Psalms 104:4

Psalms 104:4

In the present day a large number of scientific men maintain that the appearance of design in nature is an appearance only, not a reality. This view is supposed to be established in two ways: first, by the general doctrine of the universal reign of law; and secondly, by the particular theory of evolution.

I. Look, first, at the argument drawn from the universality of law. Law is a very misleading word. Law only means invariable sequence. You will sometimes hear it said, the universe is governed by laws. The universe is not governed by laws. It is governed according to laws, but no one can suppose that the laws make themselves; no one can imagine, for example, that water determines of its own accord always to freeze at one temperature and to boil at another, that snowflakes make up their minds to assume certain definite and regular shapes, or that fire burns of malice aforethought. The sequences of nature do not explain themselves. The regularity of nature, then, needs to be explained. It cannot explain itself, nor can it disprove the existence of a controlling will. The only reign of law incompatible with volition would be the reign of the law of chaos.

II. Look at the bearing of the theory of evolution upon theology. We will suppose, for argument's sake, that even in its most comprehensive shape the doctrine has been proved true; what is the effect upon our theology? Why, simply that a certain mode of statement of a certain argument of Paley's is seen to be unsound. And this unsoundness has been already recognised on other grounds. Paley maintained that every definite organ and portion of an organ throughout the world is specially, by a particular creative fiat, adapted to a certain end, just as every portion of a watch implies a special contrivance on the part of the watchmaker. But this, as every one now knows, is completely disproved by the existence in most animals of rudimentary and abortive organs, which are evidently not adapted to any end, as, for example, the rudiments of fingers in a horse's hoof, the teeth in a whale's mouth, or the eyes in an unborn mole. But though we no longer profess to trace Divine design in every minute fraction of an organism, this does not hinder us from seeing it in organisms regarded in their entirety and in nature considered as a whole.

The doctrine of the survival of the fittest does not account for the fact that there are fittest to survive. Evolution does not disprove a Designer; it only proves that He works in a different way from what had been supposed. There is no reason why things may not be made for their circumstances, though they are partly made by them. The fact that natural forces work together regularly and methodically does not prove that they have no master; it suggests rather His absolute control. The eternal evolution of the more desirable from the less cannot be logically accounted for except on the ground that it is effected by infinite power, and wisdom, and skill.

A. W. Momerie, The Origin of Evil, and Other Sermons, p. 271.

References: Psalms 104:4 . J. J. S. Perowne, Expositor, 1st series, vol. viii., p. 461.