14The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.
We watched the 4th or 5th episode in the series The Truth Project from Focus on the Family[http://www.thetruthproject.org/] with the Sunday School class yesterday, which focused on evolutionary theory, Intelligent Design, and philosophical and scientific ideas on these topics.
Class members appeared to agree that species change, adapt to their environments, appear, and disappear [I feel that requiring God to have created a static Universe to accommodate our literary comprehension is also a mistake]. It is the replacement of the Creator with a statistical fluctuation that defies reason and sober judgment. Worse, modern science has adopted as dogma that the Universe must not have been Designed—and will not tolerate questions that confront this principle, in defiance of its own most fundamental ethos.
Moreover, the narrator of the series didn’t begin to plumb the depths of the preposterous conclusions necessary to omit God from our understanding of the Universe. I have seen a number of additional examples– Richard Dawkins, who was mentioned several times in the episode, figures prominently in several:
“VOICES OF SCIENCE – Available Now on DVD
Richard Dawkins, Steven Weinberg, Lawrence Krauss, PZ Myers, David Buss
Four fascinating discussions between Richard Dawkins and some of today’s top scientists.” http://richarddawkins.net/articles/2868
Steven Weinberg, who is required to conclude that it’s still a stochastic fluctuation, regardless: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle
One of my favorites, which shows that the spontaneous appearance of self-aware beings from nothing in the middle of nowhere is actually >more likely< than 6 billion sentient observers randomly showing up on a nondescript, rocky backwater planet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boltzmann_brain
[The presence of this species is thermodynamically preposterous. Please stop existing all over our tidy Universe.]
Then there’s Steven Hawking’s “Top-Down Cosmology”, a quantum-mechanical abstraction that requires that the history of the Universe is being written as—or because?—we observe it, which means that we are creating the Universe as we speak, but the possibility that an intelligent Creator ever did so must apparently be excluded as contradicting scientific >dogma<:
“Hawking is now pushing a different strategy, which he calls top-down cosmology. It is not the case, he says, that the past uniquely determines the present. Because the universe has many possible histories and just as many possible beginnings, the present state of the universe selects the past. “This means that the histories of the Universe depend on what is being measured,” Hawking wrote in a recent paper, “contrary to the usual idea that the Universe has an objective, observer-independent history.””
Another summary of the concepts above:
“God or a multiverse?”
By Mark Vernon on Tuesday, December 9 2008, 08:16 – Science
“Quantum physics says goodbye to reality”:
My earlier weblog comments on these articles:
—Some Other Questions[—Integrity? and/or a failure to communicate?]
—It’s Science Again