Excerpted from The Evidence of God in an Expanding Universe, edited by John Clover Monsma. New York: G.P. Putman’s Sons, 1958



By Marlin Books Kreider, Physiologist

M.Sc, Ph.D., University of Maryland. Physiologist with Environmental Protection Division, U.S. Quartermaster’s Re­search and Development Center, Natick, Mass.; also Pro­fessor of Biology, Eastern Nazarene College. Member of American Society of Professional Biologists, National Speleo­logical Society, etc. Specialist in metabolism and circulation.


For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. [Rom 1: 19-20]

Both as an ordinary human being, and also as a man devoting his life to scientific study and research, I have no doubt at all about the existence of God. There is, definitely, a God.

But His existence cannot be proved, nor can He in any way be analyzed, by laboratory methods. He is non-physical. He is a spiritual, intelligent, creative, all-sustaining Power.

But though we cannot use ordinary scientific methods in determining His existence, yet we can study the manifold evidences of His existence in man and in Nature at large. Those evidences, to my mind, are clear-cut and convincing.

May I state here that many of the so-called theories or facts of science that many people assume to be true are also not proven facts. Many of them are merely indications point­ing in the direction of facts, instead of established verities. It’s something like a man that you see running out of the back door of your house which you discover has been ran­sacked. You do not have proof that he is guilty, but evidence certainly points in that direction. A magistrate weighs the evidence before the proof of guilt is established.

In addition, the scientific method is inadequate to demon­strate or prove the existence of every reality. For example, love, undeniably one of the strongest forces affecting man, can defy scientific proof or analysis. Likewise, how can beauty or the appreciation of music be proved to someone lacking appreciation? But who would deny their existence? Evidences of the existence of God equally as strong as those often accepted as proof in many fields of rational, scientific thought can be found, even though conclusive proof for or against the existence of God may be lacking.

Our first body of evidence is found in cosmology, in the existence of a universe which is governed by precise forces of Nature and an orderliness which suggests an arranger or organizer. This precision is so great that the path of planets and, more recently, the artificial satellites can be predicted in advance. This preciseness extends to the interaction of electric charges involved in chemical reactions. It allows most physical phenomena to be expressed by mathematical law and formula.

Such order, according to common human experience, is a result of an orderly mind. Chaos rather than order emerges unless a designing or controlling force is func­tioning.

Another group of evidences lies in the realm of life and organic structure. Of special interest to the writer as a physi­ologist is the intricacy of design and structure of the human and animal bodies. The creation or construction of any one organ of the body is far beyond the ability of the most in­genious man, though the function of some structures can be reproduced to a very limited degree by artificial devices. Among these are the artificial lung, heart, kidney and me­chanical brain.

Speaking of the brain, that possesses unbelievable abilities, yet little more is known of its physical basis than that it can initiate and conduct electric-like charges and that some chemical changes take place. But its numerous functions— who can explain or account for them? It is responsible for coordinating all muscular activities and controls even the most basic bodily functions such as respiration and heart beat. It contains memory, and holds thousands of mental images available for instant recall. Is there any physical ex­planation of the integrating and problem-solving ability of the brain, or of reason and common sense, of motivation, desire, and serenity? The appreciation of an aesthetic quality such as beauty, the comprehension of a spiritual reality such as love, the consciousness of self, personality development–all are functions of this same small mass of protoplasm. But who can explain them on a physical basis—or even at all?

Among the many complexities of the body is the intricate control of the myriad chemical reactions continually taking place, some of which cannot be duplicated outside of the body. The buffer systems which neutralize the acids of di­gestion and of exercise maintain the optimum conditions for metabolism. Antibodies form to fight off harmful invaders and may confer immunity. These antibodies are specific for each disease, just as the structure of the chemicals compos­ing the protoplasm is specific for each individual. Each human being therefore possesses a chemical distinctness. Who was it that brought this about? Certainly not mere man!

