Tag: Science

Embrace the Evidence

Posted on by

This is the third of six lessons in the God’s Not Dead series.

Josh begins by putting God on trial, CS Lewis used the phrase, “God in the dock” which was the British way to say, “God in the witness stand.”

Josh begins by showing that the creation itself points to the reality of a Creator. Science is a natural place to start by observing the tremendous order in the universe is without a doubt. Skeptics are not impressed with this since they demand to see direct physical evidence over a clearly designed logical argument. But we would not find physical evidence for God by observing the universe, just as we find no physical evidence for Steve Jobs by looking into an iPhone.

Let’s take a look at some evidence, beginning in Romans 1:20…

Slide4

Josh begins his presentation with the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God (argument from creation). The basic idea of this argument is that, since there is a universe, it must have been caused by something beyond itself. It is based on the law of causality, which says that every limited thing is caused by something other than itself. Plato is the first thinker known to have developed an argument based on causation. Aristotle followed.

  • Norman Geisler Information: (Download the PDF)
  • Stephen Hawking Information: (See the Geisler download) Hawking wrote, that the laws of physics breaks down before the Big Bang, and I know why. Creation is where time and space all began!

The laws of nature seem to be carefully designed with human life in mind. Our universe is fine-tuned for life. Gravity slightly stronger or lesser, what would happen?

Let’s talk about details that cannot be accidental…

Slide5

  • The distance from the earth to the sun.
  • The earth’s rotation rate and length of year.
  • The amount of water on the earth’s surface.
  • The types and amounts of gasses on the earth.
  • The size of our moon and its distance from the earth.
  • The location of the earth in this galaxy.
  • Properties of light that allow photosynthesis. The properties of the lenses in our eyes that allow focused and detail images.

The change of all these details being so perfectly set by chance is unimaginably small, given the number of planets in our universe.

Other factors that allow us to live on the earth: to advance culturally and scientifically. The atmosphere has the right gasses for us to breathe, yet transparent so we can study the stars. The amount of O2 allows us to produce fire and all its uses, but not combust uncontrollably and destroy most of the forests.

Slide6

Skeptics suppress the truth by appealing to several excuses:

  • The universe could have created itself.
  • There are plenty of other larger universes.
  • Ignore evidence and simply science and faith are inherently in conflict.
  • But these proposals are not based on evidence, but blind faith…
  • Many would accept ANY explanation no matter how unlikely, in order to avoid God.

Richard Dawkins brings up the question of “who created God?” which leads to absurd thinking. He is saying we must have an explanation for our explanation to offer it plausible. Think about the turtle on the fencepost, you don’t have to know how it got there, you simply know that it did not get there by itself.

Slide7

  • Since he created time and space, he must be beyond time and space.
  • Since every detail was designed for his purposes, he must be very intelligent.
  • Since creation came into existence out of nothing, he must be very powerful.
  • Since he has created a place to benefit people, he is personal, involved, and caring.
  • Since he is able to do miracles, act in ways that are atypical and special, atheists deny the possibility of miracles. But they require their own miracles to explain the universe coming to existence out of absolutely nothing.

Only an intelligent being can create Mt. Rushmore, so a geologist would not have to abandon his science to recognize that fact.

Slide8

Some people encounter all this evidence, it undermines the foundation of their belief that the universe is all that exists.

When they recognize that they were created, they can somehow have a relationship with this Creator God.

People act like animals because of evolution. If we came from apes, we should have no problem denying moral accountability, so sex at all cost is OK, theft and murder are right because it is the survival of the fittest.

We must help people to sense the Holy Spirit and allow him to convict them of the truth, that they have violated the law in their hearts.

People will either respond in anger, change the topic, or they will come to terms with their denial of God’s existence.

The evidence from science is one of the best ways to begin speaking about Christianity with agnostics and atheists. It dispels the myth that science and faith are in conflict, and supports many truths we find in the Bible.

The Bible is not a book of nature but is not in conflict with nature. Evidence can challenge the very foundation of an atheist’s worldview and can grant them space to consider the reality of God.

The Art and Science of Supervision

Posted on by

There are good and poor supervisors. The best supervisors have good positive personal qualities and follow the proper roles that make them good supervisors. Many books on supervision have reported surveys about the characteristics of good supervisors. Usually these have some characteristics in common and others are different.

I read a story about Doran and Gloria McCarty, who took a group of students to Belize on an overseas project. One Sunday morning they spoke at meetings in the city and in the afternoon went into the rural area for an afternoon service. Because of the distance, road conditions, and having to take two ferries each way, they were late returning to Belize City that evening where Gloria was scheduled to sing. She had only one copy of the music and had no time to reproduce another. A local member assured Gloria that the pianist would be able to play the song if she would go through it with her once. Gloria was skeptical. After a brief rehearsal on only a portion of the music, Gloria took the songbook and the pianist played the song perfectly.

The pianist playing was a beautiful example of the art of music. Since she did not have a copy of the music, she could not exercise the science of music, but rather she demonstrated incredibly the art of music. We refer to it as “playing by ear.” The art of music represents the natural gifts a person possesses. The science of music refers to the music structure and the laborious hours of practice required.

