Deutschland online bookmaker http://artbetting.de/bet365/ 100% Bonus.

Tracks of God’s Creation in the Universe

Rate this item
(1 Vote)


Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.  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: 
 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.  Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools (Rom.1,19-22).

This is certainly the way of thinking of the Early Church, but can we in XXI century also think in the same manner, can we point to the evidences of God’s existence or of His creative activity in the past? And are atheists in the same situation (without excuse) still now? These are the main questions of our issue.

The Christian world-view tells us that the Universe is created by God. Can we see the witnesses of this creation with the help of knowledge  received by modern natural sciences? We warn beforehand that we don’t want  to prove God’s existence by means of natural sciences. This task is not feasible, not because of God’s nonexistence, but because of the nature of faith, which is (according to the doctrine of the Early Church) always the child of freedom (John 6,29) (see also[1]). Equally and for the same reason it is impossible to prove the fact of the divine Creation with the help of  methods of natural sciences. Our aim is to try to show that the notion of divine Creation is quite adequate to the demands of modern science, and from the viewpoint of  methodology of science is a quite reasonable  hypothesis. And on the contrary, the notion, which deny the possibility of God’s Creation, though it is acceptable from the point of view of methodology, exceeds the limits of common sense.

Thus, if the World is created, do the indirect signs of the creation exist and how can we ascertain and detect them?

For the beginning let us try to examine a more general question about how we identify the indications of situations which are the results of intellectual activity of someone.

Obviously, if we shall be the pioneers arriving for the first time to Mars and there on it’s surface we shall find a notebook, we shall immediately conclude that somebody has already visited this place, and has left here his apparatus. And at any rate we surely shall make the conclusion that this notebook had an artificial origin.

And without any doubt we shall appraise as exceeding the limits of common sense the opinion, according to which this notebook could appear only as a result of natural causes, spontaneously. And the psychic setup of a man, who will persistently insist on this version of origin of this notebook, we shall evidently appraise as exceeding the frames of the psychic norm (a “grave case” ).

This example shows us that we possess some intuitive criteria for detection of situations and systems, produced by creation (designing).

Two questions can be put: what are the signs for human identification of such situations and systems and how they can be identified objectively. The questions connected with the detection of this kind of situations and systems are very serious and important, and are   considered by experts in mathematics, psychology and other disciplines.[1]

We shall restrict ourselves by usage  of some obvious and qualitative criteria.

Let us continue  with an other example.

Somebody of us has probably met with something similar during his school years. Let us imagine that a schoolboy  has overslept  and is late for the first lesson and is urgently running to school and is leaving his bed untidy, his dresses - thrown about, his books - also. When he returned home, he could see that his bed was made, his dresses were distributed  on the shelves of  a wardrobe, his books were on the bookshelves on their places. What was his conclusion?  Obviously, “somebody had put things in order” (mother, grand -mother or somebody else). And our schoolboy  would has never thought in such situation that all had been arranged by itself, spontaneously, and if he will seriously insist on this idea we will have all reasons to consider that this is a “grave case”…

Now let us introspect the signs, which are used by healthy thinking for making the most plausible and sensible conclusion about the involvement of some reasonable force in this situation (e.g. of mother etc.).

1.The situation  has a very low probability  of spontaneous formation.

Though in our example from the point of view of statistical physics the order theoretically can appear  spontaneously, but the probability of this spontaneous appearance is extremely insignificant (though not equal to “0”) .

Situations with relatively high probabilities of spontaneous origin we usually  don’t estimate as unambiguously artificial. If after the throw of bones by your partner  in the dice the double «6» cropped up, there is no need to suspect  seriously the sharper’s intervention, but if this is repeated 10 times in succession…

The low probability is a necessary criterion but not sufficient.

Really, every configuration of grits on the beach has a very low probability, but we don’t perceive every configuration of grits on the beach as a consequence of some artificial influence. But if we see on the sand “Petia+Tania=love” the answer is unequivocal…

2. The situation should  be well-organized – the order must be present.

The elements must be organized  non simply in a hardly probable way, they must be situated  in accordance of definite principle or principles.

For instance, if light and dark grits  on the beach alternate in chess order (the surface looks like a chess-board), we most likely shall  make the conclusion about  artificial origin of the given situation, produced  by some intellectual influence from outside.

It should be noticed, that the order of a system can be conditioned by inner natural causes – e.g. in crystals. We can remember the diversity of order in crystals of  ice – e.g. in snowflakes.

These formations  can not be appraised as artificial, because:

3.The order must have  external cause of it’s origin, the information about the order must be introduced from outside.

It is evident that in the example given above, the configuration “Petia+Tania=love”  can be never conditioned by properties of grits (as the form of  a snowflake is conditioned by it’s chemical  components). A person who will persist that this configuration could appear only by chance certainly will be appraised as a “grave case”.

4.We also conclude that a situation in general had an artificial origin when  in a set (or  a sequence) of it’s very hardly probable elements we can retrace some single and  relatively understandable purpose.

E.g., if in the morning you have found 100$ on the floor outside the door of your flat, this event could be appraised as a chance, but if it continues 10-15 times in succession, you will most  likely begin to think about what does it mean. May be some mysterious philanthropist emerged, or someone palms off false  notes to you for crossing you  up and so on…Certainly, a person, who will firmly defend the idea, that all these 10-15 cases it is a pure chance, will give rise to suppositions of a “grave case”.

Notice, that all four signs mentioned above are present in the situation of putting things in order in the  schoolboy’s room. Can we observe anything similar in the World around us?

