The materialist philosophy assumes that the universe is a heap of matter
without any intelligent design, plan and creation. The discoveries of
the 20th century have refuted this assertion
in several aspects. First, the Big Bang theory showed that the material
universe had a beginning, a starting point for time and matter to exist.
This meant that time and matter, materialism's absolutes, are in fact
secondary things, created by a pre-existing Being. The second blow to
materialism came when scientists discovered the delicate design and balance
pervading the universe. Also called as the Anthropic Principle, this discovery
shows that every physical aspect of the universe, from sub atomic particles
to giant stars, is "fine tuned" for human life.
Both of these revolutionary facts - that the universe had a beginning
and everything in it is extremely fine-tuned - refute the ancient dogma
of materialism and point to the existence of the Creator.
Despite this fact, still many materialists dogmatically cling to their
philosophy. But some of them have started to question their dogmas. In
a news story reported by Nature on 13 August 2002, subtitled "Our
Universe is so unlikely that we must be missing something", the
doubts of leading physicists about the miraculous design in the universe
is reported as follows:
In an argument that would have gratified the ancient Greeks,
physicists have claimed that the prevailing theoretical view of the Universe
is logically flawed. Arranging the cosmos as we think it is arranged,
say the team, would have required a miracle.
An ever-more-rapidly expanding Universe is destined to
repeat itself, say Leonard Susskind of Stanford University, California,
and his colleagues. But the chances that such re-runs would produce worlds
like ours are infinitesimal. So either space is not accelerating for the
reasons we think it is, or we have yet to discover some principle of physics,
the researchers conclude. Like a guardian angel, this principle would
pick out those few initial states that lead to a Universe like ours, and
then guide cosmic evolution so that it really does unfold this way.
The incomprehensibility of our situation even drives Susskind's
team to ponder whether an "unknown agent intervened in the evolution
[of the Universe] for reasons of its own". 1
After this comment, the Nature reporter makes a biased comment
and alleges that this "unknown agent" could not be God. But
there is no reason to think so. His objection is only based on his prejudice
against faith in God.
It is true that materialists are "missing something" about
the origin of the universe. What they are trying to do is to explain a
miraculously created and designed universe without accepting the existence
of its Creator. If they continue to ponder on the facts and leave behind
their prejudices, they will see the truth for themselves: That the universe
and every thing in it were created by God.