Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe―Discoveries in Physics and Cosmology Hardcover – March 30, 2021

You know, I picked up "Return of the God Hypothesis" thinking, "Okay, let's see what this is all about. Science and... Yahweh? This should be interesting." What I didn't expect was for my brain to feel like it had just run a marathon through the cosmos, the Big Bang, and the intricate machinery of life itself.Stephen C. Meyer is clearly a very smart person. Like, "explains complex physics and biology in a way that makes my head spin but also kind of makes sense" smart. Reading this book felt like sitting in on a lecture from a brilliant but slightly mischievous professor who keeps pulling back the curtain on the universe and saying, "See? Isn't that weird?"He takes you on a journey through some seriously mind-bending scientific discoveries – the fine-tuning of the universe, the origin of life's information, and other things that previously existed only as vague concepts in my head. And then he lays out the case for the "God hypothesis" as a compelling explanation for why all this stuff looks so... designed.It's not a light read, mind you. There were moments where I had to reread paragraphs (sometimes multiple times) and stare blankly into space while my brain processed concepts like entropy and irreducible complexity. My cat seemed concerned by my sudden periods of deep, furrowed-brow contemplation.But Meyer has a knack for making these complex ideas accessible, even for someone whose last science class involved dissecting a frog (a traumatic event we won't dwell on). He's witty, he's thorough, and he doesn't shy away from the big questions. It's like a really well-written detective story, but the mystery is "How did all this exist?" and the prime suspect is... well, you get the idea.Whether you agree with his hypothesis or not, the journey through the scientific evidence is fascinating. It makes you think. It challenges assumptions. And it's delivered with a confidence and clarity that's genuinely impressive.If you're curious about the intersection of science and faith, enjoy having your brain stretched in new and interesting ways, and appreciate a well-argued case for a provocative idea, pick up this book. It's a intellectual workout that's both challenging and incredibly rewarding. My brain is tired, but it feels smarter, and I'm thoroughly impressed by the case Meyer presents. And I've always believed in God anyway.

Another amazing book by Dr. Meyer, following Signature in the Cell and Darwin's Doubt. I found this book to be an amazingly well written page-turner, just like Dr. Meyer's previous two books. The arguments are compelling, whether or not you ultimately agree with them. This is a truly great read.

This book is excellent. Real science -- a great read for anyone interested in science or philosophy. Intelligent Design (ID) has to be contended with no matter your viewpoint, and Meyers does an excellent job presenting an unbiased, scientific exploration of the evidence for it. Well written and researched.

