In the June 2009 Acts & Facts, I read an interesting article, “Werner Arber: An Honest Evolutionist.”
I found this citation refreshing:
Although a biologist, I must confess I do not understand how life came about . . . I consider that life only starts at the level of a functional cell. The most primitive cells may require at least several hundred different specific biological macro-molecules. How such already quite complex structures may have come together, remains a mystery to me. The possibility of the existence of a Creator, of God, represents to me a satisfactory solution to this problem.
Now, the article goes on to say that this is not an all-out admission that God is the Creator by Arber. It is only a concession about the possibility (but with profound implications). Nevertheless, there is a willingness to concede, based on empirical observations, what is undoubtedly a gnawing problem in the consciences of many evolutionists.
In How Should We Then Live?, Francis Schaeffer writes:
In much modern thought, all begins with the impersonality of the atom or the molecule or the energy particle, and then everything–including life and man–comes forth by chance from that (Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live?, 165).
The implications of what Schaeffer stated and what Werner Arber conceded, albeit as a possibility, correspond. When we don’t squelch the complex personality of the atom, it allows us to pull back the veil and see the fingerprints of the Creator behind it all.