GOD VS. SCIENCE???
In the November 13, 2006 issue of Time magazine, the cover of the magazine introduces us to an article titled God vs. Science, subtitled “A spirited debate between atheist biologist Richard Dawkins and Christian geneticist Francis Collins.” At first I only read the introductory remarks and dropped it as not worthy of the time it would take to read it. Indeed the only reason I even take Time magazine is that it was offered to me at $2.00 for a year’s subscription, and I thought, “Why not”? But later I came back to the article and read it thoroughly so as to be better prepared to write this article.
“Time” states that, “We revere faith and scientific progress, hunger for miracles and for MRIs. As they say, “We want it all.” But are the worldviews compatible?” The magazine is saying that we want the best of both worlds, but that may not be possible. In the introductory remarks to the debate the magazine quotes Yale psychologist Paul Bloom who wrote “bluntly” that “Religion and Science will always clash.” They leave it there like that is the final word on the subject, but the fact is that while “religionists” and “scientists” may clash, true religion (i.e. the religion of Jesus, the Christ) and true science do not clash. They never have and they never will.
It is rather amazing what gets passed off as science. We have the “big bang theory” and Darwin’s theory of evolution. But science is science and theories are theories and never the twain shall meet. A theory only becomes science when it is proven and then is fact and no longer a theory. As for the big bang theory it should be in the comic books right next to Spiderman and Superman. As for evolution, it remains a theory and not science. Add to this that Darwin wasn’t even a scientists but, as David Jeremiah says in the Foreword to Dr. Henry Morris’s book, The Long War Against God, “[the theory of evolution] was mainly developed by an apostate divinity student. He adds to the lists of developers, “a lawyer (Lyell), an agriculturist (Hutton), a journalist (Chambers), and other non-scientists.”
We might ask then, “why have scientists swallowed it?” Well scientists are, after all, human beings just like all the rest of us. And they, like us, subconsciously, if not instinctively, know that if there is a God then He is the Boss and we might not be pleasing him, and will, heaven forbid, have to give an account to Him. So If evolution will help us get rid of God then let’s go that way. That very conveniently gets rid of our responsibility to God.
Furthermore, as Dr. Morris points out, Darwin didn’t come up with anything new, as his ideas have been around since the dawn of history and are, what he calls, The Long War Against God.
These “scientists” make some very interesting statements. Creationists seem to like to argue that for life to have happened accidently is preposterous. As one has said, “An atheist is one who believes that a dictionary was printed by an explosion in a print shop.” But these scientists in countering this say that, “if the probabilities were 1 in a billion, and you’ve got 300 billion universes, why not? “300 billion universes”? My dictionary defines universe as, “the whole body of things and phenomena, observed or postulated.” So to these scientists(?) universal doesn’t mean universal, which means that all doesn’t mean all which means that words don’t mean anything, which means we cannot communicate which means-- well nothing means anything, which means-- well now it should be easy to understand why I didn’t read the whole article when I first looked at it. As the Bible says, “The fool has said in his heart, there is no God.”
One problem with the whole debate is that both contestants believe in evolution and the big bang. Evidently Bible believing Christians are not worthy to be considered. Dr. Francis Collins, the Christian debater tries to fit evolution to the story of creation in Genesis; something that was long ago tabbed as theistic evolution. But let us come back to that.
One thing they discussed was miracles, the supernatural, and I found that interesting. I have never believed that Almighty God was a magician. We, as Christians, believe that miracles occur which are contrary to the laws of nature as we understand them. The key phrase here is, “as we understand them.” I suspect that God operates according to the laws He has established. It is just that there are, no doubt, myriads of His laws that we have not discovered yet. And the more of them we do discover the more we will find out that there are more to discover yet. As true scientists discovered long ago, the more we learn, the more we find that there is to learn. It will always be that way for “God’s understanding is infinite.” Therefore I have no trouble believing that God spoke worlds into existence and did not need millions or billions of years to do it via evolution. “Is anything too hard for God?”
As for proving that there is a God, Anselm did that in the twelfth century with his ontological argument. His argument went something like this: “those who doubt the existence of God would have to have some understanding of what they were doubting: Namely, they would understand God to be a being than which nothing greater can be thought. Given that it is greater to exist outside the mind rather than just in the mind, a doubter who denied God’s existence would be making a contradiction because he or she would be saying that it is possible to think of something greater than a being than which nothing greater can be thought. Hence, by definition God exists necessarily.” Of course there are those who have argued that this reasoning is faulty but on honest examination one finds that these deniers use specious arguments that lead to false conclusions. As often has been said, “you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink.”
Mark, the author of the Gospel with his name attached wasted no time trying to establish that there is a God; he was not writing to fools as he knew Jesus had said, “cast not your pearls before swine.” No he was writing to those who would accept the truth when exposed to it. Hence he started his story by writing, “The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.” He then went on and told the story, not bothering to try to establish that there is a God, but rather just assumed it as a self-evident truth.
But just what is it that these atheist don’t believe in when they say there is no God? Have you ever walked into a packed sports arena just prior to the start of a major contest? There is an excited atmosphere there. I have heard sports commentators say that it was electric. I recall many years ago moving to the northeast to join a religious community which “waited on the Lord” in their religious services. They just sat there quietly until someone felt moved to speak. I had two small sons and I was concerned at just how well they would behave in this atmosphere. My concerns were immediately dispelled on first entering the meeting place. It was quiet; everybody just sitting there, and my boys were so affected by the spirit in the room that they remained quiet as mice.
I may not know just what a spirit is but I have experienced different spirits in different situations, just as you have, and just as these atheists have. To deny that there is any such thing as a spirit is to deny reality. Jesus said, “God is a spirit.” In Scripture He is referred to as the invisible God, just as all spirits are. Scripture also declares that He is the Eternal. If the Scripture is correct then God is an eternal, invisible spirit. To say that no such spirit exists is ludicrous and asinine in the extreme and not worthy of discussion.
Why do I believe in God? I could say, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth His handiwork” and I would be correct. Or I could say with the Apostle Paul, “that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them” and I would yet be correct. But why do I believe in God? Well,“You ask me how I know He lives, He lives withing my heart.”