Present-day science includes in its ambit many things (such as electrons, the law of gravity, X-rays, etc.) which are non-material in nature. They cannot be observed by the human eye, but every scientist believes in their existence, for the simple reason that although we cannot see these things directly, we can see their effects—for example, a falling apple, in the case of gravity, and a photo film, in the case of X-rays. We believe in the existence of all these things, not by direct observation but by their results, or, in other words, by way of indirect knowledge or inferential argument.

This change in human knowledge also changed the theory of logic. It is now well established in science that the inferential argument is as valid as the direct argument. In the pre-Einstein era, unbelievers held that the concept of God pertained to the unseen world and that since no direct argument was available to prove it, belief in God was illogical. They considered all the relevant indirect arguments as scientifically invalid since these were inferential in nature. But now the whole situation has changed. As nothing is really observable, the existence of anything can be established only by means of the inferential argument, not the direct argument.

If the inferential argument is valid with regard to the unseen micro-world, it is also valid with regard to the existence of God and other religious truths. Bertrand Russell admitted the fact that the argument centering on design propounded by theologians seeking to offer evidence for the existence of God is scientifically valid.

The fact is that when there is design, there must also be a designer. We see that our world is well-designed. This should lead us to believe that there is a Designer of it—God Almighty.

Source: God Arises