Tag Archives: science

Would You Accept Proof of God’s Existence?

Searching for evidence of God? As I watch talks given by pastors and apologists such as Ravi Zacharias, John Lennox, William Lsuperman-1275374_640ane Craig and many others who provide “evidence”, I find interesting that a great deal of the skeptics ignore the supporting facts and will accept nothing but proof.  I wonder though what proof could be provided and if they would even believe it!

First I will quickly review a bit of the evidence put forth pointing to a creator. Now for those die-hard skeptics the purpose of this post is not to incite an epic argument which eventually leaves me in a quivering heap as I wither under the onslaught of angry comments.  Please remember, I love you. I’m not attacking your beliefs!  I’m merely re-presenting the evidence that has been put forth thus far and postulating whether any evidence or proof would be sufficient to sway skeptic’s mind.

Evidence:

  • The universe had a beginning and was created from absolutely nothing.
  • The universe appears highly designed.
  • The Earth is extremely fine tuned  to support intelligent life. So much so that the odds of another planet with intelligent life existing in the known universe is 1 in 10 to the power of 138.
  • Science cannot explain how the existence of life came into being by random chance.
  • Science cannot explain the mind/consciousness.
  • Macro-evolution is unsupported largely by the fossil record, the fact that mutations are genetic dead ends, and irreducible complexity.  And as mentioned, evolution cannot explain origin.
  • Jesus existed was crucified and we have “evidence” the tomb was empty.
  • Jesus fulfilled 60 major prophecies concerning his life and death and was seen post-resurrection by 500 witnesses.

There is a great deal more evidence but those are a few of the big ones.  Now sure, we can argue how I have it all wrong or that I’m naive.  I recall a commenter on one of Professor John Lennox’s lectures calling him a “God-Tard” which frankly I found humorous in its immaturity.

Yes, it is true.  I have a personal relationship with God and therefore I may examine the evidence in a biased manner that inclines me more to see our Lord than to see blind naturalism or materialism.  Here therefore are two unbiased quotes from atheist scientists.

“A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature.” Fred Hoyle, Astronomer.

“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural.  We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs…because we have a prior commitment to materialism.  Moreover that materialism is absolute for we cannot allow a divine foot in the door.”  Richard Lewontin, Darwinist

Now just as some scientists have a prior commitment to materialism I too have a commitment to God.  But the real question is this: What proof for God’s existence will the skeptic accept?  In the documentary, “Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed” I heard Richard Dawkins, a very outspoken evolutionist, suggest that alien intervention could explain the origin of first life on earth. Does this seem more plausible then a creator? While it may offer an alternative to how life came to be, it in no way solves the problem of how our life supporting earth came into existence or the fact that the existence of our universe is pretty much a miracle in the first place.  Believing in aliens when we know the likelihood of their existence is 1 in a zillion, seems like a greater leap of faith than to believe in a creator.

If Jesus appeared in the clouds in the future as discussed in the Bible, would we really believe he was Jesus? If he came to earth and walked across the face of the water, calmed a storm or healed a man’s blindness with but a touch, would that be enough to convince even the greatest skeptic? I suggest that for some they would rather be comforted with the belief that a super being from another planet was stopping in for a visit than to believe there was an all-powerful God to which they might be held morally accountable.

“We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom. The supporters of this system claimed that it embodied the meaning, the Christian meaning, they insisted of the world. There was one admirably simple method of confuting these people and justifying ourselves in our erotic revolt: we would deny that the world had any meaning whatever.” Aldous Huxley, End and Means

The Bible sums up the passage above clearly.

For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts.” Romans 1:19-21

I feel to call anyone a “fool” in today’s information age is unfair.  We are constantly bombarded by fake news and facts to such a degree we find ourselves at social gatherings retelling very embarrassing untruths.  I hope with this post I have not added to the confusion. But one book, the best selling book, has stood the test of time and scrutiny.  The Bible.  If you want truth, and your mind is open, you will find it in there.

God bless!

Advertisements