In this extensively researched, meticulously documented 450-page tome, Dr. Meyer zeroes in on three of the most challenging questions in the science of origins: 1) If the “Big Bang” caused the universe, what caused the “Big Bang”? 2) What accounts for the incredible fine tuning in physical laws and the parameters of early expansion necessary for matter, stars, planets, and life to even be possible? and 3) What explains the origin of life and the information encoded within DNA necessary for any form of life, particularly the highly advanced forms which appeared “suddenly” (on a geological timescale) in the Cambrian explosion (ca. 540 Mya)? In each case, Meyer demonstrates quite clearly - and accurately - that there is no viable natural explanation. After explaining the current state of science on these questions, Meyer frames them within the much broader context of epistemology, logic, metaphysics, Bayesian analysis, and information theory to conclude that among all possible options, Theism offers the most probable, coherent, and intellectually satisfying answer to otherwise intractable mysteries.The science and doctrines of origins have been a hotbed of controversy for many decades. Both emotions and overconfidence run high and thoughtful dialogue is far too rare. Dr. Meyer is no hard-charging polemicist. Almost to a fault, he approaches his critics with gentleness and respect. And there have been critics, indeed. Indeed, one might frame his new work as an extended response to the most salient criticisms of the last several years.So what are those criticisms? Well, according to Wikipedia “Intelligent design (ID) is a pseudoscientific argument for the existence of God” - revealing mostly an intense, if unsophisticated, ideological bias among editors at Wikipedia. Nonetheless, Meyer thoroughly and effectively disassembles that characterization with chapter upon chapter of careful reasoning and irrefutable evidence.More thoughtful criticisms come from the scientists affiliated with BioLogos, a group founded by Francis Collins who identify themselves as evolutionary creationists. They have been frequently critical of the Discovery Institute and Intelligent Design (ID) for reasons that are more philosophical than scientific. To really understand Meyer’s argument and why he frames it as he does, it helps to understand debates of the last decade in which Meyer has been a central figure. BioLogos figures prominently in that story.In his autobiographical testimony, “The Language of God”, NIH director and former head of the human genome project describes his coming to faith after being deeply influenced by the “moral argument” for God, famously recounted by C. S. Lewis in “Mere Christianity”. Yet in Chapter 3, “The Origins of the Universe”, Dr. Collins specifically invokes Meyer’s first two arguments as convincing scientific evidence in favor of - if not completely proving - God. BioLogos mostly takes issue when Meyer steps into biology, not surprising since that was the focus of Meyer’s first two books and they primarily identify as Christians who embrace the complete evolutionary paradigm.On the matter of design, it is not as though Meyer and ID proponents have been fundamentally refuted. That would be easy if the evidence existed. One must simply account for the origin of life out of inorganic precursors, and the origin of biological information encoded in DNA, and the case would be closed. (For anyone who can do that, there is a $10,000,000 prize for the taking). The ID movement is famous for promoting the idea of “irreducible complexity” in biological structures. This has been a source of much contention and in some instances their examples have not been so compelling as first thought, but those arguments amount to little more than quibbling over examples, not the underlying principles. BioLogos has been very critical of the idea of “irreducible complexity”, but in “Return of the God Hypothesis” it is conspicuous mostly for its absence apart from the origin-of-life discussion.Another objection from the BioLogos community is that ID is guilty of a “God of the gaps” fallacy for invoking shortcomings of evolution as evidence for God. (More than one observer has noted that the same objection could be raised against the moral and cosmological arguments preferred by BioLogos). Obviously concerned with that accusation, Meyer dedicates an entire chapter (“Acts of God or God of the Gaps?) to that challenge. In this Meyer acquits himself admirably, though more could be said. Given the current state of origin-of-life research, we have not a “gap” but a massive glaring void. In “The End of Science” agnostic science writer John Horgan identified the origin of life as a problem that likely never would be solved. Twenty years later, Horgan remains just as doubtful .Now, BioLogos is concerned that the faith of some is shattered when it is based on particular “gaps” that ultimately are explained. Such would be a shallow faith indeed. They are quite correct that the faith of many has been shipwrecked on the rocks of science - sometimes by bad science, and often just because they were taught very bad science. But there’s little or no evidence that anyone’s faith has been undermined by an approach resembling that of Meyer.In principle, BioLogos objects to seeing design in biology and invoking that as evidence for God, as Meyer consistently has done. Yet sometimes their own position doesn’t come off as fully thought out. BioLogos scientists unashamedly declare themselves as believers in creation. While they explicitly reject Deism and affirm God’s subsequent intervention in human affairs and incarnation in Christ, their view of creation is such that undirected evolution is sufficient to explain the complexity and diversity of life - and ultimate appearance of humans. (“Once evolution got under way, no special supernatural intervention was required” - Collins, Language of God). Meyer notes that this necessarily imposes teleology upon evolution - itself a principle decisively rejected by almost all evolutionary biologists and for which there is no evidential support. [Although many Christians think evolution is unacceptable in any form, in practice our disagreements are really more over the scope of evolution rather than its existence. Here, for example.]Denis Lamoureux of St Joseph’s College in Alberta holds PhD’s in both theology and evolutionary biology and is credited with coining the term “evolutionary creation” (EC) favored by BioLogos. Officially he is not a part of the organization, but there is a definite symbiosis and mutual respect. As Meyer notes, Lamoureux argued that God’s plan for creating life and humans was embedded within the design of the universe from the instant of creation.Elsewhere, Lamoureux has written: “The Creator loaded into the Big Bang the plan and capability for the cosmos and living organisms, including humans, to evolve over 10-15 billion years.” According to Lamoureux, “design is evident in the finely-tuned physical laws and initial conditions necessary for the evolution of the cosmos through the Big Bang, and design is also apparent in the biological processes necessary for life to evolve, including humans with their incredibly complex brains.” [italics added] Repeatedly, he affirms the principle (and terminology) of “intelligent design” in nature affirming the handiwork of a Creator.Meyer fairly points the difficulty in seeing this position as more scientifically sound or palatable than some other version of evolution in which God is actively involved. To assume the information for life up to and including humans was embedded in the original design of the cosmos goes far beyond anything within the realm of known science. There is no known natural mechanism by which that information could have been encoded or transmitted. Meyer is silent regarding the actual scope of evolution as he sees it. But the concept of progressive creation vigorously opposed by the BioLogos community appears no less scientific or more miraculous than their proposed alternative. A crude analogy would be firing a pistol and hitting a dime on the far side of the universe. In the BioLogos view, God takes one shot and hits the target, whereas a progressive view would allow for mid-course adjustments. The latter solution is less demanding. (Of course, the analogy doesn’t account for the additional problem of how information is encoded and transmitted). Or, to look at it another way, a progressive view has God intervening in known scientific processes, whereas the EC view postulates unknown scientific processes for evolution to achieve its intended result in the complete absence of subsequent intervention.Coming from a different place on the continuum, the Old-Earth Creationist ministry Reasons to Believe has criticized Meyer and the Discovery Institute for failing to name the designer and consequently having little apologetic or evangelistic impact. This objection seems to be resolved decisively in “Return of the God Hypothesis”, as the core theme and purpose of the entire work is to show that the designer is a personal and benevolent deity who is actively involved in the course of nature and human affairs.Dr. Meyer is an exemplary writer and scholar and his new volume is a masterwork of apologetics. It will benefit students, scholars, pastors, and scientifically-minded believers who wish to strengthen their faith and those within their circle of influence. The case should be persuasive to agnostics and skeptics who are looking for honest arguments and not emotionally predisposed against theism. We should all pray that this approach will lead to more cooperation and less conflict in the arena of creation apologetics.