1.The anthropic principle

“For man's sake God has created
everything: earth and heaven and the beauty of the stars. 
Men cultivate the earth for themselves; but if they fail to
recognize how great is God's providence, their souls lack 
all spiritual understanding”.  –Antony the Great(IV AD) [2].

   The doctrine of the Early Church teaches us that the Earth and even the whole Universe have a single aim of creation - they are created for man. We can find many utterances of Church Fathers of first centuries about the arrangement of the Earth and of the Universe with a goal of man’s residence on it and in it.

 “For He Who knew all things before they were, saw that in the future man would go forward in the strength of his own will, and would be subject to corruption, and, therefore, He created all things for his seasonable use, alike those in the firmament, and those on the earth, and those in the waters” – John Damascene (VIII AD) [3]. Other utterances could be added , you can see, e.g., those of Theophilus of Antioch (II AD) [4] and of Cyrill of Jerusalem (IV AD) [5].

Utterances of this kind 50 years ago could provoke  some complements from atheists such as: “typical examples of medieval obscurantism”, “church stupidities”  and so on. Science does not stand on a single place…

In  the end of XX century physicist ascertained that the Universe is organized in a peculiar way. A great number of fundamental physical constants, describing the World around us, were gotten by scientists by  now. So, physicists decided to watch what would be the World if the values of constants were  different.

It was found that, though the set of potential numerical values of these diverse constants is infinite from the viewpoint of mathematics, the intervals for allowed values of constants, with which could exist the Universe suitable for human life and for life at all, are  extremely narrow. According to one researcher (M.Bowden), “we live on the edge of a razor”. It is enough to change a little bit one of values of several parameters – and our existence as the existence of life in general becomes impossible in this Universe.

It should be noticed, that the existence of life is feasible only in very limited frames of parameters of  physical conditions. The discourse that with other values of physical parameters the evolution and existence of an other “life” with other material basis could take place, are untenable from the point of view of modern biochemistry. Something similar to the real life with it’s actually existing biochemical basis (DNA, RNA, proteins …) is absent in reality, and even in theory. Therefore all reasonings about life with other basical molecular mechanisms are in frames of  pure science fiction. The structure of living matter, according to modern molecular biology, is unique. The physical conditions of it’s existence are also unique.

We give only two examples:

If the mass of neutron was at 0,2%  less than it’s real value, atoms would not exist[6][2].

Prof. Nikitin V.A. from the “United Institute of Nuclear Researches” (Dubna, Russia) wrote:

“The conditions, necessary for the existence of life are known. A question is bound to arise: how great is the the probability of origin of a favourable environment  as a result of an accidental combination of properties of fundamental  particles of matter and the  laws of their interactions? It appears that this probability is extremely small. Here are some examples.

-        The decrease of difference of masses of proton and neutron at 1 MeV( i.e. 0,1%) leads to the instability of atom of hydrogen. There is no water and no organic matter without hydrogen” [7 ].

    We could continue the enumeration of such examples - at present we can count many cases of fine tuning of the Universe of this kind (see e.g. [9], [10]). This situation is described by scientists with the help of the notion, called anthropic principle.

What does it mean for the materialism who tries to explain the origin of the Universe with the help of coincidences, named sometimes with a fine word “fluctuations”? If we consider the World  (and accordingly all it’s constants) as originated by chance, then the probability  theory can be applied.

Why the Universe is arranged in this way, and not otherwise? – we hear answers from materialists about accidental coincidences of circumstances.

If we attempt to evaluate these probabilities, they  prove to be smaller than any positive number (p→0), but not equal to “0”. The applied  mathematics affirms – actually accidental events with probabilities smaller than some definite values don’t occur at all. The probabilities of spontaneous origin of mentioned constants are smaller than any fixed value[3]. It means that we live in the non-existent World!  To such an extremely curious conclusion we are led by  the logic of coincidences of materialistic philosophy.

The situation mentioned above can not be described in an other way than a miracle, exceeding the frames of natural laws.[4] It is said, that materialists don’t  trust in miracles, in fact they trust in them, but in so to speak “materialistic miracles”, without which the materialistic worldview will collapse.

What does  the situation with constants mean?  Let’s notice,  that in this situation we have tens of minisituations with trifling probabilities, in each of them we can see a definite relation to man, the situation reminds in some sense our example of  multiple discoveries of 100$ near the door. In such situation it is quite reasonable to assume the presence of the interference of some reasonable subject.

Thus, the data concerning the ranges  of allowed values of fundamental constants and their real values correspond with exactitude  to the notion of goals, laid in the structures of Universe, according to the doctrine of the Early Church  - the World is created for human life.

“For in reality God did not establish the universe in vain, or to no purpose but destruction, as those weak-minded men say, but to exist, and be inhabited, and continue” -  Methodius of Patara(III AD) [8].

In this situation we are in the right to acknowledge as truth  a much more plausible model – the model of creation. Though at the same time, the possibility of belief in accidental causes of unthinkable coincidences remains, but the belief (especially the “pious belief”) in such accidental events is at least on the border of psychic norm…Our Lord does not compel us to believe in His existence, and reserves to us the right of choice between common sense and the belief in absurdity but warns that we shall pay for such beliefs, which evidently violate conscience and common sense.

According to data of modern natural sciences, not only the Universe in general but our Galaxy, Solar System and the Earth  are finely tuned for the possibility of human stay on the Earth. It is enough  to change slightly many of physical parameters  and our life on the Earth will be impossible.

