If you ever get lost in an island which is totally unknown to you, what would make you believe that there is human existence in that island from before? If you find a house with decorated furniture, ready food to eat and water to drink, will it not be enough for you to believe in pre-human existence there? Or are you not going to believe unless you capture humans there with your own eyes? What do you think, which one is the more rational approach between these two?
Obviously, it is not always mandatory for us to see and touch something to believe in that something’s existence. Otherwise, it would be impossible for us to prove the existence of our own great-great-grandmother, wouldn’t it? A similar approach is adopted when a believer believes in his Creator, Sustainer and Protector – ‘Allah’ the most merciful, most beneficent. And the foundation of this belief is based upon the signs of intellectual creations and the power of that Creator.
Just think – how much planning does it take to design a monumental building for an architect? How much intelligence does it cost of an engineer in designing an algorithm and program to develop a robot? The universe is infinitely more composite than any architectural structure, and a human is unquestionably a more complex and organized creation than a man-made robot. Astonishing is the harmonization between them. Contemplate how irrational it would be to enunciate the creation of the universe and humankind as a random accident.
It amuses me that some people are satisfied with believing the ‘Big Bang’ and ‘Evolution’ to be the only reasons for the existence of life and the universe. But in the scale of rationality, these within themselves cannot be the sole causes behind our existence. The reasons are crystal clear. If every creation – matters and natural systems – in our surroundings is observed insightfully, we realize that each of them is well organized, has some fixed properties and characteristics, and is governed by some fundamental laws. Have you ever thought about why the velocity of light is fixed to be 3 x 10^8 m/s, why the earth takes just 365.242 days for a single revolution around the sun, or why the value of the gravitational acceleration on earth ‘G’ is approximately 9.8 m/s^2? What would happen if these values were much higher or much lower? What would happen if the centrifugal force of the earth were a hundred times greater than its centripetal force? We would all be kicked off from the earth’s surface in an instant and be lost in space, wouldn’t we?
The electrical resistivity of Copper is fixed at 1.72 x 10^-8 Ohm-m, Silicon at 2300 Ohm-m and for insulators, the range is over 10^8 Ohm-m. But what is amazing is when they are interfaced into a single computer, together they serve their purposes perfectly. What would happen if there were no conducting materials on the earth?
Think about Newton’s laws of motion and gravity; did he set these rules into nature or just discover these fundamental laws set by Someone super-intellectual and supra-natural? I still remember one of my favorite Nobel laureates, physicist Richard Feynman, who was a self-proclaimed agnostic, pronounce repeatedly in his lectures the phrase ‘the laws of physics’; so did Stephen Hawking in his Time Travel television programs. In the holy Quran, Allah certifies this saying,
“Who has created, and further, given the order and proportion. Who has ordained laws, and granted guidance.” [Surah A’la : 2-3]
Again, “Who has created, proportioned, and balanced.” (Surah Infitar : 7) As a person of faith I don’t have any problem with postulates like ‘Big Bang’ or ‘Evolution’ unless they directly contradict with Quranic concepts. But as a rational person I strongly believe they must have happened under the supreme control of a super-intelligent and super- powerful Being. The incredibly organized patterns and perfectly purposeful objects and systems that make up the universe could not have been created from randomness. How irrational would it be to accept the existence of laws but deny the existence of the law-maker?
