Scientific Evidence for God?

[the_interactionist]

It's no secret that the past couple of centuries have given birth to the greatest theological dualities in history, those obviously being religious faith vs. deterministic science; however, in the not-so-distant future drawing nigh, we may experience one of the most drastic paradigm shifts - THE most momentous revolution - in the histories of both religion and science.

Even though the research has been evolving for the past (at least) 50 years in this very direction, many zealots of religion and science - which obviously possess their fair shares of dogma - are going to have to "face the facts" and accept that this duality between the two has been a long, drawn-out, completely unecessary one. The time may soon be coming when religion and science can stand in line next to one another at the bottom of the slide of the world's playground, without one trying to push the other down.

This should be most comforting for believers of any kind, whether it fits into anyone's individual preferences or narrow paradigms or not. It's still reassuring for most anyone who believes in God. A little less reassuring for atheists, a little more for those poor agnostics who don't really know where they stand.

Any believer who is wants to influence anyone opposing monotheism would do good to educate themselves on these matters, to be the best witness they can be. Atheists and agnostics have trouble accepting the Bible for the whole truth of life. Holding things up in light of where they look for their answers (science) can indeed help to show non-believers that they can at least accept the possibility that God is real and who knows where that may lead?

Here is a basic layout of some current philosophies on human life, how it may have come to be, and where it's possibly headed. These philosophies, all based on scientific research and theories proposed out of relative research, represent a wide variety of beliefs, but also spread light on the idea that between all belief systems, no matter how complex or incomplete, there is a balance to be found where harmony may exist between the dualities, if we so choose for it to:

1. Neo-Darwinism

Neo-Darwinism's core idea is simply this: evolution and biological complexity are the products of random mutation and natural selection at the level of genes. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection hinged on the idea that advantageous traits in an organism would enable it to better adapt to its environment and thus survive to reproduce. But he could never figure out how these traits were passed on from parent to offspring. It wasn't until twenty years after his death, when scientists unearthed Gregor Mendel's discovery of genetics, that an answer became crystal clear. Through the marriage of Darwin's theory and Mendel's, the Neo-Darwinists created what's called the "modern evolutionary synthesis," which says that natural selection is the mechanism of evolution and genes are the units on which it operates. Which we know for a fact that they do.

2. Progressive Darwinism

Core idea: genetic mechanisms are far more complex than previously thought; moreover, we now know there are several nongenetic systems of heredity that also influence the evolutionary process. This is an amazing theory based on genetic research over past 40 years, specifically, the work of Dr. Bruce Lipton. The findings of this "new" science of genetics, called epigenetics, leads us into the discovery that these nongenetic systems that influence the way our body changes throughout our life and how we trasmit our genes onto our children get their force from sentience and thought. The very act of thought, especially repetitious thoughts and ideas, influence the way our genes act and react to the signals they're recieving from the brain.

This is a truly profound discovery because we now know that it is not necessarily our genes that control us, but rather it is us that control our genes. We are no longer seen by scientific determinism as helpless and victims of our bodies. We have great influence over them via that amazing gift from God we call FAITH!

To learn more about this amazing facet of human life check out Dr. Lipton's book, The Biology of Belief.

3. Intelligent Design

The underlying foundational idea here is that certain features of the universe and earth's biological complexity are best explained by an intelligent agent or cosmic designer, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Proponents of ID invoke a version of the anthropic principle, saying that the laws of physics are so fine-tuned to give birth to life that they could not have been created by chance (in other words, random mutation during natural selection).

Naturally, the scientific community accuses ID-ers of pushing a Christian agenda under the guise of a scientific alternative to Neo-Darwinism when, in fact, ID has yet to provide any direct scientific evidence for its claims. Likewise, many theologians feel that ID's conception of a creator is limited and uninspiring.

A good primer of Intelligent Design, if one so dares to gain insight, is this book: Darwin's Black Box.

4. Theistic Evolution

Theistic evolutionists primarily believe that the evolutionary process of natural selection and random mutation are not contradictory with faith in a God who gives order to all existence. In fact, science and religion deal with different aspects of reality that compliement one another. It's just a matter of time before the two differences coalesce.

This seems to be a liberal-agenda based idea; however, it's logic, evidence, and probability (when held under the speculation of both scientific determinism and religious speculation) can't be honestly ignored.

Recent findings about evolution and our complex biology are bringing scientists to their knees in awe. A number of them, such as Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, are well-established scientists who started out agnostic (at best) but have been overwhelmed by the evidence for design and purpose in the universe. This isn't to be taken lightly. Knowing that the Human Genome Project set out to prove once and for all the central dogma of scientific determinism - that all human life and experience, subjective or objective, is the direct result of genetic factors... nothing else - this sheds light on how humbled many scientists are becoming at the thought of accepting God as a real probability in this universe.

Francis Collins started out as an atheist, involving himself in physics, chemistry, and biology in order to prove what Darwin and Mendel had long-ago proclaimed was the final truth to life. Ended up, he "proved" just the opposite to himself and now is a firm believer in God. What changed his mind? Scientific evidence based on his own genetic research.