The art of supervision refers to people who are especially good at building relationships and understanding human behavior without specialized supervisory training. Their sensitivity enables them to discover and deal with issues. Supervision as an art is done through intuition. Intuitive supervisors follow their hunches.

The science of supervision offers supervisors training in diagnosing issues and assisting supervisees in dealing with issues. Since supervision is a human enterprise, a person should utilize all of his/her abilities in the art of supervision. Yet the supervisor’s perceptions, even if generally correct, are not always accurate. They need a system to check out their perceptions.

The science of supervision offers a way to check those perceptions, a scientific backup. A medical doctor may have the uncanny ability to diagnose a condition, but no one would want a physician to operate until he/she had passed the necessary tests. Through good supervision training, the supervisor will gain a heightened sense of the art of supervision and have at his/her disposal the tools of the science of supervision.

Regardless of the helpfulness of science, there is always the subjective element in supervision. Value judgments have to be made. This is important because people cannot be transformed into things to be quantified. There are some qualities of supervisors that help them to become effective. McCarty points out these twelve characteristics:

  1. Faith: which reflects the image of God
  2. Health: emotionally and spiritually
  3. Care: the essence of the support system, there is no reason not to care
  4. Courage: facing hard tasks and issues rather than avoiding them
  5. Growth: if it doesn’t grow it is diseased or dead
  6. Authority: using the wrong type in the wrong situation
  7. Preparedness: the supervisor needs training to be good at it
  8. Insight: inner vision to understand what’s happening
  9. Communication: listen and hear, clarify
  10. Flexibility: meet the demands of the situation
  11. Perspective: keep the whole situation in mind, not just while in the trenches
  12. Relational: we work with people, don’t forget it

Alliances Today

Posted on by

Isaiah warned Judah not to ally with Egypt (Isaiah 20:5; 30:1-2; 31:1). He knew that trust in any nation or any military might was futile. Their only hope was to trust in God. Although we don’t consciously put our hope for deliverance in political alliances in quite the same way, we often put our hope in other forces.

Today we continue to make alliances with other disciplines. We hope these will lead to meaning, justice, purpose and perhaps even salvation. Does this seem on target?

Government: We rely on government legislation to protect the moral decisions we want made. We want to stand on what is right, elect people to represent us, but the minority rules in our politically correct society. Our republic is great, but legislation cannot change people’s hearts.

Science: We enjoy the benefits of science and technology. We look to scientific predictions and analysis before we look to the Bible. Science has been raised to the level of deity, omniscient and irrefutable.

Education: We act as though education and degrees can guarantee our future and success without considering what God plans for our future.

Medical care: We regard medicine as the way to prolong life and preserve its quality-quite apart from faith and moral living. Today we see health care as an inalienable right along side of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Financial systems: We place our faith in financial “security” (making as much money as we can for ourselves) forgetting that while being wise with our money, we must trust God for our needs. Jesus had much to say about money, and most of it was warning us about it’s being a trap and a barrier to dependence on God. Paul sums it up in 1 Timothy 6:9-10, 17-19.

Do Science and Scripture Agree?

Posted on by

This is a pretty hot question through the ages. The issue could be how data is interpreted; often conflict comes from trying to make the Bible say things it was not meant to answer. Do scientists and some Christians disagree? Yes, like Galileo, the Scopes trial of 1925 or Wilburforce and Huxley.

Well meaning Christians:

Some try to make the Bible say what it does not say. For instance James Bishop Ussher (1581-1656) calculated the genealogy back to Adam and claimed the earth was created in 4004 BC. Ussher’s notes are not part of the original text so the Bible does not really say that the earth was created in 4004 BC. Statements can be philosophic interpretations of data which do not carry the same weight of authority as the data.

When a scientist speaks:

When a scientist speaks on any subject, he is likely to be believed. He may be speaking outside of his field but gets the same respect that should be given from within his field. Carl Sagan (professor of astronomy at Cornell) speaks on the subject of science and religion. Science is his field; religion is certainly not. He makes bold statements like the universe is all there ever was or ever will be. If we must worship a power greater than ourselves, would it not make sense to worship the sun or stars? But it makes no sense to worship the product of blind chance in a pointless process.

Honest differences:

If we stick to what the Bible actually says and what the scientific facts are, the area of controversy is much smaller. There are times of honest differences among Christians: like the meaning of the word “day” in Genesis 1. We cannot condemn someone with a differing view.

Faith is suspect:

Can something that cannot be verified scientifically be dismissed as invalid or unreal? If a statement cannot be proved in a lab or confirmed by science, it cannot be accepted as reliable. There are other ways to acquire knowledge, than just in a laboratory. Consider falling in love. It cannot be confirmed in a lab yet no one would say it is unreal. The scientific method is only reliable on topics whose realities are measured in physical terms.

Scientific methods:

Faith is no detriment to reality. Science itself rest on presuppositions which must be accepted by faith before the research is possible. The universe is orderly, operates on a pattern, and we can predict it’s behavior.

