every single thing was created through, and for him….Life from nothing began through him, and life from the dead began through him, and he is, therefore, justly called the Lord of all. The age of the earth is not a test for orthodoxy. The doctrine of Creation is a cornerstone of the Christian faith. The fact of Creation (ex nihilo); the source of Creation (a theistic God) and the purpose of Creation (to glorify God) are more important than the time of Creation.

Ever since the creation of the world, God’s eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things He has made(Romans 1:20).