Follow the Evidence Wherever It Leads

Alcibades being taught by Socrates (François-André Vincent)

By Chris and the Editorial Staff
Updated 8/23/2024

In the summer of 2023, a good friend from my high school days summed up his view of religion as follows: As science becomes increasingly powerful in its ability to explain nature, the world relies less and less on religion to explain the unknown.

My friend’s argument is a common one, echoed by prominent atheist Richard Dawkins in his book The God Delusion:

If an apparent gap is found, it is assumed that God, by default, must fill it… gaps shrink as science advances, and God is threatened with eventually having nothing to do and nowhere to hide.

The implication is clear: The existence of this “God of the gaps” is becoming increasingly unnecessary and unlikely over time.

Meanwhile, Dr. Karin Öberg, a professor of astronomy at Harvard University who converted from atheism to Catholicism in adulthood (as I did), declared in an interview:

The world that we know today… is much more suggestive of a creator than, I think, the universe that people thought they were living in 100 years ago.

Who’s right? As Socrates said, let’s follow the evidence wherever it leads.

Harvard Professor Karin Öberg, whose research on astrochemistry has been cited >11,000 times,
converted to Catholicism in adulthood

Origins of the Universe

The Appeal of an Infinite Past

Secular scientists used to take it for granted that the universe had no beginning. Stephen Hawking pointed out in his book A Brief History of Time:

Many people do not like the idea that time has a beginning, probably because it smacks of divine intervention.


John Maddox, a former editor of Nature, stated in a 1989 editorial that the Big Bang is “philosophically unacceptable” because it gives people “ample justification” for their religious beliefs and predicted that “it is unlikely to survive the decade ahead.” The steady-state theory, which states that the universe had no beginning or end, was proposed in 1948 as an alternative to the Big Bang theory. As a proponent of the steady-state theory, American theoretical physicist and Nobel laureate in physics Steven Weinberg said:

The steady-state theory is philosophically the most attractive theory because it least resembles the account given in Genesis.

Ab Initio Temporis

In contrast, physicist Dr. Stephen Barr notes the following in his book Modern Physics and Ancient Faith:

Jews and Christians believe that the universe had a beginning in time… they think that this has been explicitly revealed by God in the first words of Genesis: “In the beginning, …” … In the year 1215, the Fourth Lateran Council declared that it was a matter of Christian faith that the world was created by God “ab initio temporis,” i.e., “from the beginning of time.” (Barr p. 34)

In 1929, Edwin Hubble’s work on the movement of galaxies formed the first observational basis for the expansion of the universe, which in turn suggested that the universe had a beginning. Father Georges Lemaître, a Belgian priest and MIT-trained theoretical physicist, proposed the Big Bang theory in 1931, which stated that the universe originated from a primeval atom when space and time came into existence. Initially, Albert Einstein told Fr. Lemaître: “Vos calculs sont corrects, mais votre physique est abominable. (Your calculations are correct, but your physics is abominable).” Einstein later admitted that he was wrong.

In 1965, radio astronomers Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson of Bell Labs detected cosmic background radiation that supported the Big Bang, which is universally accepted today. Penzias, who shared the 1978 Nobel Prize in Physics with Wilson, remarked:

The best data we have [concerning the Big Bang] are exactly what I would have predicted, had I nothing to go on but the five Books of Moses, the Psalms, the Bible as a whole.

…

In summary, therefore, we find a universe which was created out of nothing, one which is in very delicate balance to provide exactly the conditions needed to provide for life, and thirdly, one which has an underlying, one might say supernatural, plan.

Fr. Georges Lemaître (middle), who proposed the Big Bang, stands between Albert Einstein and Robert Millikan at the Caltech Faculty Club, Pasadena in 1933.

Credit: Bettmann / Getty Images

A Fine-Tuned Universe

Aside from the pivotal finding that the universe had a definite beginning, modern cosmology has produced another surprising observation: The universe is fine-tuned for life. In 1999, British Astronomer Royal Martin Rees published a book Just Six Numbers, which describes fundamental quantities in physics that determine everything from the size and shape of galaxies to the possibilities for life on Earth, such that if any of these numbers were even slightly different, the universe as we know it wouldn’t exist. The 2020 Nobel Laureate in Physics Sir Roger Penrose argued that the universe began in a state of extraordinarily low entropy, requiring fine-tuning to an accuracy of 1 in 10 to the 10 to the 123.

