Today many scientists argue that introducing God, as a valid scientific explanation on the how and why things are the way they are, will prove to be a “science stopper.” They believe that adding God to the equation will only stifle research. Science history has shown that just the opposite is true and that a belief in God has served to be a catalyst for scientific research. Below find some of my random thoughts on God and science:
Great scientists of the past used God to help them in their research. Johann Kepler, the founding father of physical astronomy, said that he was merely, “Thinking God’s thoughts after Him.”
There is nothing inherent in the study of science that says we must have a natural explanation. Yes, a supernatural explanation can’t be ruled out.
Yes, it is true that this could lead to laziness in searching for answers and as a result we need to diligently search for answers before we attribute something to an act of God.
Some observers of the scientific enterprise think that it may have reached its limits when explaining the truly big questions of existence.
For many Christian thinkers, inference to the best explanation is the best way to explain reality.
Much of the conflict between science and religion could dissolve if both religious people and scientists would stick to their boundaries. For example, when it comes to the question of origins, science is not in a position to categorical state the how and why of creation.
If science contradicts religion, how do atheists explain the fact that most of the great scientists of the past believed in God and took the Bible seriously? They include Kepler (astronomy), Boyle (chemistry), and Newton (calculus).
A belief in God gave the founders of modern science the confidence they needed that the natural world was orderly and therefore capable of systematic investigation. They expected to find ‘law’ in Nature because they believed in a Lawgiver.
With over 100 years of research, and many of the brightest biologists, the explanations of origins still elude them. There are currently no working theories of how life might have arisen by purely naturalistic means.
The evolutionists believe they have discovered the only truth about origins and as atheists, this truth fits their materialistic worldview. They have concluded that their discoveries are as material as the microscope they use.
But is there such a thing as “science”? There isn’t. Science is not a thing like a shovel used for digging, a microscope for viewing what can’t be seen with the naked eye, or a gun to send a projectile through the air. To “follow the science” means to follow the opinions, theories, and conclusions of people. That requires a belief in intangibles which requires faith; therefore, atheistic scientists are some of the most religious people we know. They are also the most schizophrenic people we know as they search for truth all the while suppressing truth in unrighteousness. They must get a lot of headaches and upset stomachs.