God: His Physical Laws, The Evidence

Just as God created Spiritual laws that order the lives of human beings, so also has He created Physical laws which order the universe. These laws stand as evidence of intelligence that allows the universe to function and exist in an orderly fashion and continue to permit life to exist on earth.

The Physical Laws:

  • Gravity and Relativity
  • Thermodynamics
  • Continuity and Transfer
  • Electromagnetism
  • Classic Laws of Planetary Motion , Universal Gravitation
  • Photonics; Reflection and Refraction
  • Quantum Mechanics
  • Radiation
  • Chemistry
  • Geophysical Laws.

Man has a difficult time trying to keep all of the machinery of earth operating correctly and efficiently.  God has continued to operate the machinery of the universe with such precision that man has built all of his scientific laws based upon God’s creation.

Gravity And Relativity

The ratio between gravity and electromagnetism were balanced precisely.

In order to understand the importance of gravity during the commencement of the universe and how this ratio was set precisely to ensure a life sustaining universe, we must investigate the circumstances that surround this event.

During the initial moments of the universe at 10−43 seconds, had the ratio between gravity and electromagnetism increased by 1:1040, only very small stars would have formed. If the ratio were decreased by the same amount, only very large stars would have formed.

Archimedes’ estimated that 1×1063  grains of sand could fit into the entire cosmos.[1] This illustration helps us understand how a small change in the ratio between gravity and electromagnetism would have ended any chance of our universe producing stars that would later make life possible. In a universe that is 75 percent filled with grains of sand (1:1040), removing just one of these grains, is the same as changing the initial ratio of gravity and electromagnetism when the universe began. Had this tiny variance taken place at the commencement of the universe, no life would be present on earth today.

In order for the possibility of life on earth much later, there must be both large and small stars present in the universe beforehand. Large stars produce the elements needed for life, smaller stars burn a the precise rate required to sustain life on a planet, such as earth.[2]

If gravity was any stronger at the early formation of the universe, all stellar matter would bind stronger and smaller stars would use their nuclear fuel at a drastically increased rate, eliminating small stars and making life impossible on earth, later. If gravity was any weaker at the beginning, matter would not have clumped together to form much larger structures that would later become stars, and no life would exist on earth today.[3]

The existence of this very narrow ratio between gravity and electromagnetism helps us understand how impossible this environment was at the beginning of the universe. The fact that this precise ratio was dialed-in exactly where it needed to be for life to be possible on earth, nearly 9 billion years later, demands that this ration was purposely determined before the universe began. God, knowing the correct ration between gravity and electromagnetism, set this ratio precisely where it needed to be. This extremely narrow margin that was set at the beginning of the universe, makes it impossible that this precise ratio could have taken place by any natural, or undirected process.

This scientific and empirical evidence is one of the many reasons that we can confidently conclude that God was necessary for the universe to exist and human life to be present on earth today.

Perfectly Balanced Gravitation Force And Earth’s Atmosphere

If the gravitational force of Earth was stronger, our planet’s atmosphere would retain too much ammonia and methane for life. If the Earth’s gravity was slightly weaker, the planet’s  atmosphere would lose too much water to maintain life.

Gravitational Interaction With The Moon:

If the moon had more gravitational pull on the earth, tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period would destroy all life by massive waves. If the moon had less gravitational pull on the earth, all weather on earth would change so severely, that life could not exist.

Jupiter’s Distance From Earth:

If the planet Jupiter was at greater distance from Earth, the beneficial gravitational force which this massive planet exerts in our Solar System would have a significant impact on the number of asteroid and comet collisions which strike the earth. Described as the “vacuum cleaner of the Solar System,” Jupiter’s immense gravity, as well as its precise placement in the Solar System, shields the earth by drawing most larger asteroids and comets that pass through our inner Solar System, into the asteroid belt. Without the specific placement of Jupiter where it is located, it is likely that life on earth would be impossible—as our planet would be repeatedly struck by extinction level asteroids and comets. If Jupiter were any closer to the Earth, its gravitational force would throw off our orbit and kill everyone on the planet.

Isaac Newton And Gravitational Force

Sir Isaac Newton’s work on the physics of time and space are considered the foundation for all scientific knowledge today. On July 5, 1687, Newton published three books that have been referred to as the “Principia,” a Latin term that describes his “Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy.”

Newton wrote in his Principia, that the order and design which we observe in time and space are inseparable from the existence of God. In Newton’s view of the evidence presented by the universe through science, mathematics, and astronomy, this “most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”[4]

“The true God is a living, intelligent, and powerful being. His duration reaches from eternity to eternity; His presence from infinity to infinity.…He governs all things and knows all things that are or can be done. He is not eternity and infinity, but eternal and infinite; he is not duration or space, but he endures and is present. He endures forever, and is everywhere present; and, by existing always and everywhere, he constitutes duration and space.  This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.…He is omnipresent not virtually only, but also substantially; for virtue cannot subsist without substance. In him are all things contained and moved.”[5]   —Isaac Newton

Isaac Newton viewed the evidence for God’s existence as self-evident by the presence of the universe itself. In his observance of all the scientific and mathematical absolutes of the Cosmos, “the Creator cannot be denied in the presence of such a magnificent creation.” Newton found it preposterous that any intelligent person could imagine that the universe came into being, without an unlimited intelligence as its first cause. Newton came to these conclusions based on the evidence of science, mathematics, and astronomy.[6]

Isaac Newton observed comets and planets moving in concentric orbits from many different positions, and concluded that this would be impossible apart from the design and engineering of an intelligence. A transcendent being of immense power created gravity to act on these planets and cause them to follow the same centerpoint, ordered by the laws of physics.[7]

Albert Einstein demonstrated that gravity occurs as a result of space-time bending, which in the final conclusion of his theories, Einstein confirms Newton’s judgment that orbits follow geodesic trajectories. In other words, both of these great men of science concluded that the universe has a design and a purpose.

Newton determined that without intervention from the Creator of the universe, the stars would collide with each other on a more frequent basis. By apparent design, God has limited the amount of motion that occurs in the universe from decay due to viscosity and friction.[8] In many of Newton’s writings, he implies that the force of Gravity was influenced by something immaterial—an intelligence.

