Chance is Not a Cause
Many scientists have calculated the probability that life could arise by chance from non-living chemicals, and the figures are astronomically small - so small, in fact, as to be practically zero.1
Biochemist Michael Behe has said that the probability of getting just one protein molecule by chance would be the same as a blindfolded man selecting a single marked grain of sand in the Sahara Desert three times in a row. And as unlikely as that is, a single protein molecule is not life. In order to have life, one would need to get about 200 of those protein molecules together.2
In other words, the probability of life arising from non-life by chance is virtually zero, but I believe we can say it is actually zero. Why? Because chance is not a cause. Chance is a word we use to describe mathematical possibilities, but it has no power of its own.3
For example, although we check our weather app to see the chance of rain in our area, chance doesn't cause the rain; rain is caused by the heaviness of water droplets that condense in the clouds, which results from the sun's evaporation of water on the Earth's surface. Likewise, chance does not cause a hurricane to impact one location rather than another; trade winds, the Coriolis Effect, high pressure systems, and various other incalculable factors do.4 And while there may be a good chance my husband will be on the response team for the next deadly hurricane, chance is not what causes him to be deployed; the impact of the disaster, partnerships in the affected areas, requests for help, and his record of excellence do, among other factors.
In fact, we speak in terms of chance for the very reason that we cannot account for and measure the relevant factors with precision. Chance is actually a word used to cover our ignorance. When we flip a coin and say there is a fifty percent chance the coin will land on heads, it is the force of the flip, gravity, wind speed, and perhaps other factors which determine whether it lands on heads or tails. Since we cannot calculate each of these factors, we use chance to describe probability, but chance doesn't cause the coin to land on heads any more than chance causes me to miss my self-imposed blog publishing deadlines.
If chance is not a cause, then how it is meaningful when people claim that life developed by chance? Answer: It isn't! If someone cannot offer a natural mechanism by which the first life could have come into existence, we ought not allow chance to be a satisfactory cover for their ignorance. We are right to ask for an explanation and to remember that chance doesn't cause anything, no matter how many billions of years it is given.
In the words of R.C. Sproul,
"Chance is a perfectly good word to describe mathematical possibilities, but it is only a word. It is not an entity. Chance is nothing. It has no power because it has no being; therefore, it can exercise no influence over anything. Yet, we have sophisticated scientists today who make sober statements declaring that the whole universe was created by chance. This is to say that nothing caused something, and there is no statement more anti-scientific than that."5
___________________________________
[1] Norman Geisler and Frank Turek. I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 2004), 125.
[2] Lee Strobel, The Case for Faith (Grand Rapids, Mich: Zondervan, 2000), 99-101.
[3] Geisler and Turek, 125.
[4]https://www.windows2universe.org/earth/Atmosphere/hurricane/movement.html
[5] R.C. Sproul, 60 of the Best R.C. Sproul Quotes, https://www.thepoachedegg.net/2019/05/apologetics-r-c-sproul-chance-is-nothing.html