Stephen Hawking in his book The Grand Design acknowledges:

Our universe and its laws appear to have a design that both is tailor-made to support us and, if we are to exist, leaves little room for alteration. That is not easily explained and raises the natural question of why it is that way.

Anthropic Principle

One common response to the fine-tuning problem is the anthropic principle, which states that we shouldn’t be surprised to find ourselves in a universe that allows for our existence since we wouldn’t be around to observe a universe that wasn’t conducive to our existence.

Philosopher John Leslie counters this with the following analogy, retold by Dr. Francis Collins (former head of the Human Genome Project and the National Institutes of Health): 

In this parable, an individual faces a firing squad, and fifty expert marksmen aim their rifles to carry out the deed. The order is given, the shots ring out, and yet somehow all the bullets miss and the condemned individual walks away unscathed.

How could such a remarkable event be explained? Leslie suggests that there are two possible alternatives ... In the first place, there may have been thousands of executions being carried out in that same day, and even the best marksman will occasionally miss. So the odds just happen to be in favor of this one individual, and all fifty of the marksmen fail to hit the target. The other option is that something more directed is going on, and the apparent poor aim of the fifty experts was actually intentional. Which seems more plausible? (Collins p. 77)

While the anthropic principle points out that there is a limited range of outcomes that can be observed in a universe that has the characteristics to support intelligent life, it is an unsatisfying answer to how our fine-tuned universe came to be despite the infinitesimal odds. If something unlikely happens, whether it’s 50 marksmen all missing their target or the far more improbable existence of our universe, it’s reasonable to look for a reason why. 

Multiverse Theory

Stephen Hawking proposed one solution: Our universe is just one among a potentially infinite number of universes, each with different physical constants. While this multiverse theory could explain the existence of our universe, it suffers from a lack of evidence. Sir Penrose, the aforementioned Nobel laureate who collaborated extensively with Hawking, said the following about Hawking’s use of the multiverse theory and the related M-Theory in The Grand Design:

It’s overused, and this is a place where it is overused. It’s an excuse for not having a good theory.

…

The book is a bit misleading. It gives you this impression of a theory that is going to explain everything; it’s nothing of the sort. It’s not even a theory.

Shortly before he passed away, Hawking acknowledged the following in his 2018 paper A Smooth Exit from Eternal Inflation?:

We are not down to a single, unique universe, but our findings imply a significant reduction of the multiverse, to a much smaller range of possible universes.

Referring to this paper, British author and professor Philip Goff wrote in the Guardian:

The problem is that the less variety there is among the universes, the less capable the multiverse hypothesis is of explaining fine-tuning. If there is a huge amount of variation in the laws across the multiverse, it is not so surprising that one of the universes would happen to have fine-tuned laws. But if all of the universes have exactly the same laws—as in Hawking and Hertog’s proposal—the problem returns, as we now need an explanation of why the single set of laws that govern the entire multiverse is fine-tuned. 

…

There is still hope for a scientific account of fine-tuning. However, by ruling out one of the two scientifically credible options for doing this, Hawking and Hertog have slightly strengthened the alternative explanation in terms of God. It is ironic that the atheist Hawking should, in his final contribution to the science, make God’s existence less improbable.

The Universe Is Like a Garden

So we live in a universe that has a beginning and is fine-tuned for life.

But Richard Dawkins protests in The God Delusion:

Isn’t it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?

Oxford mathematician Dr. John Lennox responds,

But when he sees the beauty of a garden, does Dawkins really believe that there is no gardener?... I find it incomprehensible and rather sad that he presents us with such an obviously false set of alternatives: the garden on its own, or the garden plus fairies. Real gardens do not produce themselves: they have gardeners and owners. Similarly with the universe: it did not generate itself. It has a creator—and an owner. (Lennox #2 p. 230)

Just Six Numbers by Lord Martin Rees—a British cosmologist, Astronomer Royal, and former President of the Royal Society (the UK’s academy of the sciences).

The Resurrection of Christ

Dr. Lennox highlights the likelihood of a creator and owner of our universe. What do recent data say about Christianity in particular?

Our article on the Resurrection shows that Jesus Christ, whose existence and crucifixion are historically attested by non-Christian sources, gained followers who witnessed and interacted with his risen form and willingly faced martyrdom after recording their testimony in the Gospels. Christ’s tomb was empty, and his body was never found. Alternative theories, such as the stolen body hypothesis or the hallucination hypothesis, do not explain the constellation of evidence in favor of the resurrection.