“It is inconceivable that inanimate brute matter should, without the mediation of something else which is not material, operate upon and effect matter without mutual contact.”[9]

It was the final conclusions of Sir Isaac Newton, that God was the force that kept the planets in orbit—as they could not sustain such motion by themselves.

“This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent Being. …This Being governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all; and on account of his dominion he is wont to be called ‘Lord God’ παντοκρατωρ [pantokratōr], or ‘Universal Ruler.’ … The Supreme God is a Being eternal, infinite, [and] absolutely perfect.”[10]


One of the baffling questions in the study of the initial moments of the Big Bang, is why we have a universe which is clearly designed for life instead of one which would make life impossible. Given the parameters which were present during the first moments of the universe a vastly different result would be expected. The fine-tuning of the universe, which existed at the beginning of the Big Bang was so essential for life that even the basic element of carbon—of which all human beings are made—would not exist, had the universe began by any other process.

“It has been frequently argued that there are many curious coincidences in the relations between the constants of Nature upon which life on Earth seems to depend…One of the most striking of such apparent coincidences was revealed with William Fowler’s confirmation of Fred Hoyle’s remarkable prediction of the existence of a particular energy level of carbon which, had it not existed, would have meant that the production of heavy elements in stars would not have been able to proceed beyond carbon, leaving the planets devoid of nitrogen, oxygen, chlorine, sodium, sulphur, and numerous other elements.” —Roger Penrose, mathematical physicist, mathematician and philosopher of science.

This indicates that all of the “coincidences” in the origin of the universe were actually designed, engineered, and constructed in the precise manner necessary for life on earth, much later.

In concluding his estimation of how the universe began, Dr. Penrose moves towards the “miraculous” as the most reasonable explanation for the unique and precise early state of the Big Bang.

“If we do not assume the Second Law, or that the universe originated in some extraordinarily special initial state, or something else of this general nature, then we cannot use the ‘improbability’ of the existence of life as a premise for a derivation of a Second Law that is operative at times earlier than the present. No matter how curious and non-intuitive it may seem, the production of life would (if we do not make a prior assumption of the Second Law) be far less probable to come about by natural means—be it by natural selection or any by other seemingly ‘natural’ process—than by a ‘miraculous’ creation simply out of random collisions of the constituent particles!”

Since a state of extremely low entropy at the beginning of the Big Bang was a primary component in the formation of the early universe—this stands as empirical evidence for design. This initial low entropy most certainly did not happen by chance; as the natural state of the initial universe should have exhibited a very high degree of disorder. The fact that the universe began by a great deal of organization—controlled to exact a specific result that would permit life billions of years later, these details demand an intelligent source.

We should remember that the specific type of universe which developed during the hundred trillion-trillion-trillionth of a second of the initial expansion of the universe, were critically controlled by forces unknown to scientists today. From this point and continuing throughout the expansion of the universe, this control has been continually ordered in such a way that life would be possible in one specific Galaxy, one Solar System, and one planet. At the formation of earth, this design continued in directing the absolute necessary constants of the Solar System and the earth, which would allow human life to dwell upon its surface and prosper.

Extremely Low Entropy:

Entropy is the rate of heat loss associated with the specific degree of randomness or disorder within a system. In the beginning of the universe there was an unusually low level of disorder related to heat loss—intimating strict control being instituted, which permitted a specific outcome. The universe should not have come into being with a very low rate of entropy. Given the parameters that were present at the commencement of the universe, there was a great degree of certainty that it would have began with a very high rate of degradation. Sir Roger Penrose determined that the presence of an extremely low level of entropy at the Big Bang, is indicative of engineering, rather than random fortuity. The probability that this condition would have been present during the initial expansion of the universe is 1 in 10 to 10123.[11]

In his book, “Cycles of Time, An Extraordinary New View of the Universe,” Dr. Penrose describes the existence of low entropy as an essential precursor to life—from the first moments the universe began.

“The entire fabric of life on Earth requires the maintaining of a profound and subtle organization, which undoubtedly involves entropy being kept at a low level.”[12]

“Let us return to the basic question that we have been trying to address in this part, namely the issue of how our universe happened to come about with a Big Bang that was so extraordinarily special—yet special in what appears to have been a very peculiar way where, with regard to gravity, its entropy was enormously low in comparison with what it might have been, but the entropy was close to maximum in every other respect.”[13]

Dr. Penrose illustrates the high degree of impossibility in which the universe was likely to begin with extremely low entropy by calculating the results of the present universe in reverse—back to the moment the Big Bang began, revealing that the actual level of entropy should have been very high.

“We can get some appreciation of this if we imagine the time-reversed context of a collapsing universe, since this collapse, if taken in accordance with the Second Law, ought to lead us to a singular state of genuinely high entropy.”[14]

In fact, the chances that the precise universe we observe—which began with extremely low entropy—was so astronomically remote, it could not have occurred by chance. In the words of Dr. Penrose, the existence of this condition requires an completely new theoretical explanation.

“The probability of finding ourselves in a universe of such a degree of specialness, if it had come about just by chance, has the utterly absurdly tiny value of around 1 in 10, to the 10th, to the 124th power, irrespective of inflation. This is the kind of figure that needs some completely different kind of theoretical explanation!”[15]

The way in which the early universe began under such a low level of entropy, is one of the most puzzling and important questions of science and mathematics today. Described as “aimed with incredible precision,” this defines the origin of the universe as having a supernatural beginning rather than by natural phenomenon.