We cite some quotes from the article of an expert astronomer H.Ross:  

“… parent star mass
  • if greater: luminosityoutput from the star would not be sufficiently stable
  • ·if less: range of distances appropriate for life would be too narrow; tidal forces would disrupt the rotational period for a planet of the right distance
parent star color
  • if redder: insufficient photosynthetic response
  • if bluer: insufficient photosynthetic response
surface gravity
  • if stronger: planet's atmosphere would retain huge amounts of ammonia and methane
  • if weaker: planet's atmosphere would lose too much water
distance from parent star
  • if farther away: too cool for a stable water cycle
  • if closer: too warm for a stable water cycle
thickness of crust
  • if thicker: too much oxygen would he transferred from the atmosphere to the crust
  • if thinner: volcanic and tectonic activity would be too great
rotation period
  • if longer: diurnal temperature differences would he too great
  • if shorter: atmospheric wind velocities would he too great
 gravitational interaction with a moon
  • if greater: tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period would he too severe
  • if less: earth's orbital obliquity would change too much causing climatic instabilities
magnetic field
  • if stronger: electromagnetic storms would be too severe
  • if weaker: no protection from solar wind particles
axial tilt
  • if greater: surface temperature differences would be too great
  • if less: surface temperature differences would he too great
 albedo (ratio of reflected light to total amount falling on surface)
  • if greater: runaway ice age would develop
  • if less: runaway greenhouse effect would develop
 oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere
  • if larger: life functions would proceed too quickly
  • if smaller: life functions would proceed too slowly
 carbon dioxide and water vapor levels in atmosphere
  • if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop
  • if less: insufficient greenhouse effect
 ozone level in atmosphere
  • if greater: surface temperatures would become too low
  • if less: surface temperatures would he too high; too much uv radiation at surface
atmospheric electric discharge rate
  • if greater: too much fire destruction
  • if less: too little nitrogen fixing in the soil
seismic activity
  • if greater: destruction of too many life-forms
  • if less: nutrients on ocean floors would not be uplifted” [9 ]

Here it is appropriate to remember the words of Basil the Great(IV AD): “Our God has created nothing unnecessarily and has omitted nothing that is necessary” [11].

 Let’s recall that we have on our Earth all the conditions for survival (and they are not few). And what about the Cosmos around us? Our appearance in any other point of the Solar System without means of life support  (e.g., without spacesuit) will be immediately finished by our death.

Why the Earth contains everything suitable for man?  Why only on the single Earth everything necessary and sufficient for human life is gathered? Why like this, and not otherwise? And again we hear the importunate refrain of atheists: “Coincidences”.

The  authentic answer to this question was made a long time before the beginning of investigations of Solar System with telescopes and space flights. Some hundreds of years before Christ the God’s prophet Isaiah wrote: God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited (Isaiah.45,18).

We like spoilt kids often forget this major fact, which is in an exact correspondence to modern data of astronomy and astronautics: an other place for our life in the visible Universe simply does not exist. Thus, again somebody have to choose between inconceivable tiny probabilities of coincidences and simple notion of creation of the whole Solar system and the Earth with all their features for human life.

2.The order, which is always with us.

According to the Early Church doctrine, the World is created  not only  for human life,  but so that a man who gazes upon it could cognize it’s Creator – i.e. His attributes. 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 (Rom.1,20). And at that it is possible both with the most naïve gaze at the universe and with the look armed with the  most modern achievements of sciences.  

We could already see in the previous part, that the fined tuning of constants  can be quite rationally explained by the hypothesis of creation. Since the values of them correspond exactly to the demands of human survival – it is an indirect but convincing  testimony  in favour of the philanthropy of the force (or forces), which created the Universe.

Let us continue our examination of peculiarities of our Universe. It is far from been chaotic, possesses a definite ordered  organization and so the notion of it’s chance origin looks strange.

Thus, as we know from the school, everything in the World is submitted to nature’s  laws, reflected in the recurrence of links, properties etc.

We certainly don’t deny the existence of miracles, which suppose damages of physical  laws, produced by God’s will. But people perceive such  miracles very rarely (otherwise the notion of “nature’s laws”, used by both modern science and Early Church doctrine, would lose it’s meaning), and each time such  miracle carry in itself it’s own special spiritual goal.

Until now scientists could not find anywhere an area, where the lawlessness was reigning. How to explain this fact? The materialism is helpless to answer. On the contrary the Early Church affirmed , that the God, who created the Universe, created the whole Universe according to definite laws.

“Every and even most ordinary movement of nature has it’s certain natural laws, in conformity with which the living spirit, which is also the creature, has it’s own certain tendencies…” - Augustine of Hippo(IV-V AD)[ 12].

 “God, as soon as He created the World, from the first moment according to the great and immutable laws,  drives it like a top, which makes circles after an impact. Since the essence of this spacious and beautiful World is not casual, and it is impossible to imagine anything similar to it, and during such a long time it is allowed to nonrandom laws”  - Gregory the Theologian (of Nazianzus) (IV AD) [13].

 And everything which exists and functions (all substances of the Universe are created by God) exists and functions according to laws. Thus the doctrine of the Early Church explained this well-known fact, inexplicable by modern atheist scientists, and  predicted the huge number of results of modern scientific researches.

