this process can be explained by evolution.
Yes; but these things need a pre-ordering in order to exist in the first place. What explains the nature of space? What explains the nature of energy? What explains the nature of existence in and of itself? What explains the nature of an ordered reality in which evolution can take place? These things need to exist first inorder for the other things to make sense. It seems shallow minded and highly presumptuous to me, to reduce these things to mere physics.
The theory of evolution does not remove the necessity of Gods role as a creator. For instance; the Big Bang Theory presents us with the opportunity to observe, that in order for a universe to begin to exist, not only must there be a cause, the core nature or potentiality of that universe must also be determined from the very beginning of its birth, before it can ever hope to unravel into any of the beautifull actualities which we observe today. In other words; the universe was born with its nature and potentiality; it is not the cause of it and can not be reduced to physics. If there was no time space or energy before the Big Bang (there was no before) then the potentiality or nature of our universe cannot be determined by our universe simply existing, since it needs its nature in order to exist; neither can its nature be explained by something prior to the universe existing, since there was no time. If there was a cause, it seems reasonable to assume that such a cause would have to transcend time space and energy and would also have to be the source of its potentiality.
A computer programmer can represent a blue balloon by a sequence of numbers (1 0 11 0). When the Programmer runs the script, the sequences of numbers are activated; which causes the blue balloon to ultimately fulfill its purpose of appearing on the screen. One might observe, that the random running of script data,(within a determining environment) and the sequence of numbers, are the cause of the blue balloon; and this would be correct in a shallow finite sense, but the intrinsic nature of the blue balloon, cannot be explained by the sequence of numbers, or the running of a script. The blue balloon, itself, was determined and created by something else (the computer programmer), but the means by how it came to be actualized, was due to the software (which the computer programmer also created).
We see a similar process with evolution, however, Science has nothing to say on the matter of a designer or programmer; because science can only “**measure **” and make “**observations **” of the natural world or software.
The process of evolution explains the actuality of a thing, but it doesn’t explain the potentiality which nature expresses through the evolutionary process. We can imagine a universe that has absolutely no life given potentiality, where biological organisms do not arise despite any process that would have otherwise brought us into physical existence. An atom behaves as it does because it has that potentiality or nature, and it needs the potentiality or nature in order to explain its behavior. Its mere physical being needn’t have any consequence, and by itself, it cannot explain its potentiality. Unless you refuse potentiality an explanation, one has no choice but to go beyond the physical object of which a given behavior or potentiality is actualized.
We are not just dealing with chance or random variations. Potentialities such as biological animation, love, emotion, feeling, sexuality, is an intrinsic part of nature which has been woven into the fabric of time and space and is not ultimatley the design of physical factors. It is more then the sum of its parts.
A pattern or structure of atoms gives rise to an already present or given potential. We all observe that potentialities such as consciousness arise in correlation with physical events; however the observing of such events does not provide an explanation for its potentiality. It only shows us that such things arise through a physical process. It does not show us that any process is the ultimate reality of what it produces.
If there were no explanation of why there were complex forms of life then it would be attributed to the supernatural.
The scientific evidence coupled with logic, necessity and close observation, shows us that the things we see in the universe cannot be reduced to mere physics; since physical things need first the nature of being physical; and thus cannot provide an ultimate explanation to why a thing is a thing.
Over millions of years our DNA changes slightly to accommodate our surroundings.
This does not explain its potentiality; it only explains the process, the natural cause of an actual thing.
IF God is infinite he created our finite universe, but then God is a form of complex intelligence so he would need a cause.
Why do you assume that God is complex and therefore needs a cause? Complexity only really applies to a physical object which has gained in quality or quantity. God is an immaterial eternal Mind with an Eternal Will; He is pure Actuality.
So why not take God out of the equation and go with an infinite universe?
Because an infinite universe fails to explain the origin of its potentiality. Plus the Big Bang theory is here to stay.
But just think about this