universe in this respect is a very striking fact about it. The universe might so naturally have been chaotic, but it is not – it is very orderly.” To this argument, many claim that the order we see in the universe is there because we have imposed it; it is not there independently of our imposition. And this has always seemed quite a solid refutation, for how do you prove order? According to Swinburne, “the teleologist’s premise is not just that there has been in nature so far an order which men can recognize and describe; but there has been and will continue to be in nature an order, recognizable and describable by men certainly, but one which exists independently of men. If men are correct in their belief that the order which they see in the world is an order which will hold in the future as in the past, it is clearly not an imposed or invented order. It is there in nature. For man cannot make nature conform subsequently to an order which he has invented. Only if the order is there in nature is nature’s future conformity to be expected.” To this version of the teleological argument, there are varying conclusions mandated by opinion, as opposed to its earlier version whose single conclusion seemed mandated by logic and scientific truths. Swinburne concedes this version is vulnerable to attack from those who claim “that although the order of the universe is an objective matter, nevertheless, unless the universe were an orderly place, men would not be around to comment on the fact… Hence there is nothing surprising in the fact that men find order – they could not possibly find anything else.” Although the teleological argument has a strong version (regularities of succession), it will continue to receive skeptical review because it cannot build the complete bridge to the throne of God. In fact, no theory can. At some point in time, there must be a leap of faith. ...