Let us notice, that the quote from Gregory of Nazianzus, adduced above,  tells us about an other important peculiarity of the Universe, which is appraised by modern science  as an axiom, and is confirmed by results of a huge number of modern investigations. The nature laws are invariable in the time (the principle of actualism). How could Fathers of the first centuries insist on this global principle without appropriate empirical data? It is a puzzle for atheists. But they were insisting, and anticipating by this way the multiple results of future researches realized hundreds of years later.

“The natural laws can not be violated or shaken, but remain   invariable” – John Chrysostome (IV-V AD)[14].

“And all things that have been constituted by God for the sake of men abide the same” - Gregory Thaumaturgus (III AD) [15].  God is the Creator of the Universe designed for man , including the laws of it’s functioning.

The permanency of nature’s laws in  the time and space (about this later) naturally raises the question about the causes of  constancy of these laws. The causes of their constancy in the time can be only the constancy in the time of some factors (e.g. these factors can be other constant laws, from which the first laws can be deduced as consequences).

But the question “why” can be put further, and then the constancy of these factors should  be conditioned by the permanency in the time of factors of second order and so on to the infinity. In this situation there is no actual cause in the World, since all the causes  turn out intermediate joints.  

But none the less the World is standing and the laws are constant.  The factor which really determines such stability should be independent from anything and determine everything depending on it. This feature is attributed in the doctrine of Early Church to God and is included in the notion of His name “hwh"y”(Exodus 3,14), God is retaining the Universe  with all it’s properties in the existence[5].

The natural laws are invariable from the moment of their creation not only in time but also in space. It is easy to imagine the World in which the ordering  was organized roughly as it exists in human societies in different countries.  Every country has it’s own constitution, though everywhere a relative order can be found. Unlike this, the ordering  of the Universe is unitary  - i.e. the natural laws are the same everywhere in the visible Cosmos. Unlike the atheistic  worldview, which is incapable to explain this phenomenon, the Early Church insisted on the existence of a single“order of nature” (not a multitude or several “orders”). Thus the phenomenon of unitarity of laws of the Universe in the space  in the frames of this  worldview has it’s place and explanation.

  “Where God wills, the order of nature is overruled; for He does whatever He wishes” - Andrew of Crete(VIII AD)[16 ].

“Wherever God wills the order of nature is overthrown” – John Damascene [37].

According to Church Fathers, the unitarity of natural laws is a testimony of the creation of the Universe by single God, not by several.

“ All nature testifies to the Unity of God, inasmuch as the universe is one” - Ambrose of Milan (IV AD)[18]. 

 “ Creation, then, being one, and the Universe one, and its order one, we must perceive that its King and Artificer also is one. For this is why the Artificer Himself made the whole universe one, lest by the coexistence of more than one a plurality of makers should be supposed; but that as the work is one, its Maker also may be believed to be One. Nor does it follow from the unity of the Maker that the Universe must be one, for God might have made others as well. But because the Universe that has been made is one, it is necessary to believe that its Maker also is one” -  Athanasius the Great (IV AD)[17].

And again we collide with a situation, when the fundamental fact, received in the multiple  scientific  researches,  was known to the Church Fathers many centuries before the   carrying out of a huge number of modern investigations in the area of natural sciences.

Thus, if the whole Cosmos is created according  to a single system of laws, it is quite reasonable to speak about the single Creator. The unitarity of nature’s laws (which corresponds to the principle of uniformism in modern natural sciences) tells us about the unity of the Creator, and about His omnipotence , since the single  system of laws embraces the whole giant Cosmos. This Creator has enormous potentials. The subordination of the whole Cosmos to laws tells us about it’s designing. Laws mean some order. Their origin is absolutely incomprehensible to atheists. But not only general subordination to laws spread  through the whole Universe tells us   about the evident order  in it. The properties of laws themselves (and they are specific) say to us about the wisdom of the Creator and that this wisdom is ( as we can see further) of highest level.

3.In wisdom hast thou made them all

“When you see measures, numbers, and order in all things, seek
their maker. You will not find him except where there is 
the supreme measure, the supreme number, and the supreme order,
that is, in God, of whom it has most truly been said that he
disposed all things in measure, number, and weight” – Augustine of Hippo[19].

The natural laws don’t point simply to the  fact that links between phenomena are organized by a system of rules (”order of nature”) and thus we can think that the Universe with it’s laws is the result of creation. The properties of laws witness themselves about the specific order of nature.

Fundamental physical laws have a definite mathematical structure. If we try to remember the physical laws, which we were studying at school, than mathematical formulae arise in our minds…

Let’s begin from the fact that the laws are described by mathematical notion of function, every value of “x” corresponds with only one value of “y”. But if all was arisen by chance, the picture could be different. But we don’t know any other variants. Let’s notice also that function means the higher order than function’s  absence, so when to a single value of ”x”  correspond more than one of “y”.

According to modern science the links between the phenomena and properties of the World, fundamental physical laws in particular,  are describable with the help of mathematics. What is the cause of such dispensation of the Universe? There is no area in natural sciences (e.g., in physics) where all of observed links have not their mathematical expressions – the values of “y” can be calculated with the help of formulae. But mathematics teaches us that the set of functions, which are undescribable by formulae is infinite.

It is easy to imagine the situation when the World was organized in an other way , e.g. the physical laws (all or some parte of them) were expressed by graphs, defying all mathematical descriptions. But physics  is not the science of unthinkable graphs and boundless tables of data, but the science of formulae and equations, where everything is  the subject of mathematization . And this is known by every schoolchild.

The famous physicist of XX century R.Feynman (Nobel Prize in Physics in 1965) affirmed that the essence of work of physicist when some new situation is analyzed is to guess the equation, describing the links between parameters [20].

