Does Science disprove Atheism?

I am of course aware that this question is usually aimed at religious faith, rather than at atheism, but from my point of view this question makes more sense. It's not that long ago (less than a hundred years) that Christians were being mocked for believing that the universe had a beginning. Even Einstein was among those who initially believed that the universe was always there. This in spite of the fact that one of the things that put the last nail in the coffin of the “steady state” theory of the universe, was his own theory of relativity. His initial reaction to big bang theory was that it did not make sense. He was later persuaded of it it's truth (around the 1930's), but many in the Scientific community were sill skeptical! In fact it was not until the 1960's that the matter was finally considered settled.

Progress in this area came only as telescopes got larger and technology improved. As part of this process, it was discovered that the Universe is expanding, and that some galaxies are retreating from the earth at speeds exceeding 100 million miles an hour. What allowed Scientists to measure this, is the phenomenon commonly referred to as the red shift. This is similar to the doppler effect which most of us have observed when the noise of an oncoming vehicle changes pitch as it passes us in the street. This change in pitch has to do with the shift in the received wave length of sound as the source moves away from us. Red shift has to do with the change in wavelength of a moving source of light as it moves away. The faster the retreat, the greater the red shift (the redder the light in the spectrum of light being received). Part of what makes this discovery so compelling is the fact that it was predicted from one of the solutions to Einsteins' equations (discovered by another). Initially highly skeptical, Einstein was finally persuaded that the universe is indeed expanding by photographic evidence of the red shift, provided by Edwin Hubble and his compatriot.

So once we knew that the universe is expanding, the next thing to do was to trace it all back in space and time. It was in tracing it all back to a single miniscule point of origin that lead to the (now more fully developed) theories of the big bang. What was (and is) interesting to Bible believers is that Science was finally coming up not only with the fact of a beginning, but one that bears an uncanny resemblance to the Genesis description of the whole thing coming into being in a flash of light and energy. Robert Jastrow in an older, but still very informative book (God and the astronomers), rather amusingly describes all this as the Scientist, having scaled the mountain of ignorance, is about to conquer the highest peak but then, when he pulls himself over the highest rock, is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.

So were atheist convinced? Perhaps a more pertinent question is “Can Science disprove atheism?” The fact of the matter is that some were, some are, and no doubt some will be. On the other hand the same thing can be said about theists! How to explain this? It is my observation that very few seem to be persuaded one way or the other by logic alone. One of the so called new (militant) atheists Richard Dawkins tells of being traumatized by 9/11 in the States. His conclusion is that religion was to blame. Who can argue the fact that there have been many atrocities committed in the name of God? But think on this, the last century saw more (much more) atrocities committed in the name of atheism than in religion. Dawkins would argue that it was not atheism in and of itself that was the cause of the atrocities. Maybe, maybe not, but you can't have it both ways. You can't use this argument to absolve atheism but refuse to allow the same argument to absolve religion. Surely Christ has the right answer when He tells us that the problem begins in the heart of man (or woman, I would not want to offend the ladies by excluding them :-) Matthew 15:18,19).

So what has this to do with the question at hand? What I am saying is that we seem to make up our minds for one reason or another, but not primarily based on logic. We may have been offended by those who use God to justify this or that. Or we may see all religious people as hypocrites, or we may have had very positive experiences from some who name the name of Christ. What happens then is that our World view informs our logic. I asked a friend what it would take for him to believe. He told me, and I then asked him if that happened would he really believe. He thought a bit then told me “No, I would find some other reason to explain it.” But let's be honest, this attitude is found on both sides of the theist- atheist divide! Please don't confuse me with the facts, I know what I believe!

So, can we never expect to persuade others from either side, is it all hopeless? My answer is no, but it is not likely to happen by Science/logic/reason alone. Since the essence of Christianity is to know God (as opposed to knowing about Him - see John 17:3), and since knowing a person has a strong component of experience, we will not become Christians without it. What was powerful to me was seeing my experience of Him described in the Scriptures, and also of having the Scriptures help me experience Him more. This is as I say a powerful combination.

But what about Science and logic, does it not have a role to play, can Science persuade someone that God exists? In my view Christianity (for that is what I profess) gives the best explanation of reality. It best explains that there was a beginning and a whole host of other things. It best explains why the Universe “”appears” to be designed, it best explains the phenomenon of a multitude of finely tuned physical constants, constants which, if changed even slightly, would no only exclude the possibility of life period, but even of the formation of stars, planets and galaxies. It best explains what Francis Schaeffer called the mannishness of man, our personality, our search for meaning, our morality. It best explains why beauty and culture and love and hope and peace and joy and the like are infinitely better than squalor and poverty and hate and war and bitterness and lying and deceit. I am told that Science with all its capabilities cannot distinguish between hate and love, anger and euphoria, between joy and fear. Perhaps, just perhaps we are more than Darwinian primates. Perhaps, just perhaps we are made in the image of the Judeo Christian God. Perhaps, just perhaps, Science without faith is blind!

Where was God when...?

He could have prevented this, He could have prevented that. If He is all powerful and all loving why would He not intervene? It can be a stumbling block. It is especially hard when we see someone we love suffering. The Psalmist had a similar problem, it bothered him. He tells us “When I tried to understand all this, it troubled me deeply until I entered the sanctuary of God ....” (Psalm 73:16,17).

The sufferings of Job can teach us something along the same lines. He probably suffered more than any of us do/have/will, and yet at the end of it all when he is no longer fighting God he declares “My ears had heard of you, but now my eyes have seen you” (Job 42:5). It was the eyes of his heart he was talking about, it was the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him (Ephesians 1:17,18). This knowledge is not intellectual knowledge, it is the intimate mother love of the baby on the breast. It is the mother heart of God experienced. It is the feeling of security, the feeling that in spite of it all, it's going to be alright, that I can get through this because I am loved and accepted and comforted and healed. It is knowing that somehow God is in control. It is the surrender of Peter when asked if he was offended “Where shall I go Lord, You have the words of eternal life?” (John 6:68).

I came to see this in a new way recently when I learned that someone I love and respect had suffered a devastating blow in her personal life. It is far too easy to give theologically correct answers to the problem of suffering when you are far removed from the situation, but mere logic will not satisfy. We cry out “Why?” and “Why me?” And even if we do not acknowledge it we are crying out to God. I have this picture of me and Him, He with His arms around me, and me pummelling His chest with my fists in frustration and pain. Finally I surrender sobbing. I have entered the sanctuary, and His mercy and grace and peace overtake me and I am comforted.

Paul prays for the Ephesians that they would know the the width and length and depth and heigh of the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge (Ephesians 3:18,19). It makes no sense in logic. How can you know something that surpasses knowledge? What I do know is that when I am real with Him, He is real with me. He meets me where I am “at,” even when where I am at may not be where I should be. My intellectual understanding is limited, but I know when I am loved, and I know the love of Christ is real. I have experience the truth of the Scripture which says “Draw near to God and He will draw near to you” (James 4:8).

If you want to pray: God, I need you, please meet me where I am and draw me deeper into your unfathomable love. Heal me and I will be healed. In Jesus name, Amen.

Not invested in the truth or falsity of Evolution

It is clear to me that by selective breeding you can, over time, breed dogs or horses with longer or shorter noses. Whether everything evolved from a single cell seems to me to be a lot less likely that it was thought to be at the time of Darwin. Part of this is that the big bang theory and the theory of relativity seems to fit the facts more closely than the view that the universe always existed, or that it was trillions if not quadrillions of years old.

Those thoughts/estimates of the age of the universe were thought to be necessary for Darwinian evolution to have taken place. The lack of progress in the anticipated discovery of transitional forms in the fossil record, the fact of the (relatively) rapid appearance of new species in the so called “Cambrian explosion,” as well as the discovery that life is far more complex than we ever thought it to be, all weaken the evolutionary hypotheses. But don't expect the theory to disappear any time soon. The point, as Thomas Kuhn explains in his book “The Structure of Scientific Revolution,” is that the Scientific community is often very resistant to throwing out popular theories, even in the face of contrary evidence. It wasn't only the Church that resisted Galileo’s view that the earth went round the sun (rather than the other way round), it was many of the Scientists of his day. But it doesn't (didn't) matter in any case, at least not from a theological perspective.

I mean if I were to come to you and say “The earth goes round the sun therefore God does not exist,” you would I think look at me with bewilderment. Likewise when Newton discovered the law of gravity, he did not immediately renounce his (profound) faith. So why not? Well, Newton was sensible enough to realize that the discovery of a Scientific mechanism, or law, does not immediately rule out the possibility of the existence of a law giver, or a designer of the mechanism, be it evolution or big bang theories or whatever.

I am not entirely sure why so many Christians seem to be so threatened by the theories (yes plural) of the big bang. I suspect however, that it is this very same confusion, and that they have bought into the lie that a Scientific description of a mechanism somehow or other disproves the existence of a creator. The atheist who insists on empirical evidence for his (or her) views, and cites science as having proved God's non-existence needs to ask himself (herself) such questions as “If the big bang is correct, then what is the cause of it?” You cannot hold the Scientific principle of cause and effect in a closed system and not ask for the cause of the mechanism, in this case the cause of the big bang. At least you should not!

And there are many other questions that need to be asked. For example “Where does intelligence come from?” or “If it all came into being by chance, why would it make any sense to expect laws that explain things?” Why would we expect methodical study of the universe to reveal its secrets? It is surely significant that Science really only took off in cultures where there was a strong belief in an intelligent creator being. The point is that it is only with the “hypothesis” of an intelligent creator that we would expect that which is created to be intelligible!

So in the end these things have become non-issues for me. The point is that firstly I am not at all sure what parts (for example) of the theories of evolution are true. I am not as sure about what is true and what is not as many on both sides of the equation would have us believe. But secondly what I do believe is anything that turns out to be true will be nothing more than a description of the mechanism He employed (set in motion?). To say it another way, I am not invested in the truth of falsity of the various forms of the theory of evolution. My faith does not rise or fall on these issues. On the other hand I do have enough confidence in the Scientific method to believe that in the end the truth will prevail on any particular issue. It just might take a long time for that to happen, however. And in the meantime since the existence of a moral God tends to put a damper on some of the things we might want to do, I am also sure we will find other ways to try to explain away His existence.

My prayers are powerful

Does this describe how you feel about your prayer life? Here's the rub, if this is not how you feel, then it's likely not true. The Bible tells us “The prayer of a righteous man or woman is powerful and effective” (James 5:16). You may answer “Well the true rub here is that I am not righteous!” However if you belong to Christ then you are the righteousness of God in Him (2 Corinthians 5:21).

The context of the James quotation is important. The first part of verse 16 reads “Confess your sins one to another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed.” There are three things here that I want to mention. Firstly the healing of which James is speaking, while it certainly includes physical healing (verse 14 and 15), also has to do with healing of the heart, mind and emotions. Jesus tells us that His mandate includes the healing of broken hearts (Luke 4:21 and context, see also Isaiah 61: 1). Now part of this involves believing what He says about us. We are the righteousness of God, we are saints, we are qualified to be inheritors of the Kingdom of God (Colossians 1:12).

So part of the healing we are promised is that we will progressively know who we are in Christ, precious sons and daughters of the living God. But secondly the context is about walking in the light, and in particular about that aspect of walking in the light that has to do with confessing our sins. When we do this, God is faithful to forgive us our sins, and He is faithful to cleanse us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:9). If we are not doing this regularly, we will not be walking in the light, and we will not feel cleansed, we will not feel the joy of repentance and we will not have confidence before Him in our prayer life. In fact when we have known and unconfessed sin in our lives, He will not hear us (Isaiah 59:2).

So if we are to be powerful in prayer, we need to know who we are, and we need to keep short accounts with with God. But this brings me to the third thing that I see in this context, the confession also has to be to one other! This can be very scarey. If your experience is anything like mine, you will have confessed to others and it has either become the subject of gossip, or it has come back to you as accusation! This is not healing! We need to be wise here, and we need to find a safe place. It will probably start with finding someone who you can trust, someone who will keep your confidences and not judge you, and someone who will pray for you (and you for them – still in verse 16). Not all fellowships are safe, but it is imperative that we find a place (or places) that are safe. We are deeply into what true fellowship means here. It has to do with being real, it has to do with being honest and humble enough to realize that “in many things we all fail,” and that “all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God” (James 3:2; Romans 3:23).

To put all this another way, it is about living at the foot of the cross. It is about living in the perspective of what He needed to do for us and what He has done and continues to do for us. It is about knowing that He loves us unconditionally. It is about knowing who we are in Him, about recognizing Him in each other and treating each other accordingly. It is about walking in the light. It is about knowing our authority in Him. It is about knowing that when, to the best of our ability we are doing all this, that our prayers are powerful.

But know the enemy will test this in you. He will whisper in your ear that you are not worthy. As did Jesus, we need use the Word of God. We need to tell him and tell ourselves “I am the righteousness of God in Him.” Then we need to tell ourselves “My prayers are powerful.” We need to keep saying it until we believe it, and then we need to keep saying it because we believe it, and because it is true! And we need to pray!