• "I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing." - John 15:5 . "A ...
    2 days ago

Choose Godly Woman Topics

Thursday, March 28, 2013

Does Science Refute God

Pin It

Does Science Refute God? -  Michael J. S. Austin, Ph.D.


If so many people wouldn't think twice before giving a resounding 'Yes' to this question, what's the point in asking? In spite of which, here are a few reasons for the continued need to ask this very important question. I mean, what about the people who might answer 'No' - shouldn't their voice also be heard?
  • ASSUMPTIONS
To begin with the question assumes that our investigation into the cosmos has given us sufficient confidence to deal with final issues. In other words, we judge the question to be allowed - it is appropriate to our present human condition. But the question does not ask 'Does science disprove God?' because that's understandably asking too much for any self-respecting person committed to modern science.
So, if the answer to our leading question is widely given as 'Yes', we need to know upon what grounds the answer is given. Let's consider some of them. Given that the word 'God' as generally accepted in the West denotes the supreme, supernatural Personal Being, who is alleged by believers to have created the cosmos, which he then sustains and who is further alleged to be involved in the affairs in this world, what does science make of this? And let's also clarify what we mean by science. Science is the process of investigating the whole natural, physical realm in order to collect, analyse, interpret and arrange the findings, including the best-fit meaning for those findings, such as how it originated (if it has an origin), including life itself and how all this organised knowledge might benefit human progress.
  • EXPLANATIONS
One basic principle of contemporary scientific endeavour is that everything must be able to be explained wholly in terms of natural phenomena. Thus, any approach that resorts to bringing God into the picture is thought to be nonsensical.
Now for a test case: the origin of the universe, the origin of life, the origin of humanity and the origin of rationality. I have chosen the subject of 'origins' as they are closely related and of particular interest both to science, in its own right, and to Christians who believe their world view is not anti-science at all. In a short article I aim to treat the origins together.
So, on an astrophysical level, if we can explain the big origin by the forces released in an infinitely distorted space-time upon matter in a point of singularity with infinite density but infinitesimal volume expanding it to become our physical reality, then God is redundant. Built into this concept is an explanation that relies on nothing but matter, force, time and chance, and then don't forget our human intelligence that is being used to propose that this original event was not merely possible, but highly probable.
  • FINAL OBJECTIVITY
What do I make of this? This explanation leaves me asking 'On what do you rest your theory of knowledge?' If you think that the electro-chemical activity of your brain is able to grant an objective insight into the origin of everything, this fails to offer a rational explanation for the origin of the point of singularity itself, or the forces which expanded it to become the cosmos, including ourselves. It shrinks everything to a zero, without offering any verifiable science as to the origin of this amazing singularity.
This thinking awards itself the competence to make significant, objective assessments in a cosmos that is supposed to be void of final meaning and grounded in a mindless accident. But if this is so, on what possible basis do collections of matter (brains) assume the chemical basis of their thinking is able to transcend itself and make independent, objective assessments - as if it was related to a final frame of reference, when their philosophical base finds no support for such a reference frame? This is where the dilemmas begin. And we should recall that science as such has not proven naturalism (i.e. naturalistic philosophy), or atheism, or monism - they are assumed axiomatic and ideological positions.
  • INSUPPORTABLE BELIEFS
These philosophies are adopted as a starting point, but are not empirically verifiable - open to proof or disproof by scientific method. Now this is the approach that assumes the high validity of reason in order to refute God. And from where does it borrow its reason? - From God! Secular and postmodern thinkers advise us that there are no final truths. So, where did they discover that one? Their rebellion against God's truth leads them into the most awkward logical paradoxes. Thus denying that their logic and reason possess a transcendental dimension, they use it to deny that they have it!
The Bible has already given us a trustworthy account of origins when it says the living God is the One 'for whom and by whom all things exist' (Hebrews 2:10). Furthermore, it shows that all people are culpable and because of the moral revolt (the historic Genesis Fall) against God, in which we all subsequently share, by nature, we are not letting on what we don't wish to concede. Although we all know God is the Creator, 'they did not honour him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened' (Romans 1:21).Rebels suppress the knowledge of their rebellion against God in a façade of ideological beliefs they think are consistent with their rejection of final truth - 'For they deliberately overlook this fact... ' (See 2 Peter 3:5-6).
  • EVERYTHING DEPENDS ON GOD!
Without a belief in the rational Creator God of biblical theism, we lack any final ground for believing in an understandable universe. Biblical theism alone gives modern science a rational foundation for the validity of its central assumption - that objective truth and meaning exist as discoverable information, because God the Creator has imbedded the natural world with discoverable information and endowed us with the capacity to search and find what is really there! Truth as information does not merely fall out of random, molecular activity.
In fact, the historic bodily resurrection of Jesus provides a compelling example of the foundations of rational proof. For if the bodily resurrection of Jesus could not be shown by historical evidences, including eyewitness testimony, and the changed course of history, it is doubtful whether anything could be proved. Unless the validity of Christianity is presupposed as final truth - that Jesus was raised from the dead, we lack any rational foundations for our thinking and for the idea of proof itself. But with that truth, Christianity has given the world the supreme example of proof, and not merely for a 'natural' event, but a supernatural one.
Ultimately, the reasons advanced to refute God are self-refuting and go to show the degree to which the natural mind is just as the Bible says it is - 'alienated and hostile' (Colossians 1:21); cut off from a meaningful relationship with God and possessing a strong bias against and antipathy towards him! In the final analysis, biblical Christian theism, the revelation of the living God, refutes and unmasks the philosophic base of contemporary secular 'science'.
So, as Jesus is Lord of all, including origins, now is the time to bend the knee to him, and own up if you are a moral and intellectual rebel against God - and repent. Accept his death as the full penalty on the behalf of those who deserved God's judgement, paying the supreme price for rebels like you, and then trust him with abounding thanks for such forgiving love!
SCIENCE NEEDS GOD AS A BASE FOR PROOF AND RATIONAL THOUGHT!
Michael J. S. Austin, Ph.D. Hello, my big goal is to show that biblical Christianity appeals to serious reason and careful thinking, and is powerfully relevant today. So, I aim to share the good news of Christ crucified, risen and ascended - a Saviour who is worthy of your full confidence. And I write to help you find faith or to strengthen your faith, so that you may be SURE. I share Evangelical and Reformed convictions and have a Ph.D. from Reformation International Theological Seminary for work on the validity of reason. Use this link to my very latest Amazon Kindle e-book - (very modestly priced): 'FOR SURE! - Assurance and Evangelicalism' http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AG0WK84 Read and enjoy, and please recommend to others - Thank you! Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Michael_J._S._Austin,_Ph.D. Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/7519666


Follow us On :

No comments :

Post a Comment

Labels