Creationists assert that random mutation and natural selection imply that there is no purpose to life.

Perhaps the greatest objection to the theory of evolution by Creationists is that random mutation and natural selection - together - imply that life has no purpose. Cardinal Schönborn of Vienna wrote recently, echoing this concern.

It is correct that science does not imply purpose. The error is to attribute to science an anti-purpose. Science neither supports nor rejects a purposeful existence. Science, including the theory of evolution, has absolutely nothing to say about: purpose in life, a reason for existence, or a belief in God.

In contrast to the opinion of Cardinal Schönborn, Cardinal Poupard, who heads the Pontifical Council for Culture in the Vatican, said, "We know where scientific reason can end up by itself: the atomic bomb and the possibility of cloning human beings are fruit of a reason that wants to free itself from every ethical or religious link."

"But we also know the dangers of a religion that severs its links with reason and becomes prey to fundamentalism," he said.

"The faithful have the obligation to listen to that which secular modern science has to offer, just as we ask that knowledge of the faith be taken in consideration as an expert voice in humanity." (New York Times, 11/04/2005.)

These are philosophical, religious questions that are completely beyond the purview of science. Science cannot measure or test the purpose of human existence, just as it cannot measure or test God. Science is completely devoid of the tools and the capacity to understand anything about a purpose in life and the majesty of God.