This topic was touched on briefly during the last post; this is the fourth argument in the series for the existence of God—the Fine-Tuning argument. This argument states that the parameters which allow the universe to exist and sustain existence, also allowing for life to exist, implies a Designer, Who set the conditions in place. One form of the argument is as follows:
- The fine-tuning of the universe for intelligent life is due either to physical necessity, chance, or design.
- It is not due to physical necessity or chance.
- Therefore, it is due to design.[1]
One can look at the Bible and see evidential claims to support God as the Designer of the universe (Gen 1:1, John 1:1-3, Col 1:16-17).
Let us look at the possible explanations for the fine-tuning of the universe posited in premise #1. Physical necessity, chance, or design are the three possible causes for the universe being as it is. As we think through these possibilities, using logic and reasoning, one will stand out as more probable than the other two. (Yes, I’m biased, however that is with justification as you will see below).
Physical necessity—this is highly problematic from the start. In order for there to be physical necessity regarding the physical laws which govern the universe, there must first be physical matter. The laws cannot pre-exist the physical matter to which they apply and manage. Additionally, physical matter cannot pre-exist the physical laws which govern said matter. These two elements must come into existence at the same moment in time. Another problem, since Big Bang cosmology states that time, space, and matter came into existence, there must be a beginning for time, space, and matter (and the laws which govern them). This implies that before the Big Bang (when everything in the universe came into existence), there was no time, space, or matter. Where did it all come from? How does nothing (literally “no thing”) give rise to everything in the universe?
Chance—this is a term used to express probability amidst high odds or extreme difficulty. “Chance” only exists as an immaterial concept; it is not a force or physical law which operates within the universe. In high school and college, never have I been taught the ‘law of chance’ among other physical laws. “Chance” is a term we hear in gambling. The odds overwhelmingly favor the house. It is about 99.99% guaranteed that money bet will go to the casino. That 0.01% possibility that the individual gambler may win is called “chance.”
Another illustration, sticking with the idea of gambling: think of 5-card draw poker—52 cards in a deck and you are dealt 5 of them. “We use the formula for combinations and see that there are a total number of C( 52, 5 ) = 2,598,960 possible distinct hands… The probability of being dealt a royal flush is the number of royal flushes divided by the total number of poker hands. We now carry out the division and see that a royal flush is rare indeed. There is only a probability of 4/2,598,960 = 1/649,740 = 0.00015% of being dealt this hand.[2]” So, just under 2.6 million possible hands to be dealt, and the highest hand has about a 1-in-650K possibility of being dealt. Not impossible odds, just highly improbable, but it does happen from time to time. What if a person were dealt 2 royal flushes in a row? Would you believe that “chance” favored the person OR would you be inclined to be suspicious of cheating? How about 3-in-a-row? 4? 5? At 2 royal flushes back to back, almost all of us would think something illicit is going on, and we would be justified in thinking so. I have spent some time tying to find a source to cite (and when I find it I will make the necessary update to this post); on several different apologetic podcasts I’ve listened to over the years, I have heard it related to the fine-tuning of the universe (or possibly the exactness of the coding of DNA) that the probability of such things arising by “chance” (absent a Designer) is equivalent to being dealt 12 royal flushes in a row.
What we are left with is the possibility of a Designer as the reason for the universe to be fine-tuned. What follows is not a God-of-the-gaps argument. Such arguments come from a lack of knowledge or understanding when someone plugs “God” into that lack of explanation. Rather, this is an argument from what we do know and observe in the world around us.
- Laws come from law givers—speed limit signs did not evolve along the side of the road because cars came into existence. Rules against drunk driving and penalties associated with violating those laws did not mysteriously come into existence. The US Constitution is not the result of an ink bottle exploding on a piece of parchment paper. In each of these situations, an individual (or group of individuals) set out to establish a controlled means to preserve human life and freedom (even in instances where freedoms may be restricted to an extent). Likewise, the laws of physics and chemistry, which govern the universe and everything contained therein, most reasonably resulted from a Law giver, Who is powerful and intelligent enough to set them in place and sustain them.
- DNA is referred to as a code. Code comes from coders. Language comes from minds. If you were walking along a beach and saw a white wooden sign with red letters saying, “Danger, shark infested waters!” would you think some physical forces such as wind and erosion acting on a tree gave rise to the sign? How about a grouping of rocks which spelled out the message, “Danger, shark infested waters?” Would you imagine years and years of waves crashing on the shore arranged the rocks in such an array? No, you reasonably cannot claim you would. Why? Because those illustrations contain a message, in a language that people can understand, and languages are mental concepts among intelligent beings.
- Design (or the appearance of design as argued by Richard Dawkins) implies a Designer. No one can reasonably argue that a pile of sand, iron ore, water, glue, and time caused a building to grow / evolve from the pile. Likewise, where we see design, our intuition is to look for a designer. A tornado blowing through a junkyard is not where the first Model T Ford came from. If you find an iPhone off a path through a forest, you will not reason that it is a new form of seed or fruit that fell from a tree (even though there is an apple logo on the back—opportunity for a dad joke and I took it). Sorry-not-sorry!
The bottom line is we tend to reason to the simplest explanation. You came across this blog post and read what it says. In your reading, I highly doubt you thought this was a random assembling of letters into a coherent argument for the fine-tuning of the universe. You may be wondering about the mind behind these thoughts. That illustrates we reason a designer when we see design, almost as a default position. That is because we were formed and fashioned by the Greatest Designer there is!
~In Christ!
[1] The Fine-Tuning Argument for God’s Existence – Christian Truth is needed through Apologetics (christiantruththroughapologetics.com)
[2] What Are the Odds of Getting a Royal Flush in Poker? (thoughtco.com)
Way Truth Life Apologetics 
Leave a comment