“That picture would have our collapsing pre-Big-Bang phase somehow ‘aimed’ with incredible precision at such a very special ultimate state, of the same extraordinary degree of specialness that we appear to find in our actual Big Bang.”[16]


At −430 (seconds) planck time, an event described as the “Grand Unification Epoch” took place. Electromagnetism, the strong interaction, and the weak interaction were unified as the electronuclear force; while gravity was separated from the electronuclear force.⁠[17]

Theoretical Physicist, Alan Guth, at the Massachusetts Institute of  Technology, put forth the idea in the 80’s, that if during the initial moments of the Big Bang (Moment of Creation), the massive expansion of material was not uniform or controlled, the resulting universe would have been quite disorderly. Instead, as if by design, a microsecond later, the entire universe jumped in size by ten trillion trillion (1025). It was then that the entire expansion stopped and a normal rate of expansion began. This rapid and sudden expansion would have “stretched out” the irregularities of the initial disorderly explosion. Once the rapid expansion ceased and a normal rate of expansion started again, the material of the universe could expand into an orderly and even universe.⁠[18]

What caused the initial sudden expansion, and what force made it cease and stop, only to resume in a orderly fashion?

Guth’s proposal was that anti-gravity caused the initial sudden and uneven expansion of matter to be quickly diminished and cease. In the universe’s initial inflation, the expansion of gases was far too fast to form galaxies later in the universe. This problem was solved by the force exerted by antigravity suddenly halting the initial rapid expansion. Amazingly, this all happen in 10-32 seconds (a hundred trillion-trillion-trillionth of a second).⁠[19]

If Not Controlled—A Drastically Different Universe

One of the most startling discoveries in the search for evidence of God in the universe was made by mathematical physicists Sir Roger Penrose. Since the Cosmos has a beginning, we understand today that it is winding itself down to a certain heat death in the distant future, when all the available energy in the universe will be used up in about 10100 years.⁠[20]

Try to imagine the phase space… of the entire universe. Each point in this phase space represents a different possible way that the universe might have started off. We are to picture the Creator, armed with a ‘pin’–which is to be placed at some point in the phase space… Each different positioning of the pin provides a different universe. Now the accuracy that is needed for the Creator’s aim depends on the entropy of the universe that is thereby created. It would be relatively ‘easy’ to produce a high entropy universe, since then there would be a large volume of the phase space available for the pin to hit. But in order to start off the universe in a state of low entropy – so that there will indeed be a second law of thermodynamics – the Creator must aim for a much tinier volume of the phase space. How tiny would this region be, in order that a universe closely resembling the one in which we actually live would be the result?’

The calculations of Dr. Penrose determined that when God created the universe, the preciseness required to establish a universe balance for life, would be 1 part in 10 to 10123 power. This is a 1 followed by 10123 zeros. A number that is so large, it is greater than all of the estimated particles in the entire universe.⁠[21]

Dr. Penrose is saying that the likelihood that a vastly different universe would have occurred from the one that we have, was an absolute certainty. Why then do we have a universe that has developed in such a way that it allows for life? Many people are under the impression when they hear the term “fine tuning,” that we are speaking of the earth or our solar system, which was engineered in such a way to make life possible. Not at all. The fine tuning began in the initial moments of the big bang (creation) when at −430 (seconds) planck time, electromagnetism, the strong interaction, and the weak interaction, were unified as the electronuclear force, while gravity separated from the electronuclear force.⁠[22] If God had not engineered the precise way in which the initial expansion of energy unfolded at the beginning of the universe, no stars, galaxies, or planets would have formed. God was working in the moments of one trillion trillion, trillionth of a second to bless our lives—14 billion years into the future. Since He has this capacity to move and work in the trillionth of seconds, it is certain that He is working in all of our lives right now. We can trust Him.

The fine tuning of the universe began in the first moment of the universe. God Created a Finely-Tuned Universe Perfect for Life.⁠[23]

The rate of expansion for the early universe was just right:⁠[24] If the energy expansion in that first second was slightly larger, then the gravitational forces necessary to form stars and planets would not have taken place. If the expansion of energy was slightly smaller, the universe would have collapsed back onto itself. If the initial expansion of energy was greater than the capacity of gravitational forces to pull all of this matter back together and eventually form galaxies and stars, life many billions of years later, would not have been possible. Mathematical physicists have calculated that at the first second of the universe, the expansion of energy and gravitational forces differed by less than 1 part in a million, billion, or 1015.⁠[25]

The amount of weak nuclear force was just right: The ratio of protons and neutrons was perfect to allow helium to form that would be needed for the formation of stars later.

The amount of strong nuclear forces was just right: This allowed helium to burn precisely slow enough so that elements could form.

The ratio of gravity to electromagnetism are balanced precisely: If the ratio between gravity and electromagnetism was increased by only 1 in 1040, only very small stars would have formed. If the ratio were decreased by the same amount, only very large stars would have formed. In order for life to be possible, there must be both large and small stars present in the universe. Large stars produce the elements needed for life, small stars burn a the precise rate required to sustain life on a planet, such as earth.[⁠26]

The Correct Ratio Of Gravity To Electromagnetism

If the ratio between gravity and electromagnetism was increased by only 1 part in 1040, only very small stars would have formed. If the ratio were decreased by the same amount, only very large stars would have formed. In order for life to be possible, there must be both large and small stars present in the universe. Large stars produce the element needed for life; small stars burn at the precise rate required to sustain life on a planet, such as Earth.⁠[27]

Paul Davies determined by calculation that a 1-in-1040 chance is equal to shooting and hitting a coin from Earth, at the far side of the universe.⁠[28]

The Law of Biogenesis

Despite the efforts of some people, no one has ever been able to prove that life comes from anything else but other life. Animals, plants, all organisms, all life, come from their own kind. In the only case of a claimed spontaneous generation of life. Louis Pasteur proved that this was a hoax.

By scientific evidence, Pasteur proved that life only comes from life that existed previously. There have never been any provable exceptions to this basic law of life and these findings are precisely what God said about life in the Bible.

Not long after Darwin published his Origin of Species in 1859, Louis Pasteur challenged the idea of spontaneous generation. This hypothesis is the very foundation of evolution as the origin of life. Dr. Pasteur’s simple and elegant “swan-necked flask” experiments impeached the idea of organic life as originating from non life assertion.

Dr. Pasteur learned that the germs that were used in the experiment to prove abiogenesis, came from microbes that had parent microbes, not from a process of spontaneous generation of life. This discovery brought forth many useful apllication sich as the need for sterilization, asepsis during surgery, and the theory of germs in applications of disease.

Current claims that Louis Pasteur did not proved biogenesis are untrue due the fact that the impeaching objections that are raised are based on ideas that include very large theoretical volumes of fluids that could possibly contain the necessary elements to allow spontaneous life to emerge. In examining these assertions by atheists, we find that their conclusions are similar to the atheistic theoretical physicists hypothesis of the multi-verse as an answer for the reason why the universe is fine-tined for life. Both the physicists and the biologist who use these theoretical hypothesis, have no observable empirical evidence to support their conclusions. They both use ideas that require very large test subjects that do not exist and cannot be tested or observed. These ideas exist only in the realm of the theoretical, not is real science.

God created each species and all of these life forms appeared on earth at the same time. When we examine the scientific evidence of the fossil record, this is precisely what we see. Millions of dead animals that all appeared on earth at the same time with no intermediate species which indicated an evolution between species.

The idea that one cell could have evolved into man over a very long process of time through a great number of uncontrolled and random processes is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated upon man. There is absolutely no scientific proof that this has occurred and the very idea itself is a violation of the known laws biogenesis.

The only thing that has been proven by scientists is that certain species, when placed in harsh environments, have the ability to adapt themselves by certain changes that permit their continued survival. This type of limited evolutionary processes is assumed as evidence that greater evolutionary processes are also possible; inevitably, the evolution of man from the ape species. The idea that all life forms originated from a common ancestor has not scientific evidence to prove that this has actually taken place, other than the limited evolution of certain species for the purpose of adaptation.

The creatures, plants and organisms that exist on earth all follow a predetermined course for their existence that is fixed and unchangeable. Every animal appeared on earth fully formed as they now exist and only under certain rare circumstances has any animal or plant changed, slightly, for the purpose of adaptation, but never to create a completely new species outside their original species.

The Laws of Chemistry

In order for life to be possible there are very narrow and specific requirements that are necessary. The human body exists because of incredible chemical reactions that take place and are ordered by the laws of chemistry as they operate by a uniform process.

The information contained within the DNA of a human being is a digital instruction to each cell on how they must operate and which specific part of the body they will create.

There is a total of 150 Trillion Gigabytes of digital genetic data stored in the human body.[29]

There is no evolutionary or natural process that can create information. This is only possible by a mind or intelligence. The very existence of the cell with its advanced Mechanical operations require tremendous engineering prowess that knows how and why a machine, rotor, stators, and other vital elements of a simple cell are necessary for efficient operation. If any single part of a cell is missing because of the need for an evolutionary process, the cell would die and not have the opportunity to continue in an evolutionary process. The mere existence of the cell with all of its components present at the same time, with the digital instructions contained within DNA, make evolution impossible.

Irreducibly Complex Machines

Intelligent Design is a scientific theory that asserts that some aspects of life are best explained as a result of design. The strong appearance of design in life is real and not just apparent. Intelligent design is not based upon any religious belief system or convictions.

The design theory of creation is based upon observable, empirical, and physical evidence from nature and the logical inferences of this reality.

Design is the purposeful arangement of parts when we perceive that these parts have been aranged to fulfill a purpose. This existence of these elements of design being observed is what we call “design.”

A Biochemical example of design would be the compelling example of the bacterial Flagellum. The illustration below is from a college textbook that is used all over the world.


[30] Bacterial Flagellum

This Flagellum, is, by its purest definition, an outboard motor that is used by these bacteria to propel themselves. This tiny Flagellum contains machine parts that allow this propulsion to occur.

The top part of the flagellum is the propulsion device of the bacteria. The motor that turns the propulsion device is a rotary mechanism

When we see the parts of this flagellum we quickly realize that these parts exist and are ordered in such a way that they have a very specific purpose. This allows us to accurately define this flagellum as a mechanically designed apparatus. The ability to propel itself in virtually any direction is enabled by 40 different proteins. Amongst the parts of this flagellum are a motor, rings, a stator,

This kind of system where every part of the machine within this flagellum, must be present at the same time in order for the bacteria to have the capacity of propulsion. If any part were missing, the bacteria would not be able to move and would quickly die.

This type of machine is called an “Irreducibly Complex Device.” There are hundreds of these devices that we find in nature which make life possible. Take away any single part of these Irreducibly Complex machines at they cannot operate and the living device will die.

This means that none of these devices could have come into being by a contingent combination of parts over millions or billions of years. Every part of these devices needs to be in place at the same time or the device or organism would not function. This means that the idea of evolution for life is not possible. The most basic of all life is the cell and these cells contain parts that must all be present before they can exist. This means that these cells were created all at once, they did not evolve over time.

This bacterial flagellum closely resembles the same kind of machines that are built by human beings.

Unsuccessful Refutations

Attempts have been made to refute the irreducibly complex flagellum and its necessity of all the parts it contains, as necessary for its function, with a second similar device that is lacking a few proteins that do not permit it to have a rotor or the propulsion device. The refutation presented by this second device, although similar to the flagellum,  functions well without the rotor or propulsion device. The second device is a bacteria that injects its toxic virus into the host it intends. It has no need of a rotor or propulsion device so these parts are not present. Because both the flagellum and the virus devices are similar in their construction, with the exception of the rotor and propulsion, critics use this an example that the irreducibly complex flagellum is not evidence to impeach evolution.

This is an illogical comparison because the comparison because the flagellum and virus device are two different types of bacteria. Comparing the virus device to the flagellum does not eliminate the requirement for the flagellum to have all the parts of its device before it is able to function. The second device exists for a completely different purpose and does not need the rotor or propulsion mechanism.

This argument against the Bacterial Flagellum is a failure due to its inability to explain away the presence of many parts that are required, all at once, in order to make to flagellum able to propel itself. The argument against evolution stands, as irreducibly complex machines do exist in nature and could not have acquired all of the necessary components they need to function unless they all were created at once.