The strength of all these arguments ultimately hinges on the historical reliability of the Gospels, and research over the past century has solidified the accuracy of these testimonies. For example, scholars used to doubt the credibility of Luke, one of the authors of the Gospel, because his testimony contained surprising details about the ancient Roman Empire during the early first century. But these details were later confirmed by archaeological evidence, including findings that support the existence of Nazareth during the time of Christ, ancient synagogues, and the usage of terms that had previously been thought to be incorrect.

© The Trustees of the British Museum.

An inscription from Thessaloniki, Greece preserved at the British Museum in London, showing that Luke was correct in his use of the term “politarchs” for city officials in Thessalonica.

The Divinity of the Eucharist

But even considering the modern supporting evidence for the historical reliability of the Bible, the miracles in question occurred 2000 years ago. What do more recent events say about Christianity?

Before his own road to crucifixion, Christ told his followers during the Last Supper that the bread and wine were his body and blood, driving home the point that he was the sacrificial lamb in a new Passover.

While the transubstantiation of the bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood is normally invisible, our article on Eucharistic miracles describes five instances where the substances physically transformed into human heart muscle and blood. These phenomena were studied by reputable forensic scientists, universities, and independent labs in Poland, Italy, Mexico, and the US in the last several decades. The article provides 1) excerpts from and links to lab reports, including detailed analyses and microscope imagery; 2) interviews with the scientists involved; and 3) other materials for your own exploration, including contact information for the living scientists and the Google Maps locations where you can see the Eucharistic objects in person.

These scientific analyses of the Eucharistic miracles don’t constitute a standalone proof of God—after all, the documentation has not been formally published in peer-reviewed scientific journals. This is not surprising because of the lack of formal chain of custody (these events occurred spontaneously in church parishes) and the general unwillingness of many academic institutions to participate in the studies. However, they do show how reputable scientists studying these transformations across decades used a variety of scientific tools to confirm that what they were seeing was truly heart tissue and blood.

One of the Eucharistic phenomena  in Legnica, Poland, determined to be human cardiac flesh by Pomeranian Medical University (Poland) in 2013.

Apparitions of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Beyond the Eucharistic miracles, what other events shed light on the reality of Christianity?

While Christ was dying on the cross, he told a disciple in the presence of Mary, the mother of Jesus, “Behold, your mother,” suggesting that Mary is the protective mother of mankind. Countless apparitions where Mary has appeared to people throughout the centuries have provided a recurring reminder of this motherhood along with warnings for people to amend their lives and follow the Gospel.

Our article on Our Lady of Fátima explains one such example, where the Virgin Mary appeared to three shepherd children, communicated messages urging prayer and sacrifice, and promised a miracle so that “all will believe,” indicating the day, hour, and location in advance. As the article demonstrates, the Miracle of the Sun was witnessed and attested by many spectators, including atheists and anti-Catholic journalists. Dramatic healings occurred afterward, attested by many doctors across Portugal.

Three Portuguese children saw the Blessed Virgin Mary at Fátima, who announced months in advance a miracle witnessed by ~70,000 spectators.

The Devil and Exorcisms

Even among believers, it can feel jarring to accept the Christian belief of the Devil, which has been endlessly dramatized in Hollywood and thus feels like a horror gimmick. If the Devil exists today and can even possess humans as described in Scripture, then surely we can find actual recent testimony about demonic possessions?

In the Gospels, Christ performed many exorcisms and empowered his disciples to drive out demons in his name. Officially appointed exorcists in the Catholic Church have performed countless exorcisms over the millennia.

Our article on exorcisms compiles witness testimony from named exorcists and non-exorcists (including a Princeton/Yale/Columbia-trained psychiatrist who performs psychiatric evaluations) that universally attest to the supernatural character of the diagnosed demonic possessions. I spoke with several of these witnesses in early 2024 and compiled their testimony in the article. The described phenomena include secret knowledge, aversion to sacred objects (even in blind tests), and superhuman strength.

Following the Evidence

Before the advent of science, only religion or mythology provided common explanations for how the world came to be. In recent times, scientific and technological advancements have provided new explanations that my high school friend finds sufficient. 

But the truth is our expanding knowledge has also brought a deeper understanding of what we still don’t know. With this knowledge, we’ve come to appreciate that our universe is fine-tuned for life to an infinitesimally improbable degree, but science has not been able to offer us the reason why. Astronomical observations support a Big Bang, first postulated by a Catholic priest, but what—or who—created the Big Bang? 