And think of the heart. This tireless organ responds to ceaseless demands throughout a lifetime. It also possesses a mysterious rhythmicity which allows it to beat even though all nerve attachments are severed—a highly important fact in cases of accident. Where do we go with this perpetual physi­cal miracle? How do we explain it?

White blood cells are the cells of the immune system that are involved in protecting the body against both infectious disease and foreign invaders.

These marvels of bodily function are very closely associ­ated with the mystery of life itself, a mystery that scientists and philosophers have long wrestled with—long, but vainly. Much is known about the characteristics of living proto­plasm and of the intricate chemical reactions continuously taking place, but we lack adequate, thoroughgoing defini­tions. There is a theory called vitalism, which suggests that there is some force in addition to the known physical forces necessary for life, but, in the first place, the theory is held in disrepute by many scientists, and secondly, it too does not explain the real essence of life, nor does it explain by known and measured phenomena the direction and purposefulness that is apparent in the growth and development of every living organism. What is the organizing and directive force in embryological growth that causes a small mass of un­differentiated cells finally to produce the complex arrange­ment of adult tissue?

At this point we must face the realization that we dare not equate all that we do not understand to God’s special intervention as did the primitive peoples who considered storm and thunder signs of God’s displeasure. However, this purposefulness found in life and growth points definitely to order and design.

… it has been an accepted scientific fact that life does not arise from non-living matter, thus contra­dicting this theory of origins [, i.e. atheistic evolution]….

Turning to another area, in cosmogony, the study of the origination of the universe, we find additional evidence of a creative, extra-mundane force. It has been proposed that the first solid matter was formed from the interaction of hot swirling gases which grew to larger dimensions and split into smaller masses. These smaller masses were flung into space, finally forming the array of heavenly bodies. In similar man­ner, it has been proposed, life was formed. However, since the time of Pasteur it has been an accepted scientific fact that life does not arise from non-living matter, thus contra­dicting this theory of origins. In addition, our laboratories with their elaborate equipment for reproducing great vari­eties of environmental conditions have succeeded in creating some components of protoplasm, but not life. The mathe­matical probability of a chance occurrence of all the neces­sary factors in the right proportion is almost nil.

Even if some substance were created in this manner, there still remains the question of the origin of the initial element or electrical charges, the heat, and the physical forces which kept the newly formed masses suspended and moving, and which are now controlling the physical universe.

This view of creation also creates other problems. If life began as a small mass of protoplasm, an elaborate force must have acted upon it to produce the vast variety of living structures inhabiting the earth. When known scientific mech­anisms are examined by which organic evolution of a mass of protoplasm could form the complex man of today, they are found inadequate.

In the first place, the science of genetics reveals a few types of alteration of the gene, but there is no evidence that these alterations could account for any great complexity of structure. Secondly, the law of the survival of the fittest suggests that some change takes place, but cannot explain the development of the many varieties or species of animals and plants. Furthermore, the study of entropy, or the avail­able energy of the universe, reveals a continual decrease from an initial point. This is in the opposite direction re­quired for organic evolution of simple protoplasm to com­plex man.

Obviously no one in our present intellectual state will ever have proof of the method involved in creation. But our scientific knowledge reveals so many improbabilities in the completely materialistic explanation that it is more rational to accept as the prime cause a form of special creation and the influence of an outside force. Albert Einstein, in recog­nizing this intelligent creative force, refers to it as “the illimi­table superior reasoning power which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe.”

As stated at the outset, I call this “power” God. I see at the beginning of the cosmic road—not eternal energy or matter, not “inscrutable fate,” not a “fortuitous conflux of primordial elements,” not “the great Unknown” —but the Lord God Almighty. And I do not consider my position “irrational.”

Mortal men whose reach and ken is so extremely limited, as I have tried to point out in very brief compass, might do well not to bank too much on their “ratio”—calling this ratio-nal, and that ir-ratio-nal.

In any event, here is where I stand, and this is my belief.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: