how does the creation declare a creator?
Mankind has struggled for ages with the source and purpose of the things in the cosmos. So how can we know? We MUST use all our facilities available, if we want to get a complete answer. We can observe the evidence that surrounds us, actually considering the creation itself utilizing our (physical) senses to study. To that we must add our innate and metaphysical abilities (reasoning, logic, instinct, and desire) to separate the facts from the rhetoric and see what survives the inquiry and provides the most likely and complete answer.
We must consider the origin of the creation with our pre-supposed ideas exposed. If we don't want to believe in God, we will look for ways to answer our questions without including the possibility of a God. If we believe we must only use our physical senses, we will get an incomplete answers as well. But a careful analysis some of the 'physical only' theories will show gaping holes, big enough that to believe in them actually requires more faith than simply believing in a Creator!
Now if one considers
that there could be a Creator, we could easily expect Him to display
evidence for Himself, and information about Him within His
creation. In fact, it would be the most obvious fact of His existence,
wouldn't it! For how could there be a creation without a
creator? God in fact has described to us that this is precisely
what He has done:
"For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – His eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse." Romans 1:20
So lets take a cursory look at all the 'answers' provided to us, and determine which one makes more sense...
Can Science Provide The Answer?
steps in and attempts to describe where the universe came from with
theories based upon natural perspectives. These theories are just that
– theories – and by definition center only on things that ‘are
natural,’ not things that may be super-natural (or metaphysical.)
Science, then, has no ability or authority in explaining the
supernatural, and therefore MUST only speak of natural items.
Anything beyond the natural is outside the scope of their explanation,
although sometimes it does attempt them. This naturally
prejudices science against the confirmation of a Creator...so all the
answers science proclaim must be carefully considered, with this in
mind. The end result is, that while ignoring the supernatural,
science avoids the questions of creation, or worse, in apparently
desperate attempts to explain creation without the possibility of a
Creator, comes up with ideas like self-creating universes, or random
chance producing order, or life coming from non-life.
Science does however provide us with a glimpse of how the creation was put together, and in fact provide evidence of design, not random chance (random chance being the only alternative to a creation created by God.) This means that science, as the means of pursuit of truth, is a good thing. It is only when science limits the possibilities to be considered, that it is un-trustworthy. In fact, when this limiting position is taken to an extreme, it becomes what some consider a religion in and of itself! (Naturalism is the belief that all that exists is nature - nothing super-natural could exist - a very dogmatic statement!. Naturalism uses the limited scope of this 'prejudicial science' - sometimes called Scientism - to 'prove' its theories.)
Can Christianity Provide The Answer?
few of the world religions have their own creation story, and all of
them (except Christianity / Judaism / Islam - which incidentally all
developed from a single view of a Creator) center around a natural
development and evolution theory that just cannot hold water (we’ll get
into that later!) So in effect, only two options exist for the
creation of the universe - either it emerged on its own out of nothing
(Naturalism), or via a Creator (as described by Christianity.)
Therefore intuitively, a Creator could be 'proven philosophically' by using positive proofs (necessarily philosophical, due to the super-natural nature of God,) or by disproving (scientifically OR philosophically) the Naturalistic position. We have already considered several philosophical arguments for the existence of a Creator. And further below on this page, we will expose the inadequacy of the Naturalistic models of creation. We will distinguish the Creator's intentions, via Christ, Muhammad, or another prophet later. But for now, we can be assured that the Christian faith provides both scientific and philosophical answers for a Creator.