Summing up his second lecture  from the cycle of lectures “The character of physical law”, devoted to the relationships between of physics and  mathematics, he wrote:

 “To summarize, I would use the words of Jeans, who said that ‘the Great Architect seems to be a mathematitian’. To those who do not know mathematics it is difficult to get across a real feeling as to the beauty, the deepest beauty, of nature.” [20].

All this tells us about the specific character of the order of nature. Recalling the metaphor used in our introduction,  it could be said that the “ books were on the bookshelves on their places”.

What is the cause of just this dispensation of the World? The atheism keeps silence or “the Universe is constructed in this way”.  The Early Church answers to this question very simply: Thou hast ordered all things in measure and number and weight (Wisdom of Solomon 11,20). If all things are ordered in this way, than it is  clear why natural links between parameters have numbers in their bases. Thus all links of phenomena of nature observed by us, created together with it, have their mathematical expressions.

And so we see again the advantage of  the doctrine of creation of Early Church over the modern atheism and we see again how the huge number of discoveries of modern science were predicted by Divine Revelation many hundreds years before them. And again atheists stand in front of dilemma: either to approve the existence of Wise Creator, or to believe in absurd accidental coincidences.

If somebody will say that he offers to us a set of 100 natural  random numbers,  but if all these numbers will be found to be multiple of 5, then it is unlikely that someone reasonable will believe in the random choice of these numbers (the probability of such event is: p=1/5100). And a person who will piously believe in the random character of this choice without sufficient arguments, very probably will give rise to our felling of sadness and serious doubts about his mental health.

All the multiple physical laws are expressed by mathematical formulae, but for all that an infinite set of functions can not be described by formulae, according to modern mathematics. And those who will piously believe that the great set of existing physical laws describable by mathematical formulae, arose by chance, can not naturally not to excite our feelings of sadness. Alas, the words of the Psalm are exact. The fool hath said in his heart, [There is] no God (Psal.14,1).

The mathematics describing existing laws of nature possesses a definite specific character. Eminent scientists are forced to admit the rationality of notion of creation of the Universe by Creator, who owns knowledge of mathematics of highest level. Here we see, e.g., the words of P.Dirac (Nobel Prize in Physics for 1933):

“It seems to be one of the fundamental features of nature that fundamental physical laws are described in terms of a mathematical theory of great beauty and power, needing quite a high standard of mathematics for one to understand it. You may wonder: Why is nature constructed along these lines? One can only answer that our present knowledge seems to show that nature is so constructed. We simply have to accept it. One could perhaps describe the situation by saying that God is a mathematician of a very high order, and He used very advanced mathematics in constructing the universe. Our feeble attempts at mathematics enable us to understand a bit of the universe, and as we proceed to develop higher and higher mathematics we can hope to understand the universe better” [21].

It should be noticed, that this thoughts of P.Dirac, who did not cherish kindly feelings to Christianity, has something in common with thoughts of Augustine, which are present in our epigraph to this section. We can see in this example that the highest level of intelligence should be attributed to the Creator  and it is called in Theology  -  perfect wisdom.( It should be noticed, that this feature of the World as all others also can be written off to chances though with evident risk of loss of common sense).

But every schoolchild can be convinced that the mathematics of fundamental laws of physics have some specific character. Mathematical formulae, describing fundamental physical laws, which are studied at schools, are extremely simple, even if compared with mathematical expressions, which schoolchildren have to simplify during their lessons of mathematics.

So again our atheists for the preservation in safety of their view to the World’s origin have to believe in the idea that all the multitude mathematically graceful physical laws arose by chance, though every schoolchild knows that the quantity of formulae, which do not possess  this brevity, beauty and simplicity is infinite.

The possibility of accidental appearance of laws of the physical World described by specific mathematics certainly can not be ruled out logically, as well as possibility that 100 random natural numbers are multiple of 5… “Freedom – for the free and paradise - for the saved” (old Russian proverb).

The atheism affirms that miracles (i.e. the events the character of which exceeds the limits of natural laws (outside the frames of  the “order of nature”)) don’t occur at all. However, strangely enough, beliefs in some miracles are implied in the structure of modern atheism. This could be seen above when we considered the fine tuning of parameters of Universe. But this is not the end of the story.

4.Life as an evidence of creation

“A honest man, armed with 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.” - F. Crick6[22].

““Curiouser and curiouser!” - cried Alice” - L. Carroll

The emergence of extremely complex biological systems  from the view of physics is explicable none other than with the help of hypothesis of creation.

The cell is the unit of life (more primitive  forms of life (viruses) can not exist without their cells-owners). As it was clear in the end of XX century, the cells are so complex in their many properties, that    the notion of their spontaneous generation from the inanimate substance (abiogenesis) frequently seems to be a complete absurdity even to some representatives of atheistic worldview.

Only a single example: For the setting of a single covalent bond between two amino acids during the biosynthesis of the chain of every protein molecule the coordinated work of about 150 genes is indispensable (Spirin A.S.). And this is true for all living organisms, the main component of which are proteins.

Now, some testimonies:

F.Crick, Nobel Prize winner (with J.Watson)  which he received for the discovery of double helix of DNA, who devoted his life to the study of genetical code, in his book  Life Itself  concluded that the first cell was made by aliens – because it is absolutely impossible to imagine the spontaneous generation of such extremely complex system as the genetical code [23 ], see also [24] . 

