We go about our daily lives understanding almost nothing of the world. Except for children, few of us spend much time wondering why nature is the way it is; where the [universe] came from, or whether it was always here.[]
— Carl Sagan
Today, almost no one asks whether a particular belief is
true; the question is whether it is “meaningful to me.” Thus,
we have a blizzard of conflicting claims. We have moved away
from the belief that everyone has a right to his or her own
opinion, towards the notion that every opinion is equally
“right.” Every point of view, since it arises from one’s own
feelings, is just as valid as another. Whatever a person feels is
the truth becomes the truth for him or her.[]
As our calendar continues to move forward, the belief in
one absolute truth becomes less and less important in society.
Thus, an increasingly popular view of God today can be seen
clearly in the words of one journalist:
For much of my life I was a skeptic. In fact, I considered
myself an atheist. To me, there was far too
much evidence that God was merely a product of wishful thinking, of ancient mythology, of primitive
superstition. How could there be a loving God
if He consigned people to hell just for not believing
in Him? How could miracles contravene the
basic laws of nature? Didn’t evolution satisfactorily
explain how life originated? Doesn’t scientific reasoning
dispel belief in the supernatural?[]
— Lee Strobel, former legal editor of the Chicago Tribune
Similarly:
Science involves the study of natural forces only,
and ceases to be science when it attempts to explain
phenomena by means of supernatural forces.[]
— American Atheists Website
This quickly growing interpretation of what science is,
at the dawn of the new millennium, has made its way from
the American Atheists’ Website into the mainstream scientific
community. But in reality, shouldn’t science be a search
for the truth, no matter what the truth might be?
Many are unaware that today’s information age of laptop
computers and mobile phones has also revealed sufficient evidence
that, surprising as it may be, validates the existence of
God. One of the world’s most respected cosmologists (who
holds the position at Cambridge University once held by Sir
Isaac Newton, and who has been hailed by Time magazine as
“an equal of Einstein”) appropriately notes:
I think there are clearly religious implications whenever
you start to discuss the origins of the universe.
There must be religious overtones. But I think most
scientists prefer to shy away from the religious side
of it. . . . The odds against a universe that has produced
life like ours are immense.[]
— cosmologist Stephen Hawking
If it could be shown to you through solid and persuasive
evidence that God created the universe and everything in it,
and continues to play a significant role in that creation, would
you believe it?
[]
|
