Posted by: Average Joe | March 7, 2012

Is God Unnecessary to Explain the Universe?

Questions like this one may not keep you awake at night, but they probably cross––and even occupy––your mind for a while.

Such was the focus of an episode of a History Channel program called God and the Universe: A Scientific Search for God, in which several prominent physicists and other experts explored big-picture ideas including the multiverse, string theory, and spontaneous creation. It’s a fascinating program, with plenty of visual help, and it left open the matter of whether the universe’s origin came about by divine creation or some other means.

Naturally, RTB scholars have something to say on this topic. Philosopher-theologian Ken Samples interacts with physicists Hugh Ross, Jeff Zweerink, and Dave Rogstad as they respond on a series of three Straight Thinking podcasts.

As you listen, here’s something to keep in mind: Would you rather gamble that the Christian God does not exist than accept the “cultural baggage that goes with it” (as one HC program participant––referring to the Christian faith––put it)? People who cannot or will not accept the existence of the Christian God often resort to futuristic discovery. That is, science will eventually demonstrate, as it always has, a perfectly reasonable explanation for knowledge gaps that had long been considered the domain of deities.

Are you a gambler?

About these ads

Responses

  1. I am an eager follower of RTB and believe that your work is extremely important. I also believe that according to your testable model, evidence for God as a creator will grow. However, I also believe that although knowledge can help many skeptics embrace God, there are some that even when presented with irrefutable evidence will still reject Him. For them, no evidence will ever be enough and if they had to aknowledge the existance of God, then they would question His morality. Consider the angels that being in the direct presence of God still rejected him. The problem is the “heart of man” which initiates the thought process. Therefore, some of the questions that keep me up at night are:
    -What is the “heart of man” (as reffered to in the bible)?
    -Is the “heart of man” more important than the mind in excersising free will?
    -Is “heart of man” the facet of the “image of God” which causes free will?
    -Can the “heart of man” be influenced by human science, by demonstrations of love or is it only susceptible to the word of God?
    Please let me know if you have publications that reffer to this matter.

    • Oscar, your comment here is essentially the same as what I just replied to your other comment (didn’t see it until now). I think you are correct.

      I’m pretty sure Ken Samples has written about this topic. I’ll have to check his books and articles and see if I can find something specific.

      Joe

  2. When discussing this issue with quantum physics enthusiasts, they reluctantly admitted that they believed in causeless effects…which to my mind is a full fledged departure from the scientific method and reason and a return to the barbaric realm of magic. Stuff just happens…it’s magic…er, quantum gravity fluctuations…without cause. How can any thinking person take that drivel to heart? Their faith in quantum fluctuations is irrational and completely undermines any claim to being scientific. For every effect there must be a cause and the effect cannot be greater than the cause. Thank you for defending us from a return to medieval thinking.

    • “For every effect there must be a cause and the effect cannot be greater than the cause”

      I don’t understand this. Why can the effect be no greater than the cause.

  3. I have no belief in gods and I do not feel the need to ‘resort to futuristic discoveries’ that may push gods into an even smaller pocket. I don’t see this as a gamble because I see no compelling reason to believe the doctrines of any of the many gods, religions or religious denominations, cults, sects etc on offer. Of course, this is a Christian blog but I’d suggest if you were born of Muslim parents in Saudi Arabia, you’d be arguing the case for Islam, born of Hindu parents in India, Hinduism etc etc. I think Pascals Wager doesn’t work since an omnipotent, omniscient God would know that I have no belief in gods and which god would I believe in anyway? If you’re suggesting that the ‘gamble’ is to risk eternal damnation in hell, that only re-enforces my belief that this would not be consistent with the God portrayed in your religion.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: