Evidence for God from an Atheist

“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 to be satisfied to get it going.”

– Francis Crick

As you might imagine, atheists do not typically offer evidence for the existence of God. They might dismiss it. They might object to it. They may even counter it. But rarely if ever would atheists freely put forth evidence for the existence of God. Well, today I present to you a rare instance of this very occurrence.

Before we dive into the evidence, I must preface it with some background information related to the argument for intelligent design. In order to determine whether or not something is the result of intelligent design there are specific criteria that must be met. The criteria of specified complexity, which was first put forth by mathematician and philosopher William Dembski, is the standard for determining whether something is the result of intelligent design or not (Habermas, 2004). The first component of the criteria of specified complexity states that “the thing under consideration must be so complex that it is extreme unlikely to have occurred by chance” (Habermas, 2004). The second component of the criteria of specified complexity states that “the thing under consideration must exhibit a sort of pattern that is normally associated with a cause that possess intelligence” (Habermas, 2004). Now that we have established the criteria for assessing whether or not something is the result of intelligent design, let us see how it applies to our evidence supplied by a famous atheist in the world of biological science.

The evidence for the existence of God that we are examining today is provided to us by the co-discoverer of DNA Francis Crick (Habermas, 2004). Before the discovery of DNA and organelles, “the cell was once viewed as a very simple entity” (Habermas, 2004). Following the discovery of the organelles of the cell and DNA, scientist began to realize that the cell was not the simple entity they previously believed it to be but an extremely complex biological entity with numerous interdependent mechanisms that worked together to “fulfill their individual purpose” (Habermas, 2004). Focusing specifically on DNA, which is located in the nucleus of the cell, the immense complexity of biological life begins to become evident. DNA, the “blueprint for the entire organism, determining eye color, hair color, athletic capabilities, natural intelligence, and even vulnerability to specific diseases,” as a highly complex pattern of amino acids that “tells the rest of the cell what to do” (Habermas, 2004). Applying the criteria of specified complexity to DNA, it is apparent that the first component is met, “for DNA is too complex to have occurred by chance” (Habermas, 2004). How is this so?

For the cell to have occurred naturally, all its components and the building blocks would have to come together without intelligent assistance to form operable biological machine. How likely is this? Let us consider the process that would be involved in making a single protein of the cell. Not the cell itself. Not all the proteins in the cell. A single protein. Here is a list of the steps provided by Mike Riddle in the book The New Answers Book Vol. 3:

1. “There are over 300 different types of amino acids, of which only 20 are required for life. Therefore, the process for forming a single protein would have to be extremely discriminatory.”

2. “Each type of amino acid molecule come in two shapes commonly referred two as left-handed and right-handed forms. Only left-handed amino acids are used in biological life, but the natural tendency is for right-handed and left-handed acids to bond indiscriminately.”

3. “Various left-handed amino acids must bond in the correct order or the protein will not function.”

4. “If there was a primordial soup as many evolutionary biologists suggest, it would have been diluted with many of the wrong types of amino acids and other chemicals available for bonding, making for fewer required amino acids and more that were no longer usable.”

5. “Amino acids require an energy source for bonding that converts raw energy into usable energy. Where did the energy converter come from? The energy converter itself would require the conversion of energy to form – a catch-22 situation.”

6. “Proteins with the protection of the cell membrane would disintegrate in water, in an atmosphere containing oxygen, and due to the UV rays of the sun if there was no oxygen to perform a protective ozone layer.”

7. “Natural selection cannot be invoked at the pre-biotic level, meaning the first living cell must be in place before natural selection can function.”

What happens to be the mathematical probability of this happening? Considering the range in size for proteins is “50 to over 30,000 amino acids,” the possibility of “a small protein of 100 left-handed amino acids in an equal mixture of left and right-handed amino acids” would be 1030 (Ham, 2009). What about getting these 100 amino acids in the correct order to biologically functioning protein? According to Riddle, “the probability of getting all 100 amino acids in the correct position” a biologically functioning protein is 1/10^130 or “1 followed by 130 zeroes” (Ham, 2009). How about the probability of forming all the necessary proteins for life through natural processes? Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe in their book Evolution from Space put this probability at 1/10^40,000 or “1 followed by 40,000 zeroes” (Ham, 2009). You may be wondering is this possible? As far probabilities go, the universal probability bound is considered to be 1/10^50, which is far exceeded by the probabilities for the natural formation of a biologically functioning protein (1/10^130) and all the necessary proteins for life (1/10^40,000) (Ham, 2009). Even the possibility of getting 100 left-handed amino acids (1/10^30) is nearly at the universal probability bound. But what about DNA? What does Francis Crick consider the probability for DNA to be formed through natural processes to be?

Astonished by the complexity of DNA, “Crick estimates the odds that intelligent life exists on the Earth as the result of non-directed processes to be around 1/10^2,000,000,000” or 1 followed by 2 billion zeroes (Habermas, 2004). This exceeds the universal probability bound by a nearly unfathomable amount. For evolutionists, the only hope for their theory is time and even that is not on their side. Considering that “the maximum estimated age of our is 4.5 billion years,” the time available for intelligent life to form through natural processes is very short (Habermas, 2004). Having established the first component of the criteria for specified complexity, can DNA meet the second?

Turns out, it can! DNA, a language for life, is a sequence of nitrogen bases found in nucleotides (NIH, 2020). These nitrogen bases, adenine, thymine, guanine, and cytosine are arranged in a comprehensible and readable “order that determines the biological instructions that DNA contains” (NIH, 2020). Therefore, this language establishes the second component of specified complexity because it “exhibits a sort of pattern that is normally associated with a cause that possesses intelligence” (Habermas, 2004). So, what can we conclude?

Examining the evidence before us, it is clear that the probability that life arose from natural, unguided, and random processes is incredibly unlikely. We have also seen that DNA and the proteins that make up cells meet the criteria for specified complexity. Therefore, the evidence for the existence of God is much stronger than evolution when it comes to the origins of life. Science has supported the Bible’s account of creation. It is as cosmologist Robert Jastrow stated, "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 mountain 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” (Jastrow, 2000).

References:

The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus by Gary R. Habermas & Michael R. Licona

The New Answers Book Vol. 3 by Ken Ham

God and the Astronomers by Robert Jastrow

National Human Genome Research Institute, https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Deoxyribonucleic-Acid-Fact-Sheet