“In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth” (Gen. 1:1). The words are straightforward yet elegant and can be understood by the humblest of minds. And if they are not true, what is the alternative?
The option of blind chance
Some scientists would have us believe that the alternative was blind chance! Somehow, in the distant past, millions, even billions of year ago, a primeval “soup” of hydrocarbons coalesced under the action of volcanic activity and electromagnetic discharges from the atmosphere to form living cells. These living cells, composed of strands of DNA and RNA, contained the genetic code responsible for their reproduction and adaptation to the environment. The DNA and RNA materials contained literally thousands of atoms arrayed in very precise patterns. They had to be precise because if even one gene strand, consisting of relatively few atoms, is out of place or is defective, severe deformity occurs.
Evidence of common origin
We now know that essentially all life forms on this planet depend on the same basic DNA and RNA structures. But instead of scientists taking the clue from this fact to draw the conclusion of a common divine design, they prefer to believe this marvelous creation is the result of blind chance.
Famous scientists, among them Nobel prize winners, have often been cited to the effect that “time” was the hero! Given enough time, they say, pure chance will work.
Chance over time
In a simple sense, this may be true. We know that if we are given a coin and asked to throw it until heads comes up, we know that sooner or later it will. But is this true if the combination of arrangements necessary for success is as complex as the DNA and RNA building blocks of a living cell?
In the case of the coin toss, there are only two possibilities; but in the case of the living cell, thousands of atoms have to arrange themselves in exact patterns. Scientists have tried to simulate, in the laboratory, the conditions thought to have existed when living cells were supposedly created by blind chance, but so far their efforts have not succeeded. Yet, they remain confident that, given enough time, they will eventually succeed.
Monkeys and a sonnet
Another example often cited to illustrate how blind chance can work to be creative is the proverbial case of monkeys being turned loose on a number of typewriters and allowed to type at random. It is claimed that eventually they will produce all the literature ever written by mankind.
As clever an experiment as the random monkeys may be, there is a quantitative scientific way to check whether the idea of random plucking at a typewriter can produce a creative piece of literature or whether it will result in gibberish. The answer lies in statistics and can be easily illustrated.
Suppose we ask ourselves what is the probability that a so-called random monkey can produce even one of Shakespeare’s sonnets. For example, sonnet 18 begins with the line, “Shall I compare you to a summer’s day?” Overall, this sonnet has 488 letters and is far simpler than the genetic code of living cells. If we stick to the 488 letters, and for simplicity ignore all the capitals, spaces and punctuation marks, we can calculate the probability that this single sonnet could be produced by random pounding on a typewriter.
The calculation can be visualized in the following way: the first letter of the sonnet is “S,” what is the probability that the next letter will be an “h” instead of something else. We now repeat this reasoning for the third letter and the fourth and soon. In fact, we realize that, since the probability for each successive letter is one in twenty-six, then the probability for all 488 letters in this sonnet being exactly in the right place is twenty-six times twenty-six 488 times.
If we translate this to the usual decimal system, then the probability is one over the number 10 followed by 690 zeros!!! This is a number so infinitely small as to be basically zero probability.
Too many zeros
If a similar calculation is made on the probability of DNA forming by chance, the number of zeros would more than fill this entire issue of The Tidings!
Scientists have recently calculated their idea of the length of time that the universe has existed. Based on the general theory of relativity and recent findings on the background residual radiation in the universe, they have come up with the number ten followed by 18 zeros for the number of seconds of time since the creation of the universe by the supposed “big bang.” It matters not whether we accept the “big bang,” what is clear is that if scientists are going to be self-consistent, they have to realize that such complexity as exists in living cells could not have happened by pure chance. There simply hasn’t been enough time from the formation of the universe until life came into being for pure chance to have reasonably worked.
Blind chance demands blind faith
How much more reasonable is it for us to accept the words of the apostle Paul to the Romans: “for the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One