New scientific tools have also deepened our ability to examine religious events more closely. Rather than endangering our conception of God, these tools have uncovered abundant evidence to bolster a rational belief in Christianity in the modern age. Recent archaeological findings support the reliability of the Bible and the resurrection of Christ. Advances in recent decades allow us to scrutinize potential miracles in microscopic detail. Now a scientist can examine a specimen from a Eucharistic miracle over a thousand years old and use immunochemical testing to confirm that the tissue is human heart and blood. Transmission electron microscopy can confirm the presence of heart muscle intricately intertwined with a Communion wafer.

Beyond these scientific tools, events such as the Miracle of the Sun just over a hundred years ago are especially compelling when they are witnessed by tens of thousands of spectators, including numerous skeptics who confirmed the extraordinary phenomena that day. No scientific explanation has provided a satisfactory naturalistic answer for this event. It seems unlikely that we will ever close all the gaps in our knowledge with science alone when new gaps keep appearing. As Harvard astrochemist Dr. Öberg said, what we know of the world today is even more suggestive of a creator than it was in the past.

The Ultimate Test

While all this evidence leads us closer to affirming the existence of God, we will probably never find absolute proof for the existence of God that will convince everyone beyond any doubt. The only way to gain full certainty in the truth of Christianity is to live out a devout Christian life and experience all the graces that come from it.

Dr. Lennox writes in Can Science Explain Everything?:

Christianity is also eminently testable at the personal level. If it were not, I, for one, would just not be interested in it. How can we test it? Think of what Jesus promises to those who repent of their sin and trust him for salvation—peace with God, forgiveness, a new life with new powers and desires and opportunities, new fellowship and friendship with God, a deep love for a new community of Christians, new avenues of service, and potential for human flourishing, as well as resources to cope with life’s pain and suffering—all of it flooding life with new meaning. (Lennox #1 p. 122)


Indeed, this new meaning comes from following a God of love, humility, mercy, and justice—not any “God of the gaps” whose sole purpose is to explain away the unknown.

One can also gain confidence in the truth of Christianity vicariously through the testimony of devout believers, including highly intelligent and accomplished individuals who are living witnesses to the rationality and intellectual robustness of the faith.

Richard Dawkins claims in The God Delusion:

The nineteenth century is the last time when it was possible for an educated person to admit to believing in miracles like the virgin birth without embarrassment. When pressed, many educated Christians today are too loyal to deny the virgin birth and the resurrection. But it embarrasses them because their rational minds know it is absurd, so they would much rather not be asked.

As a practicing 21st century Christian, I unabashedly believe in these so-called “absurd” teachings. So does Professor Karin Öberg. And so do countless other scientists, mathematicians, and other rational human beings who are not afraid of openly sharing their faith.

Karin Öberg:

When I walked into a Catholic church and went to Mass for the first time after I moved back to Cambridge, Massachusetts, it was an incredible sense of homecoming, which really reminded me of what I had been reading in Chesterton—the sense of adventure and homecoming all at once. I think that was ultimately what cemented it, that combination of intellectual conversion through reading Chesterton and others with that very strong sense of peace and homecoming when I actually did go into a Catholic church.

John B. Goodenough, winner of the 2019 Nobel Prize in Chemistry and developer of the lithium-ion battery:

The resurrection of Jesus, which transformed completely the thought and the lives of those who witnessed it, testified for me that the Holy Spirit that searches an open heart has the power and the love to free us from conformity and transform us by the renewing of our mind.

Evan O’Dorney, two-time gold and silver medalist at the International Mathematical Olympiad, Intel Science Talent Search winner, and Harvard AB and Princeton PhD in math:

It’s a joy to have faith and also to do my research. It’s never guaranteed that there will be people [studying mathematics] for the glory of God, and I think that’s what really sustains it, and I hope I do my part to keep it alive.

Donald Knuth, winner of the 1974 Association for Computing Machinery Turing Award and pioneer of the analysis of algorithms:

My faith has been a source of inspiration because I believe God is pleased when people create innovations that make our world ever better.

William C. Campbell, winner of the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine and discoverer of ivermectin, a drug which treats parasitic diseases:

I believe, and I believe in prayer.

Evan O’Dorney, a practicing Catholic and Harvard/Princeton grad, has dominated the International Mathematical Olympiad, Putnam, and Intel Science Talent Search.