Chance and Randomness

On Evangelization in an Age of Science

Daniel Kuebler is in the School of Natural and Applied Sciences at Franciscan University of Steubenville and holds a doctorate in molecular and cell biology. In January 2023 he was the Dean of the school, when he spoke at the Word on Fire Wonder Conference on the subject of Evolution and Catholic Theology.¹ I was in the audience.

---

Early in his presentation Dr. Kuebler introduced the chance vs purpose argument with a quote from evolutionary biologist Douglas Futuyma:

Some shrink from the conclusion that the human species was not designed, has no purpose, and is the product of mere mechanical mechanisms – but this seems to be the message of evolution.

It is a hallmark of religion that it claims people exist for reasons that are purposeful. The creation story in Genesis is quite clear on this subject. Dr. Futuyma, who is an atheist, is of the opinion that randomness of biological change, according to natural selection, is counter to a belief in human purpose.

Kuebler argued this not the case. First, he said that randomness is not really the right word for what happens in evolution, that chance is a better fit. Second, he showed that chance is operative in our lives every day, and we have no trouble accepting that fact. Then he moved on to the central part of his argument, that theology long ago accepted that God can use chance for a desired outcome:

The effect of divine providence is not only that things should happen somehow, but that they should happen either by necessity or contingency [i.e., by purpose or by chance]. Therefore, whatsoever divine providence ordains to happen infallibly and of necessity; and that happens from contingency, which the divine providence conceives to happen from contingency” (Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae, I, 22,4 ad 1).

Afterward I approached Dr. Kuebler and thanked him for his presentation. It was precisely what I had hoped to hear at the Wonder Conference.

---

In essence, the atheist argument that God cannot use chance or randomness is mistaken.

But…atheists are not the only ones who make this argument. Some believers also say that God cannot use chance in a determined outcome, that such a thing is logically inconsistent.

It seems odd that atheists and believers should become strange bedfellows on this line of reasoning, but they have. Atheists have used it in an attempt to disprove God, while some believers have used it to disprove a particular power of God.

What our fellow Christians who make this argument forget is that the use of randomness to find God’s will is Biblical. Several times lots are cast, including the election of the Apostle Matthias. The practice continues to this day: the 2012 selection of Pope Tawadros II of the Coptic Church was done by a blindfolded altar boy reaching into a vessel with the names of the candidates on slips of paper.

Chance might be the better word for biology, but randomness seems the better word for what occurs in the quantum world. A century of observation and experimentation confirms that randomness is a basic building block of creation on the smallest scales. Einstein was wrong: God does play with dice, perhaps only to ensure that people can freely choose Him.

So, go forward, proclaim the Gospel, and tell Dr. Douglas Futuyma that purpose can be found even in “mere mechanical mechanisms.”

1. A video recording of this presentation can be found behind a paywall at https://wordonfire.institute/courses/wonder-conference-2023-sessions/lessons/daniel-kuebler-evolution-and-catholic-theology/