The academician of RAN[7]  V.A.Shouvalov, director of the Institute of Fundamental Problems of Biology (Pusshino, Russia) gave an interview with the daily “Moskovsky Komsomoletz” on 8 february 2007, in which the following declaration can be seen : “But the  arrival into the world  of the cell itself with it’s complete apparatus, in which everything is present… - it is a mystery. I can not say anything about Creator, but it is very plausible that something of this kind really existed”[ 25 ].

At last yet an other “frank confession” which we can see in the collaborative monograph  “The problems of life’s origin” written by Russian scientists  and edited by academicians of RAN: Grigoriev A.I.,  Dobretsov N.L., Zavarzin G.A., Rozanov A.Yu., Spirin A.S., and others. In the article of prof.Mukhin L.M. we can read:

 “I would like to finish by some curious fact. There was a terrible flash of enthusiasm in 1950 years on the first conference of the origin of live. After this 90% of researches were supporting the evolutionary idea. But the difficulties of this question were so great, that in 2006 the number of publications, devoted to the artificial origin of life on the Earth (i.e. connected with the idea of creation) proved to be near to 80% . So great is the ideological meaning of the problems of life’s origin”[ 26 ].

It is possible to believe in aliens or in some unknown mystical transcendental factors determining the designing and to deny Creator , but at the modern level of the development of science it is impossible to imagine an other way of life’s origin than it’s designing. (Obviously, everything always can be written off to the chances and fluctuations, but this “writing off”, as we told repeatedly, has it’s limits, beyond witch contradictions with common sense begin).

Strict materialists have only one reply to the question about the origin of such an extremely complex system as living cell: “By chance”. But such chances are unknown and were never seen, so these are “miraculous chances” -   yet an other belief from the sphere of  beliefs in “materialistic miracles”.

An example of such beliefs is provided by prof. E.V.Kunin, one of the  leading experts in the World  in the problems of abiogenesis:

“We know that the biosynthesis of protein  arose somehow, but we have no convincing sequence of stages. In connection with this situation…some ideas emerge that sufficiently complex systems (certainly not  all the elements at once) could arise purely by chance. It arose, so it arose. The victors are not judged”[ 27 ]. In general, briefly:  ““The victors are not judged”, if the extremely complex mechanism of protein biosynthesis arose, so it arose spontaneously. Amen!”.

But this is not yet the end of our journey to the wonderland of “materialistic miracles”…

The complexity of living cells exceeds considerably the complexity of computers.

“Alongside the level of ingenuity and complexity exhibited by the molecular machinery of life, even our most advanced artefacts appear clumsy” – wrote molecular biologist M.Denton in 1986 [ 28]. See also [29].

But for all that it is well known that systems of such complexity actually arise from chaos only as a result of  designing,  the rest beliefs about the appearance of living cells (including the belief in their evolution origin) prove  to be beliefs in miracles.

It should be noticed, that evolutional origin of systems of such level of  complexity  were never observed, as in general any appearance of new information in biosystems (see [29]). Thus, all ideas of evolutional origin of extremely  complex living organisms are based exclusively on assumption of existence of such evolution in the past, but it is only an assumption.

If the organization  of a single living cell is so complex, than how great will be the measure of general complexity of multicellular organisms? E.g., of a dog? The existence of  huge number of different living systems incommensurably exceeding by their complexity human works (e.g., computers), tells us again about the perfect wisdom of Creator. But atheists continue to say over and over again about the chance as the main factor of their evolutional appearance…

The logical necessity of the belief in miracles for every evolutional  materialist is especially vividly revealed when some integral physiological systems of elements are examined. These systems, like many engineering devices, designed by man, can not function in the absence of  full-fledged functioning of even if a single element of the system [29]. The sole possible way of appearance of system of this kind is their appearance as a whole and simultaneously and  never by gradual evolution.

However, natural emergence of such new systems, which were completely formed and genetically inherited, was never observed by biologists. And again the most simple explanation of these situations is designing - the concrete and well known as single real mechanism of emergence of systems of this kind. Though the appearance of such systems by  accidental causes can not be ruled out with probability of 100% , but it is clear for everybody that these chances are vanishingly small[8].

5.The beauty of the Universe as the reflection of Creator’s perfection

I admit that I do not know why mice and frogs were created, or flies or worms. Yet I see that all things are beautiful in their kind, though on account of our sins many things seem to us disadvantageous. For I observe the body and members of no living thing in which I do not find that measures, numbers, and order contribute to its harmonious unity. I do not understand where all these things come from if not from the highest measure, number and order, which lies in the immutable and eternal sublimity of God. – Augustine of Hippo[34].

Yet an other peculiarity of the World around us – it is objectively beautiful. Elements of beauty are inherent even to the creatures, which ordinarily provoke feelings of aversion (hyenas, spiders etc.). It should be noticed,  that such creatures obviously present the  minority. It is often impossible to explain emotional experiences of  beauties of nature by merely psychological reasons, because these feelings (sometimes very strong) can arise in the souls of people, who collide with these beauties for the first time.

And here naturally the question arises – why the beauty is present in the World?  - Because the World could be without this feature or could be ugly.

The answer from the side of atheists is at best: “accidental combination of circumstances” or “the  World  is constructed in this way”. (It seems that with the help of words “accidental combination of circumstances” absolutely everything could be “explained”). However, it is evident for every five years old child, who had recently learned to keep felt-tip pens in his hand, that the  beauty does not appear spontaneously  by itself.