The Laws of Planetary Motion

Johannes Kepler, December 27, 1571 – November 15, 1630) was a German mathematician, and astronomer. Kepler is known primarily for his discovery of three mathematical laws of planetary motion, based on his works Astronomia nova, Harmonices Mundi, and Epitome of Copernican Astronomy. Kepler’s work supplied the foundation for Isaac Newton’s theory of universal gravitation.

During the period of history when Kepler discovered planetary motion, the sun and planets of our solar system were thought to circle the earth, refereed to as geocentricity. Kepler believed in Jesus Christ and the inerrancy of the Bible and sought to reconcile the Biblical descriptions of the universe with science.[30]

Kepler Discovered That Planets In Our Solar System Obey Three Laws

  1. Planets specifically orbit in ellipses but not perfect circles.
  2. Kepler discovered that planets sweep out equal areas in equal times, ie., planets speed up as they get closer to the sun within their orbit.
  3. Kepler discovered the exact mathematical relationship between a planet’s distance from the sun (a) and its orbital period (p). Planets farther from the sun take much longer to orbit than planets which are closer. This is expressed as p2=a3. Kepler’s laws also applies to the orbits of moons around a planet.

The laws of planetary motion are not fundamental, they are the logical derivation of other laws of nature. Isaac Newton discovered that Kepler’s laws could be derived mathematically from certain laws of physics, specifically, the laws of gravity and motion, which Newton had formulated.

Like Newton, Kepler concluded that the evidence presented by the universe and the manner in which it is ordered, spoke volumes of its source. There was no doubt to Kepler that God was the author of the universe, based upon the scientific evidence that was presented to us by observation and study of the Cosmos.

Kepler is famous for his many quotations of God and science and his earnest desire to show God’s masterful hand in the universe:

(Theologus esse volebam: diu angebar: Deus ecce mea opera etiam in astronomia celebratur.) “I wanted to become a theologian. For a long time I was restless. Now, however, behold how through my effort God is being celebrated in astronomy.”  — Johannes Kepler [31]
Based upon the evidence presented by the universe, the movements of the planets as they are held and regulated by gravity, that more than natural events were ordering these events.

I commence a sacred discourse, a most true hymn to God the Founder, and I judge it to be piety, not to sacrifice many hecatombs of bulls to Him and to burn incense of innumerable perfumes and cassia, but first to learn myself, and afterwards to teach others too, how great He is in wisdom, how great in power, and of what sort in goodness.[32]

Kepler also said:

Purposely I break off the dream and the very vast speculation, merely crying out with the royal Psalmist: Great is our Lord and great His virtue and of His wisdom there is no number: praise Him, ye heavens, praise Him, ye sun, moon, and planets, use every sense for perceiving, every tongue for declaring your Creator…to Him be praise, honour, and glory, world without end. Amen.[33]

The laws of Physics exist as all other laws, the creation of intelligence. These laws describe the fundamental behavior of the universe and allow man to comprehend what is seen.

These Laws Describe:

  • How light propagates
  • How energy is transported
  • How gravity operates,
  • How mass moves through space.

The laws of physics are usually mathematical in nature. A few of the laws of physics are described by a concise formula, such as E=mc2. The simple formula F=ma shows how an object with mass (m) will accelerate (a) when a net force (F) is applied.

Most incredible amongst the laws of Physics is that every object in the universe consistently obeys these rules.

The Hierarchy Within Physics:

Some of the laws within physics can be acquired from other laws of physics. For example, Einstein’s famous formula E=mc2 can be obtained from the principles and equations of special relativity. In the same way, there are many laws of physics that cannot be derived from other laws of physics.

Some laws of physics are fundamental  and not based upon other laws. These laws exist because God has determined they should.

The laws of physics and their associated constants are fine-tuned precisely so that human life is possible. This is referred to as the “anthropic principle.”

The Laws of Mathematics

Johannes Kepler in describing the reason for his study said:

“The chief aim of all investigations of the external world should be to discover the rational order which has been imposed on it by God, and which he revealed to us in the language of mathematics.” [33]

Describing mathematics as the ability to think God’s thoughts, Kepler and Galileo imagined that the Creator had given men their reason and intellect so that by mathematics he could understand what God had created.

Galileo believed in the God of the Bible, and never ventured from this firm believe. It was his thought that ‘the laws of nature are written by the hand of God in the language of mathematics’ and that the ‘human mind is a work of God and one of the most excellent’.

As we examine Newton’s theories for the universe we find that by mathematics our universe is intelligible. The very fact that the universe has a mathematical nature to begin with is quite extraordinary. That God created man with the ability to understand His universe by mathematics is one of the greatest proofs for God.

Scientists tend to ignore the usefulness of mathematics to distinguish the reality of God in their understanding of the universe because they have become so accustomed to its daily use. When we consider that the fundamental laws of the universe are mathematical and go no further to ask “why,” we miss the entire point of mathematics.

Did the planets orbit in a different manner before Kepler discovered that p2=a3? In this regard, mathematical laws are not something that human beings created, but have merely discovered. God created a universe that can be understood by mathematics as a tool to reveal Himself to us.

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes 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

Mathematics is the language of creation that most clearly proves to us that God must exist.

The Laws of Logic

God must certainly love intelligence and logic for the world He created is understood by those who seek God as the source of the universe because it is the most logical method to understand all that exists.

When men seek to understand the maginficence of the unvierse by natural processes he looks quite foolish. All of the scientific and mathematical qualites of the universe clearly reveal that the Cosmos exists as a result of the intelligent and infinate engineering prowess of a limitless Creator.

It has always perplexed me how men and women of great educational genius can deny the most obvious and stellar evidence that is constantly before them. Instead of following the intelligible evidence of creation to its logical end, they invent other universes which cannot be tested or observed; evolutionary theories that have no evidence to support, and extremely complicated ideas that do nothing more that confuse and cloud the clear evidence that God made all that exists.

The laws of Logic were certainly created by God to help us understand the evidence that we plainly see. If we use these laws rightly, we find that everything makes perfect sense when God is plugged into the equations at the start of every search for knowledge.

See The Chapter: “It’s Hard To Be An Atheist.”

Examples Of Logic In Conversations With Atheists:

Argument From Ignorance:

“You can’t prove that God exists, therefore God does not exist.”
“I have not seen any evidence to prove that God exists.”

The atheist mistakenly believes that God cannot exist because they do not have enough information to conclude that He does.

Error: This argument omits the fact that no person has seen all of the evidence that is available, therefore they could not conclusively state that God does not exist. At most, all that the atheists could say is: “I don’t know if God exists, for I do not have sufficient knowledge to make such a conclusion. There are also those who hold the position that God does not exist—not due to a lack of evidence, but strictly because they chose not to believe.

Fact: There is a stunning number of empirical proofs for the existence of God, more than adequate to meet the burden of proof set forth by the rules for the laws of evidence.

“In proceeding to weigh the evidence of any proposition of fact, the previous question to be determined is, when may it be said to be proved? The answer to this question is furnished by another rule of municipal law, which may be thus stated: A proposition of fact is proved, when its truth is established by competent and satisfactory evidence. By competent evidence is meant such as the nature of the thing to be proved requires; and by satisfactory evidence is meant that amount of proof, which ordinarily satisfies an unprejudiced mind, beyond any reasonable doubt. The circumstances which will amount to this degree of proof can never be previously defined; the only legal test to which they can be subjected is their sufficiency to satisfy the mind and conscience of a man of common prudence and discretion, and so to convince him, that he could venture to act upon that conviction in matters of the highest concern and importance to his own interest.”[34]

Argument From Silence:

“There is no proof that Jesus was a real person from history, from any historical documents–except the Bible.”

The atheists infers a conclusion based on silence from secular literature.

Error: Secular literature is not interested in the person of Jesus Christ, therefore there would be no good reason that they would mention Him or the things that He was reported to have said or done. The most reliable source for the true and accurate accounts of Jesus of Nazareth, the historical person, is the New Testament accounts, which were written specifically to validate Him as a genuine person from history.

To discount the New Testament as an unreliable source, is to take up again, the argument from ignorance. A person who is not trained in ancient Biblical literature, the original Greek scriptures, or early Christian church history, is not qualified to speak conclusively that the New Testament is not reliable. Those who have earned the title of “scholar” are better able to determine the validity and reliability of the New Testament. The conclusions of experts are: the New Testament is a true and accurate account of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Fact: The New Testament scriptures have greater documentation of authenticity than any known document of antiquity in the history of the world.

The documents of the New Testament have essentially come to us after 2,000 years, unchanged in all of the basic doctrines of the Christian faith. Specifically: Jesus as a real person of history, who lived, died, and rose from the dead. These 24,000 copies of the original documents were found in the custody of the Christian church and have been considered valid and authentic articles which represent the true events of the times in which they describe. Under the rules for what constitutes valid and reliable evidence, the New Testament passes every test and must be considered authentic facts of evidence, beyond any reasonable doubt.

“Every document, apparently ancient, coming from the proper repository or custody, and bearing on its face no evident marks of forgery, the law presumes to be genuine, and devolves on the opposing party the burden of proving it to be otherwise.”[34]

“An ancient document, offered in evidence in our courts, is said to come from the proper repository, when it is found in the place where, and under the care of persons with whom, such writings might naturally and reasonably be expected to be found; for it is this custody which gives authenticity to documents found within it. If they come from such a place, and bear no evident marks of forgery, the law presumes that they are genuine, and they are permitted to be read in evidence, unless the opposing party is able successfully to impeach them.”[35]

“In recent years, no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus or at any rate very few, and they have no succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.”[36]

“The composition of the various NT writings themselves took place starting in the late 40s and proceeded through the latter half of the first century. Subsequently, these books were copied and disseminated among the growing number of Christian congregations all over the Roman Empire, as is attested by the available manuscript evidence.”[37]

“It follows from these observations that most NT documents were recognized as authoritative, even Scripture, as early as at the end of the first or at least by the end of the second century of the Christian era.”[38]

See The Chapter: The Ease Of Proving God Exists From Empirical Evidence

Argument From Incredulity

Similar to Arguments from Ignorance, in this case, the atheist asserts that God cannot exist because this would require supernatural events which are unimaginable or scientifically impossible.

Error: Just because the atheists cannot imagine that God is possible, does not preclude His possibility. An person or event can be both incredible and hard to imagine, even seemingly impossible—while being absolutely true.

Argument From Self-Knowing

Essentially, the atheists states that God cannot exist, because if He did, the atheists would already know this as a fact.

Error: This statement is erroneous due to the fact that it relies on the premise that the atheists actually knows all facts regarding God, which he could not.

Arguments From The Absence Of Evidence

“There is no evidence for God, therefore God does not exist.”

Error: The fact is: this statement does not fully substantiate the certainty that there is no evidence for God, it only confirms that the atheists does not himself have any evidence for God.

The facts are, there is substantial evidence for God that any rationally thinking, and reasonable person could observe, and conclude that God must exist.

The Impossibility of convincing an atheists that God exists

When a person adamantly declares to you that there is no evidence for God, or that the idea of “a god” is a myth, it is best to leave that person to their unbelief.

It is better to spend your time on those who are still searching and those who are open to examine credible evidence for the existence of God.

In my experience, trying to argue with an atheists over the existence of God, is often a waste of time and it only serves to irritate them.

I have yet to understand why the atheists spends so much time searching out Christians on the internet, only to try and convince them at great length, that God does not exist. It seems odd to me that someone would try so hard to prove something—which they claim does not exist in the first place.

I believe that their insatiable desire to disprove God, by attacking the evidence of the those who claim that God does exist, is because they know in their heart that God is real. The atheist knows that God exists, because Romans chapter 1 is very clear: when God created us, He placed a knowledge of Himself within our heart.

“…because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. —Romans 1:19-21

In Hamlet by William Shakespeare; the Queen is speaking and she says: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

Have you ever spoke to a person who claimed to have no knowledge of a particular event or person, when you knew for certain that they did? This person will argue relentlessly with you that they don’t know what you are talking about—while it is clear by their aggressive denial that they do know.