To learn more about his amazing discoveries (and his likeness with renowned Christian writer, C.S. Lewis) I recommend his book, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

These are only a few very basic, yet profoundly prevalent, theories of human life and evolution.

It's simply amazing that science is nearing the point at which its materialistic determinism is going to be the very means by which it leads us right back to God.

It makes one wonder if God didn't perhaps put science in our hands to give us more reason for faith.

Blessed Be

[forrestkc]

Theistic Evolution is basically Evolution Science with a theistic origination belief. Basically, it just picks up where science leaves off.

This is it in a nutshell: (1) The universe came into being out of nothingness, approximately 14 billion years ago, (2) Despite massive improbabilities, the properties of the universe appear to have been precisely tuned for life, (3) While the precise mechanism of the origin of life on earth remains unknown, once life arose, the process of evolution and natural selection permitted the development of biological diversity and complexity over very long periods of time, (4) Once evolution got under way no special supernatural intervention was required, (5) Humans are part of this process, sharing a common ancestor with the great apes, (6) But humans are also unique in ways that defy evolutionary explanation and point to our spiritual nature. This includes the existence of the Moral Law (the knowledge of right and wrong) and the search for God that characterizes all human cultures throughout history.

[Guest 4seasonschat.com]

Can God and Scence not co exist?

[Anne]

It's no secret that the past couple of centuries have given birth to the greatest theological dualities in history, those obviously being religious faith vs. deterministic science; however, in the not-so-distant future drawing nigh, we may experience one of the most drastic paradigm shifts - THE most momentous revolution - in the histories of both religion and science.

Even though the research has been evolving for the past (at least) 50 years in this very direction, many zealots of religion and science - which obviously possess their fair shares of dogma - are going to have to "face the facts" and accept that this duality between the two has been a long, drawn-out, completely unecessary one. The time may soon be coming when religion and science can stand in line next to one another at the bottom of the slide of the world's playground, without one trying to push the other down.

This should be most comforting for believers of any kind, whether it fits into anyone's individual preferences or narrow paradigms or not. It's still reassuring for most anyone who believes in God. A little less reassuring for atheists, a little more for those poor agnostics who don't really know where they stand.

Any believer who is wants to influence anyone opposing monotheism would do good to educate themselves on these matters, to be the best witness they can be. Atheists and agnostics have trouble accepting the Bible for the whole truth of life. Holding things up in light of where they look for their answers (science) can indeed help to show non-believers that they can at least accept the possibility that God is real and who knows where that may lead?

Here is a basic layout of some current philosophies on human life, how it may have come to be, and where it's possibly headed. These philosophies, all based on scientific research and theories proposed out of relative research, represent a wide variety of beliefs, but also spread light on the idea that between all belief systems, no matter how complex or incomplete, there is a balance to be found where harmony may exist between the dualities, if we so choose for it to:

1. Neo-Darwinism

Neo-Darwinism's core idea is simply this: evolution and biological complexity are the products of random mutation and natural selection at the level of genes. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection hinged on the idea that advantageous traits in an organism would enable it to better adapt to its environment and thus survive to reproduce. But he could never figure out how these traits were passed on from parent to offspring. It wasn't until twenty years after his death, when scientists unearthed Gregor Mendel's discovery of genetics, that an answer became crystal clear. Through the marriage of Darwin's theory and Mendel's, the Neo-Darwinists created what's called the "modern evolutionary synthesis," which says that natural selection is the mechanism of evolution and genes are the units on which it operates. Which we know for a fact that they do.

2. Progressive Darwinism

Core idea: genetic mechanisms are far more complex than previously thought; moreover, we now know there are several nongenetic systems of heredity that also influence the evolutionary process. This is an amazing theory based on genetic research over past 40 years, specifically, the work of Dr. Bruce Lipton. The findings of this "new" science of genetics, called epigenetics, leads us into the discovery that these nongenetic systems that influence the way our body changes throughout our life and how we trasmit our genes onto our children get their force from sentience and thought. The very act of thought, especially repetitious thoughts and ideas, influence the way our genes act and react to the signals they're recieving from the brain.

This is a truly profound discovery because we now know that it is not necessarily our genes that control us, but rather it is us that control our genes. We are no longer seen by scientific determinism as helpless and victims of our bodies. We have great influence over them via that amazing gift from God we call FAITH!

To learn more about this amazing facet of human life check out Dr. Lipton's book, The Biology of Belief.

3. Intelligent Design

The underlying foundational idea here is that certain features of the universe and earth's biological complexity are best explained by an intelligent agent or cosmic designer, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Proponents of ID invoke a version of the anthropic principle, saying that the laws of physics are so fine-tuned to give birth to life that they could not have been created by chance (in other words, random mutation during natural selection).