On the contrary the words of the prophet Solomon give us a fare more  intelligible explanation of this peculiarity of the Universe: For by the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionably the maker of them is seen (Wisdom of Solomon 13,5). Thus, the beauty of the Universe is created by philanthropic  God. The World is created beautiful with the purpose that man could cognize the indescribable beauty and perfection of it’s Creator, in the same way as we cognize the beauty of painter’s soul when we look at his wonderful pictures.

Since the words of Solomon were said several hundreds of years before Christ, so when the knowledge about the World was yet very small, and beauties of America, Australia, of underwater space and cosmos were completely unknown, these words of Solomon can not be called otherwise than prophetic.

The beauty of the World, according to the opinion of several scientists is often determined by mathematical patterns which are present in it’s structures[35]. So this is yet an other problem for atheists from the area of probability theory, yet an other situation where they will ought to believe “ in 100 random natural numbers multiple of 5”…


Thus, the evolutionary materialism implies the existence  of miracles, though it proclaims their absence. The miracles none the less happen but not of the kind, which is possibly desired by adherents of this world view. And we often hear from them that these are  only “some fluctuations”…But miracles sometimes occur in the definite place and at a certain time. To this we can also hear the answer: “These are also some fluctuations…” Yes, every phenomenon exceeding the limits of common physical laws can be crammed in the category of “some fluctuations”. This explanation  can not be logically ruled out. However, “Freedom – for the free and paradise - for the saved” .

 “Once upon a time two students: Petia and Vova, were living in a single room of the  hostel of MPTI [9] . Once Vova came to his room and could not find his jean jacket. “So, where  is my jean jacket?”  - he asked Petia, who replied: “It was dissolved... Fluctuations occurred…”. And Vova piously believed in the truth of these words, because this variant can not be logically ruled out…”.

 We have to take pity on poor Vova, and to keep firmly in our minds:

“But in our belief about God, first comes the idea that God is. This we gather from His works. For, as we perceive His wisdom, His goodness, and all His invisible things from the creation of the world, so we know Him. So, too, we accept Him as our Lord. For since God is the Creator of the whole world, and we are a part of the world, God is our Creator. This knowledge is followed by faith, and this faith by worship” – Basil the Great[ 36 ].

The doctrine of the origin of the Universe of Early Church is true and eternal (1Tim.3,15), as eternal is the Christianity(Math.24,34), as eternal are God’s words (Math.24,35).

The author expresses gratitude to Dr.Lunarman A. (Ph.D. in molecular biology) and to prof. of Moscow State University Dr.Hundjua A.(Ph.D. in physics and mathematics) for consultations and check of the text.


1.  John Damascene. An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith. Book 4, ch.10,  http://www.orthodox.net/fathers/exactidx.html
2.  Antony the Great. On the Character of Men and on the Virtuous Life. One Hundred and Seventy Texts, n.133.  In:\\ Philokalia, vol.1 http://holybooks.lichtenbergpress.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Philokalia.pdf
3.  See [1], book 2, ch.10.
4.  Theophilus of Antioch. To Autolycus, book 2, n.10 http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/02042.htm
5.  Cyrill of Jerusalem.  Catechetical Lectures, lecture 12, n.5     http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/310112.htm 
6.  Davis P., The accidental Universe, ch.3, n.3.1, Cambridge University Press, 2009. http://www.amazon.com/The-Accidental-Universe-P-Davies/dp/0521286921#reader_0521286921
7.  Nikitin V.A.  In: “Science, philosophy, religion”, pp25-26, Dubna, 1997.(In Russian).
8.  Methodius of Patara. From the Discourse on the Resurrection, book 1, n.8.  http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0625.htm
9.  Ross H. Astronomical evidences for the God of the Bible. http://www.reasons.org/articles/astronomical-evidences-for-the-god-of-the-bible
10.  Sarfati J. The universe is finely tuned for life. http://creation.com/the-universe-is-finely-tuned-for-life
11. Basil the GreatNine Homilies of Hexaemeron, hom.  N8  http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/32018.htm  
12.  Augustine of Hippo. On Genesis, book 9, ch.17, n.32 // St.Augustine. The works,  Palomnik, Moscow, 1997(in Russian). French translation : La nature, dans son cours ordinaire, est soumise à des lois qui produisent même chez les êtres vivants certaines tendances … De la genèse au sens littéral , livre 9, ch.17, n.32 http://abbaye-saint-benoit.ch/saints/augustin/genese/genlit/gen3i.htm#_Toc23145890   
13. Gregory the Theologian (of Nazianzus). Canticles mysterious, oration 5, In: St.Gregory the Theologian , Works, 3 ed., vol.4, pp 190-192,  Moscow, 1889 (In Russian). PG 37, 424-430.
14.  John Chrysostome. The sixth homily on Lazarus.  //The complete collection of works of St.John Chrysostome, St.Petersbourg, 1898, vol. 1, book 2 (in Russian). French translation : Les lois de la nature ne sont donc ni détruites ni ébranlées, mais elles restent immuables. – Saint Jean Chrysostome. Homélies sur Lazare. Sixième homélie. Sur le tremblement de terre, et sur Lazare et le mauvais riche. http://www.mauriceblanchot.net/blog/public/Jean_Chrysostome__Home_lies_sur_Lazare.pdf
15.  Gregory Thaumaturgus. A Metaphrase of Ecclesiastes, ch.1. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0602.htm
16.  Andrew of Crete. The Great Canon, song 4, http://www.orthodox.net/greatlent/great-canon-fifth-week.html
17.  Athanasius the Great.  Against the Heathen, §39. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.vi.ii.iii.v.html 
18. Ambrose of Milan. Exposition of the christian faith. Book.1, ch.4.  http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf210.iv.iv.iii.v.html
19.  Augustine of Hippo. Two Books on Genesis Against the Manichees. In:\\Saint Augustine On Genesis: Two Books on Genesis Against the Manichees and On the Literal Interpretation of Genesis: An Unfinished Book (The Fathers of the Church, Volume 84), The Catholic University of  America press, 1991,  p.74. http://books.google.ru/books/about/On_Genesis.html?id=0YxfzKIHJ_YC&redir_esc=y"   
20. Feynman R. The character of physical law, M.I.T. Press, 1985, p.58 http://people.virginia.edu/~ecd3m/1110/Fall2014/The_Character_of_Physical_Law.pdf
21. Dirac, P. The Evolution of the Physicist's Picture of NatureScientific American. (May 1963). Retrieved 4 April 2013. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Dirac
22.  Crick, F. Life Itself: It's Origin and Nature, New York, Simon & Schuster, 1981, p. 88. http://books.google.ru/books?hl=ru&id=b7kTAQAAIAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=honest
23.  Bates G., Designed by aliens? http://creation.com/designed-by-aliens-crick-watson-atheism-panspermia
24.  The problems of life’s origin , PIN RAN, Moscow, 2009,   p.250 (in Russian).
25.  Feclunin S. The science in the end of tunnel. “Moskovsky Komsomoletz” 8 february 2007. (in Russianhttp://www.mk.ru/158646.html?ID=158646&SECTION_URL"
26. Mukhin L.M. Conditions of the earth 4-4.6 GA. The primary syntheses.//  In [24], pp.120-130 (In Russian).
27.  Ershov A. A nail soup. The leading evolutionist told about Multyuniverse and anthropic principle (an interview with E.V.Kunin) // Lenta.ru. 30 november 2012  (In Russianhttp://lenta.ru/articles/2012/11/30/koonin/
28.  M.Denton. “Evolution. A Theory In Crisis” , p.326 http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-A-Theory-In-Crisis/dp/091756152X
29.  Sarfati J. Refuting evolution, ch. 9.http://austore.creation.com/catalog/refuting-evolution-p-147.html?osCsid=5ulhe8h9q4kighd5oulifco6q7
30.  Catchpoole D. Double-decade dinosaur disquiet http://creation.com/double-decade-dinosaur-disquiet
31.  Catchpoole D. Seabed worm fossils still soft after 500 million years? http://creation.com/worm-fossils-still-soft   
32.  Thomas B.Dinosaur Soft Tissue Preserved by Blood? http://www.icr.org/article/dinosaur-soft-tissue-preserved-by-blood/
33.  Lunarman A.N. The molecular and cellular paleontology: the evidence about small age of Earth.// In almanach “Divine revelation and modern science”, N3,  ed. by Kolchurinsky N., Moscow, 2011(in Russian).
34.  See 19, p.73
35.  Wieland C. and Grigg R.  Golden numbers http://creation.com/golden-numbers.
36.  Basil the Great. Letters,  letter 235. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3202235.htm
37.  John Damascene. Dogmatic Theotokion, tone 7 http://www.anastasis.org.uk/sat7ec.htm
38.  See [1], book 1, ch.XII.

[1] These questions are examined in particular by the approach called  “ID” («Intellectual Design»).

[2] “Further more, if the neutron mass were only 0.998 of its actual value (that is if the u quark were very slightly heavier than the d quark) thth free protons would decay into neutrons by positron emission: p→n+e++ν. In that case there would probably be no atoms at all!”[6].

[3] It is easy to understand that the probability of a hit by guesswork to any limited  plot on the infinite plane is as close to zero as is wished. From the viewpoint of materialists the matters with probabilities of the chance appearance  of values of mentioned constants stand in the same way. The probabilities of the hit of these  values to the intervals, suitable for human existence in the Universe are as small as is wished.

[4] The materialists attempt to get out of this state by supposition of the existence in the past of a huge set of Universes with different values of constants and their replacements. But since such events were never observed and there is no one convincing fact  in favour of their existence in the past,  we see a plenty of miracles also in this variant too.

[5] “He is the cause of all things. For as the cause of all that is and of all essence, He is called both Ens and Essence”[38].

[7] Russian Academy of Sciences

[8] We could continue our excursion to the wonderland of biological materialistic miracles,  but we limited ourselves by the frames of the metaphor indicated in the introduction. However we will mention about the area of biological facts which increases  quickly in the last years and which  provides a plenty of unpleasant data to materialists– these are the data connected to the conservation of soft tissues, big fragments of proteins, the elements of DNA in “very old” remains, in particular  in the remains of dinosaurs – see [30]. The idea of their conservation during tens and even hundreds of millions years [31] in ordinary conditions is incompatible with the data of modern biochemistry (and common sense), therefore, all attempts of scientific  explanation of this conservation are untenable [32], [33]. These facts force to approve the idea of the young age of these remains (thousands, not millions of years), which means the  collapse of evolutional time scale, or to deny the data and laws of biochemistry, or to assume some unknown mechanisms of conservation of these remains in the past.  Since such unknown mechanisms are in contradiction with data and laws of biochemistry[33], these unknown  mechanisms are miraculous. The last variant is chosen by many materialists, though miraculous character of these assumed mechanisms is not proclaimed aloud.

[9] Moscow Physics and 
Technology Institute

Read 749 times

Download Template Joomla 3.0 free theme.