The scientific method we know of today began in the sixteenth century, among Christians. They broke from the Greek polytheistic concepts that looked at the universe as in chaos and irregular. The alternative was a universe of order and there must have been an intelligent designer behind the patterns. Another improvable presupposition that must be accepted by faith is the reliability of our sense perception. One must believe that our senses are trustworthy enough to get a true picture of the universe and enable us to understand its orderliness.

Science is the only way to truth:

A Christian exercises faith and sees no incompatibility in using reason or intelligence. A scientist who is a Christian sees himself following the steps of the founders of modern science.

Science is incapable of making value judgments about the things is measures. There is nothing inherent in science that guides them in the application of the discoveries they make. Science can tell us how something works but it cannot answer why it works; whether there is any purpose for it in the universe. The Bible often tells us how, but rarely tells us why!

Is God Necessary?

Some have thought God was necessary to explain some things that could not otherwise be explained. Scientist will say that given enough time they can explain anything in the universe.

God is not only creator but the sustainer of the universe (Colossians 1:17). The universe would fall apart if it were not for God. You still need God even if you understand everything. Knowing how the universe is sustained is not the same as things as sustaining it.

Consider DNA. Is God going to be thrown from the throne since DNA can be produced in a laboratory? These advances in science only emphasize that life did not come from blind chance, but from an intelligent mind! Science does not create ex nihilo!

Three views of evolution:

Evolutionism: that the universe has been evolving forever on the basis of a natural processes, mutation and natural selection.

Microevolution: describes a continued process or development within a species. A bear is still a bear, and dog is still a dog. A species is one of seven classifications (according to the Swedish naturalist Carolus Linnaeus) 1) Kingdom, 2) Phylum, 3) Class, 4) Order, 5) family, 6) Genus, and 7) species. Kingdom is the largest group and species is the smallest. Members of a species have a high degree of similarity and will generally interbreed only with themselves. Microevolution will allow for the creation of a new species but not the development of one species into a higher classification.

In Genesis 1:24-25, is kind the same as species? Likely not. It basically means that each kind produces offspring like itself.

Macroevolution: requires the transfer of genetic information from one species to a higher more complex classification. Factors along with chance cannot provide the information necessary to build legs on a fish. There are no missing links in paleontology; from whales to land mammals for instance.

Animal ancestors:

Christians hold to two non-negotiable facts: God supernaturally created the heaven and the earth (Genesis 1:1), and God supernaturally created the first man and woman (Genesis 1:27). The Bible rules out the possibility of mankind evolving from a lower life form. The NT refers to Adam and Eve as historic figures (Romans 5:12, 1 Corinthians 15:22, 45, 2 Corinthians 11:3, 1 Timothy 2:13-14, 1 John 3:12, Jude 1:11). Genesis was not an allegory!

The age of the earth?

Was it 4004 BC or millions of years ago? Look at the Hebrew word for day. Can it mean a period or are rather than just a 24-hour period? The first humans were created on the sixth day (Genesis 2:7-22, 5:2) and he named the animals and had a wife all on a single 24-period? God’s use of the word day is not so confined (Psalm 90:4, 2 Peter 3:8). Other theologians state that God created a grown up universe, Adam at 20, trees with rings, a rock with the appearance of age, mountain ranges in place. It’s not an argument for the Christian to push since the Bible is silent on the matter. We should be agnostic as to the age of the earth.

Commentary: The same word day is used in the Ten Commandments, a 24-hour period (Exodus 20:11). Adam did not start out as an embryo. There was vegetation on day three, yet now sun until day four, so photosynthesis would not have worked if day three was more than 24 hours.

A constantly moving train:

We are always learning, yesterday’s generalization is tomorrow’s discarded hypothesis. What is to say that evolution is the last assault on our origin? If the Bible becomes embedded in today’s scientific theories, what happens when the theories change 20 years form now? In 1861 the French Academy of Science published 51 scientific facts that controverted the Word of God. Today, not one scientist would support one of these 51 facts.

Many scientists ignore these evolutionary assumptions and consider only the seventh.

  1. Non-living things gave rise to living material; spontaneous generation.
  2. Spontaneous generation happened only once.
  3. Viruses, bacteria, plants and animals are interrelated.
  4. Protozoa gave rise to metazoa.
  5. Various invertebrate phyla are interrelated.
  6. Invertebrates gave rise to vertebrates.
  7. Vertebrates and fish gave rise to amphibia, to reptiles, to birds and mammals.

Observation:

These assumptions by their nature are not capable of experimental verification. They assume a certain set of variables occurred in the past.

Does one assume there is a God or not? It either happened by chance or there is an intelligent design behind it all. If God, where does one stand on Christ?

Extremes to avoid:

That evolution has been proven and anyone with a brain should accept it.

That evolution is only a theory with little evidence for it.

The issue is interpretation of the facts; we choose to believe what we do based on our interpretation of the facts. The presuppositions one brings to the facts, rather than the facts themselves, determine one’s conclusion.