A NASA-snapped photograph of a distant nebula cloud dubbed "The Pillars of Creation" may be more than a simple tongue-in-cheek name given by evolutionary cosmologists. A recent published study found that even atheists intuitively think the universe was created. It seems our mind's default programming is to believe in a higher power (see the book Why God Won't Go Away), but this recent study implies that even those who have made a conscious decision to not believe in God have not reprogrammed their instincts- they simply choose to constantly override them. In other words, if someone were to ask them what color the sky is, their programmed response would be to say "blue", but they have to take a moment to override that thought in order to reply "green". Scripture alludes to this issue in Romans chapter 1, stating that all men are without excuse as God is evident to man both internally and externally (known as "General Revelation" in theology).
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. -Rom 1:18-23
While this passage seems to be uncannily prophetic concerning today's evolutionary paradigms, it is important to remember that naturalism (the belief that matter and life came into being by "natural" processes) has existed in different shapes and forms since antiquity- it is not the product of modern science. What I find stunning of both the passage in Romans and these scientific studies, is that atheists do not arrive at their conclusions by logic or even via a lack of evidence for God, but by defiant choice. In the King James vernacular, they are "willingly ignorant" (2 Pe 3:5)- in other words, they choose to ignore the evidence. To be willingly ignorant is not a product of logic, but actually emotional reactionism. Indeed, if you've spent much time around atheists or listened to some of their leading proponents, you might have noticed that while they mask their conclusions in logic and scientific sounding jargon, at its root, the issue always apears to be be emotional- anger, bitterness and an irrational refusal to admit the possibility of God.
This irrationality can be seen most clearly in the atheist's argument for 'panspermia'- the idea that highly intelligent aliens created or seeded life on earth. While some credit Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius for first proposing panspermia about 100 years ago as a solution for the myriad of problems and improbablities of biological evolution on earth, many mainstream evolutionary atheists still hold it as a possibility today- including Richard Dawkins (see here) and Francis Crick (in his 1981 book Life Itself). This "intriguing possibility" as Dawkins called it, is proof positive that staunch atheists even consciously acknowledge that intelligent design is a probable origins theory. What they vehemently deny is that God could be that intelligent designer. The dubious logic implemented in this argument is that while the evidence for evolution here on earth may be lacking, the sacrosanct ideology of naturalism can be preserved by accepting the notion that evolution happened elsewhere in the universe and that the highly intelligent products of that evolutionary process then created life here.
Sounds like the intro to a childrens' fairy tale doesn't it? This idea forces the adherant to believe that a process that cannot be tested, observed or even explained in our world magically happened a long, long time ago in a world far, far away. This is an intellectual slight of hand- they can't prove evolution works here and now, so they remove the ability to prove it altogether and resort to blind faith which they must then either deny or rationalize. But if the atheist's rationale for rejecting theism is a lack of evidence (which is patently and demonstrably false) how can they justify the fact that there is no evidence of the feasibility of evolution or the complete absence of empirical evidence for any extraterrestrial life? This double standard shows the absolute hypocrisy and true nature of naturalism. It also clearly demonstrates the energy and mental gynastics required to deny God's existence. As Sir Arthur Keith (an evolutionary anthropologist who was suspected in the Piltdown Man hoax and who wrote the forward to the 100th anniversary edition of Darwin's book) said in a moment of candor, "Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable."
As I have stated many times, evolution VS. creation is not science VS. religion, it's actually religion VS. religion. But don't take my word for it... “Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion--a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint… The literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.”
-Michael Ruse, Saving Darwinism from the Darwinians. National Post, May 13, 2000, B-3
For some hope for atheists, you might be interested in reading There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind, by Antony Flew.