Naturally, the scientific community accuses ID-ers of pushing a Christian agenda under the guise of a scientific alternative to Neo-Darwinism when, in fact, ID has yet to provide any direct scientific evidence for its claims. Likewise, many theologians feel that ID's conception of a creator is limited and uninspiring.

A good primer of Intelligent Design, if one so dares to gain insight, is this book: Darwin's Black Box.

4. Theistic Evolution

Theistic evolutionists primarily believe that the evolutionary process of natural selection and random mutation are not contradictory with faith in a God who gives order to all existence. In fact, science and religion deal with different aspects of reality that compliement one another. It's just a matter of time before the two differences coalesce.

This seems to be a liberal-agenda based idea; however, it's logic, evidence, and probability (when held under the speculation of both scientific determinism and religious speculation) can't be honestly ignored.

Recent findings about evolution and our complex biology are bringing scientists to their knees in awe. A number of them, such as Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, are well-established scientists who started out agnostic (at best) but have been overwhelmed by the evidence for design and purpose in the universe. This isn't to be taken lightly. Knowing that the Human Genome Project set out to prove once and for all the central dogma of scientific determinism - that all human life and experience, subjective or objective, is the direct result of genetic factors... nothing else - this sheds light on how humbled many scientists are becoming at the thought of accepting God as a real probability in this universe.

Francis Collins started out as an atheist, involving himself in physics, chemistry, and biology in order to prove what Darwin and Mendel had long-ago proclaimed was the final truth to life. Ended up, he "proved" just the opposite to himself and now is a firm believer in God. What changed his mind? Scientific evidence based on his own genetic research.

To learn more about his amazing discoveries (and his likeness with renowned Christian writer, C.S. Lewis) I recommend his book, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief

These are only a few very basic, yet profoundly prevalent, theories of human life and evolution.

It's simply amazing that science is nearing the point at which its materialistic determinism is going to be the very means by which it leads us right back to God.

It makes one wonder if God didn't perhaps put science in our hands to give us more reason for faith.

Blessed Be

Quite often educated words, are far from wisdom.

[the_interactionist]

Can God and Scence not co exist?

That's the idea behind most more integral forms of evolutionary theory, specifcially, integral spirituality, popularly touted by Ken Wilber. The core idea behind it is that the physical as well as the spiritual coexist interactively, on a variety of levels and complexities that are only beginning to be understood. All science and religious idealism is best understood when one takes a look at the core principles behind each and compares them. If we've learned anything from arithmetic consitency, it's that among comparisons common denominators can be deciphered, even among seemingly opposite factors.

We can look at science and religion two different ways: the way we've always looked at them - as separate, complete opposites that are in a rivalry, attempting to dethrone one another's authority and prevalence OR that each is part of one whole that we are only beginning to understand.

There's evidence for both sides of this coin. It's our choice which we choose to believe and condone.

[Guest AV1611_USER]

God and science do coexist, considering that science was created by God.

Many make the mistake of including evolution in science, which is not a science at all. In order for something to be science, it has to be observable, measurable, and repeatable; evolution isn't any of these. If evolution isn't a science, what is it...

“I was a young man then, with uninformed ideas. I thought out queries and suggestions, wondering all the time… and to my astonishment, those ideas took off like wild fire. People made a religion out of them.” (Charles Darwin)

[kari21]

Evidence for God? Hmmmmm, As the universe has been proven to have had a beginning (Big Bang cosmology) could a universe have created itself from nothing by nothing? Just where did all the matter and energy in the "cosmic egg" (singularity) come from?

As far as life on this planet....can life truly arise from dead matter?

It's funny...scientists working on the SETI program tell us that all they need to hear is one signal with a patten to tell that there is intelligent life "out there." Yet, the information packed into the DNA of a cell came about without ANY intelligence behind it! LOL!!!!!

Beep.....beep.....beep = intelligence.

Enough info in the DNA of a simple bacteria for 1000 books = By chance.

Gimmi a break!!!

[Scarletprayers]

Evidence for God? Hmmmmm, As the universe has been proven to have had a beginning (Big Bang cosmology) could a universe have created itself from nothing by nothing? Just where did all the matter and energy in the "cosmic egg" (singularity) come from?

As far as life on this planet....can life truly arise from dead matter?

It's funny...scientists working on the SETI program tell us that all they need to hear is one signal with a patten to tell that there is intelligent life "out there." Yet, the information packed into the DNA of a cell came about without ANY intelligence behind it! LOL!!!!!

Beep.....beep.....beep = intelligence.

Enough info in the DNA of a simple bacteria for 1000 books = By chance.

Gimmi a break!!!

girl you rock!

[senerhu]

i have often thought, that even though the Bible represents the true Word of God, it was written so that the intelligence of man, at the time, could understand it.

Could you imagine God using Big Bang, DNA, etc in the writing of Genesis? Those people would have asked for an encyclopedia, of course they would have had to know what an encyclopedia was to ask for it...

[EricH]

There will never be "scientific evidence" that proves the existence of God. If there were that would mean that evidence was above. God. Since God is above all, we would expect Him to be the standard of truth.