The person who makes it a continual habit of arguing for the non existence of God, is likely one who actually does know that He exists, but is fighting against their own conscience.

I have discovered over the past 40 years in talking to people about Jesus, that the person who is the most vocal in their opposition to surrender their life to the Lord, is very often doing so because this is their last ditched effort to hold on to their unbelief.

Like a person who is drowning, they will fight the hardest to stay alive, in the final moments, just before they die. The atheists who is so vehemently apposed to your witness of God’s existence—is likely opposing you so vehemently—because his conscience tells him God exists.

The atheists who is adamantly questions and denies your facts and evidence for God, is just trying to hold on to the the last measure of their unbelief, before they give up. Their conscience bears witness to God every day of their life. Everything they see all around them in the world—screams that God exists, yet their stubborn will, does not bend.

Defeating your arguments—comforts their conscience

The only time the atheist finds any relief from the guilt they feel in denying God, is when they are able to defeat the objections and evidence of those who claim to believe. I have read the comments of those who argue with me relentlessly about God. Every time the conversation ends they consistently assert that they have won the argument and all my evidence is null and void.

The other day, I was discussing the existence of God with a young man near lunchtime. After about 15 minutes, I had managed to confound many of the arguments that he had, by staying on the evidence for God that exists from the universe. I asked him how the universe, which did not exist for an eternity past, suddenly came into existence—from nothing, for no reason, with no purpose, as atheistic scientists contend?

I asked him, “why does the universe exist at all, when for an eternity past, there was nothing?”

He told me, “I don’t know, and neither do you…” His answer was correct. The reality of this answer is: since scientists still don’t know how it happened, it is possible that it came about by an intelligence. It is far easier to believe that an intelligent being is responsible for the universe—than to assert that it all happened by accident.

It takes less faith to believe that a person made a car, than to claim that it came into existence all by itself—and the universe is immensely more complex than your car.

Scientists refer to the universe as a elegant machine that exists by a simple set of mathematical formulas, governed by physics. There is no example anywhere in the history of the world where a machine, which exists with technical parts which allow it to function—came into existence without an intelligent being causing it to exist.

Why then do some scientists state that the universe, which is immensely more technical than any machine on earth—came into existence by happenstance?

As my stomach began to growl and my wife asked me repeatedly when we were going to eat, I informed this young man that our conversation would have to end for the time being. I said good-bye and went on to eat my lunch. When I returned to the site where our last conversation had ended, this young man had made 7 subsequent posts after my closing remarks, each one concluding that he had won the argument, and all my points and evidence was overcome by his objections and logic.

In fact, he had done no such thing. This young man had not answered the most basic question: where did the universe come from, and why does it exist in its present form? Scientists concede that the universe that should have resulted from the initial expansion of gases, during the first picoseconds of the big bang, should have produced a much different universe from the one we observe today. This universe would not have developed second generation stars, which are required to produce carbon—necessary for human life.

Stephen Hawking describes the models that scientists have developed for a universe which began under the conditions that were present at the moment of the Big Bang:

“Why did the universe start out with so nearly the critical rate of expansion that separates models that recollapse from those that go on expanding forever, that even now, 10 thousand million years later, it is still expanding at nearly the critical rate? If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in 100 thousand million million, the universe would have recollapsed before it ever reached its present size.”[39]

When all of the evidence is scrutinized, there is no possibility that our universe came about without a transcendent intelligence, engineering which directed and controlled its development, over the past 13.7 billion years.

This young man, in order to suppress his conscience—while his heart speaks to him every day that God exists, had to defeat my evidence or no relief would be found. This may sound like an elementary or unprovable theory, but I have seen the very same scenario acted out by many, many young atheists in the past—precisely in the same way.

Regardless of the evidence presented, not a single one of those who claim their is no evidence for God—will ever stipulate that any evidence presented to them, is compelling. For this reason, we must conclude that their arguments are not from a difficulty with evidence, but a difficulty with their will.

Ignoring Evidence

The preeminent fact remains that in order to conclude that God does not exist, the atheist has to ignore the evidence from the scientific community, which presents compelling evidence that God is the source of the universe.

The stunning reality that Mathematicians and Physicists have discovered is : the universe displays clear characteristics of coming into existence at a singular moment, and was intricately controlled to exact a precise result—both characteristics that require design, engineering, and extreme control—by an intelligence of infinite power.

These are but a few of the arguments from logic that exist because God created laws of logic to help us sort out who He is and to understand His existence.

The Uniformity of Nature

The primary characteristic of nature’s laws are their self evident existence. It does not take a Ph.D to determine that something is not natural, or according to nature. All human beings are endowed by their Creator with the innate ability to observe and determine things which are contrary to nature.

Nature is uniform and never arbitrary. Exhibiting characteristics of order and design, exhibited throughout the universe, earth, and human life. We are able to see one common source for nature and that it exists by plan and purpose. Natural laws are like God, they never change. What was good and right, natural and orderly was true in ancient history as it is today. It is only man who sees fit to change the natural order of life and thereby cause his own calamity.

The natural order is extremely important to science. Without the uniformity of nature, science would be impossible. Had earth and the universe existed by constantly changing parameters, we would never be able to determine reliable results for the future.

The permanent and firm attributes of nature are not in existence by a natural process as in “Mother nature,” but as a result of careful planning and engineering of God. If nature existed by a natural process of evolution, then nature would constantly be changing and science could never establish a permanent basis for reliable results. We can trust the laws of nature because the God who created these laws is also trustworthy and does not change. He manages and orders the universe so that it is solid and sure, reliable, lasting for the benefit of all His creation.


GOD: His Physical Laws

[1]Archimedes’ in the third century estimated that 1×1063  grains of sand fit into the universe in “The Sand Reckoner” (Greek: Ψαμμίτης, Psammites).
[2] Davies, Paul. 1983. God and the New Physics. London, J M Dent & Sons
[3] 1. Hoyle, Fred. “The Universe: Some Past and Present Reflections.” Engineering and Science (1981): 12.
2. Polkinghorne, John. “The Anthropic Principle and the Science and Religion Debate (PDF).” Faraday Papers, no. 4 (2007).
[4] Principia, Book III; cited in; Newton’s Philosophy of Nature: Selections from his writings, p. 42, ed. H.S. Thayer, Hafner Library of Classics, NY, 1953.
[5] Flynn, David (2008-09-08). Temple At The Center Of Time: Newton’s Bible Codex Finally Deciphered and the Year 2012 (Kindle Locations 331-336). Defender Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition
[6] Webb, R.K. ed. Knud Haakonssen. “The emergence of Rational Dissent.” Enlightenment and Religion: Rational Dissent in eighteenth-century Britain. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 1996. p19
[7] Newton, 1706 Opticks (2nd Edition), quoted in H. G. Alexander 1956 (ed): The Leibniz-Clarke correspondence, University of Manchester Press
[8] H.W. Alexander 1956, p. xvii
[9] Newton to Bentley, 25 Feb 1693
[10] Principia, Book III; cited in; Newton’s Philosophy of Nature: Selections from his writings, p. 42, ed. H.S. Thayer, Hafner Library of Classics, NY, 1953.
[11] Roger Penrose, The Road to Reality, The Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe, New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 2005.
[12] Penrose, Roger (2011-09-06). Cycles of Time: An Extraordinary New View of the Universe (p. 77). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
[13} bid. page 122
[14} Ibid, page 123
[15] bid, page 127
[16] bid, page 143
[17] Allday, Jonathan (2001). Quarks, Leptons and the Big Bang. Institute of Physics Publishing. ISBN 0-7503-0806-0
[18] “The Inflationary Universe: the quest for a new Theory of Cosmic Origins, New York, Perseus Publishing, 1998
[19] Ibid.
[20] Particle emission rates from a black hole: Massless particles from an uncharged, nonrotating hole, Don N. Page, Physical Review D 13 (1976), pp. 198–206. doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.13.198. See in particular equation (27).
[21] 1. The Emperor’s New Mind, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1989 p. 344.
2. Lennox, John (2011-02-18). God’s Undertaker (p. 71). Lion Hudson. Kindle Edition.
[22] Allday, Jonathan (2001). Quarks, Leptons and the Big Bang. Institute of Physics Publishing. ISBN 0-7503-0806-0
[23] Davies, Paul. 1983. God and the New Physics. London, J M Dent & Sons
[24] Davies, Paul. Cosmic Jackpot: Why Our Universe Is Just Right for Life. Great Britain: The Penguin Press, 2006.
[25] 1. Hoyle, Fred. “The Universe: Some Past and Present Reflections.” Engineering and Science (1981): 12.
2. Polkinghorne, John. “The Anthropic Principle and the Science and Religion Debate (PDF).” Faraday Papers, no. 4 (2007).
[26] Davies, Paul. 1983. God and the New Physics. London, J M Dent & Sons
[27] Ibid.
[28} Ibid.
[29] a. Comparing the genome to computer data storage: In order to represent a DNA sequence on a computer, we need to be able to represent all 4 base pair possibilities in a binary format (0 and 1). These 0 and 1 bits are usually grouped together to form a larger unit, with the smallest being a “byte” that represents 8 bits. We can denote each base pair using a minimum of 2 bits, which yields 4 different bit combinations (00, 01, 10, and 11).  Each 2-bit combination would represent one DNA base pair.  A single byte (or 8 bits) can represent 4 DNA base pairs.  In order to represent the entire diploid human genome in terms of bytes, we can perform the following calculations: 6×10^9 base pairs/diploid genome x 1 byte/4 base pairs = 1.5×10^9 bytes or 1.5 Gigabytes, about 2 CDs worth of space! Or small enough to fit 3 separate genomes on a standard DVD!
b. Data storage across the whole organism: Some interesting question could follow. For example, how many megabytes of genetic data are stored in the human body? For simplicity’s sake, let’s ignore the microbiome (all non-human cells that live in our body), and focus only on the cells that make up our body. Estimates for the number of cells in the human body range between 10 trillion and 100 trillion. Let us take 100 trillion cells as the generally accepted estimate. So, given that each diploid cell contains 1.5 GB of data (this is very approximate, as I am only accounting for the diploid cells and ignoring the haploid sperm and egg cells in our body), the approximate amount of data stored in the human body is: 1.5 Gbytes x 100 trillion cells = 150 trillion Gbytes or 150×10^12 x 10^9 bytes = 150 Zettabytes (10^21)!!! Source: https://bitesizebio.com/8378/how-much-information-is-stored-in-the-human-genome/
[30] This illustration has been released into the public domain by its author, LadyofHats. This applies worldwide.
[31] Kepler’s Mysterium Cosmographicum (The Cosmographic Mystery, the first published defense of the Copernican system) is devoted to reconciling heliocentrism with biblical passages that seem to support geocentrism.
[32] Letter to Michael Maestlin (3 Oct 1595). Johannes Kepler Gesammelte Werke (1937- ), Vol. 13, letter 23, l. 256-7, p. 40. As translated in Owen Gingerich, ‘Johannes Kepler’ article in Charles Coulston Gillespie (ed.) Dictionary of Scientific Biography(1973), Vol. 7, 291. Also seen translated as “I wanted to become a theologian; for a long time I was unhappy. Now, behold, God is praised by my work even in astronomy.”
[33] “Epilogue Concerning the Sun, By Way of Conjecture,” ibid.
[32] Morris Kline, Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty, (Oxford University Press, New York, 1980, p. 31.
[34] The Testimony of the Evangelists: The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence Administered in Courts of Justice by Simon Greenleaf. Chapter : “An examination of the testimony of the Evangelists”. Published by Kregel Classics, a division of Kregel, Inc., P.O. Box 2607, Grand Rapids, MI 49501. ISBN 0-8254-2747-9
[35] Ibid, Simon Greenleaf.
[36] Jesus: An Historian’s Review of the Gospels by Micjhael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200
[37] Ibid, Locations 464-467
[38] Ibid, Locations 532-534
[39] Stephen Hawking, A Brief History, Page 138.

%d bloggers like this: