Article 5: Now we have science, why do we need God?

Recently, many debates are held between science and God, giving people the false impression that either science or God, they cannot coexist. The question is, can they?

Back in 1925, the historic Scopes Monkey trial was one of such debates. Although the discussion was whether evolution should be allowed to be taught in public school, the real argument was that now Darwinian's evolution theory could explain "how we get here", it is time to be skeptic about the genesis of the Bible.

Ninety years later, Darwinian's theory is now being taught in every public school, while the genesis of the Bible is rarely taught in public schools at all. It is well known that Darwinian's theory is not science, it is only a hypothesis. Science, by definition, is to discover laws by repeated experiments. But nobody can repeat the evolution experiments in their labs. This is a theory that is based on the phenotype similarities between species, and now with the discovery of genomes, and then based on the genotype similarities between species. But such similarities can also be explained that they are created by the same author. If God see it is fitting to use similar ideas to create the bodies of monkeys and humans, then why not? God might as well gave different breaths to monkeys and humans, the former have souls only, but the later have both souls and spirits. If one looks at the paintings chronologically drawn by an artist, based on their similarities, the conclusion that one painting was evolved into another is ridiculous, but the inference that these paintings were drawn by the same painter is far more reasonable.

Therefore, the Darwinian's theory has not explained God away. Today, churches are still strong, and many scientists, or even biologists still believe in God, an in particular in the Genesis of the Holy Bible sincerely.

Many people attack the genesis of the Holy Bible based on the argument that it lacks the so called "scientific sophistication". They ask questions such as, Did God create the universe literally in six days, or six thousand years, or six million years? Where did Cain get his wife? Is the first woman Eve indeed created out of a rib from Adam? Basically, all questions come into one "Was there really a God who ever spoke?" The attempt was to dismiss the Genesis as a fairly tale and use the evolution theory to explain God away. These people, obviously, do not understand, or do not want to understand, that the bible is not a science book. If God chose to explain how he created the universe in a scientific way, it would probably have taken a whole US library to shelf all the books. But that is not the purpose of the Holy Bible. The Holy bible is a soul-salvation book. The whole bible, both the old testament and the new testament, is pointing to Jesus, the one and only Son of God, the one and only sin redeemer of humanity. Instead of explaining the how of creation, which is not that important for salvation, God explained to us that he had several "relationships" in mind when he created the heavens and the earth: 1) Worship: It is God who created the universe and the first man and woman, so that humans can worship him, the most intimate relationship between the creatures and the creator. 2) Fellowship: the idea of marriage came from God. It is a gift given to humanity. Marriage is between a man and a woman, for a lifetime, with God in it. Therefore, marriage is sacred. It is the most intimate fellowship between humans. 3) Stewardship: God entrusted the stewardship of all creations to humans. The authority we have over other animals is not because we are stronger or smarter, but because God gave that authority to us in the first place. Interestingly, as if God had already foreseen the danger of the evolution theory, in the Holy Bible, when God created each kind of plants and animals, he always added "according to their kinds", as ten times as in one page. Such repetition in a book in which conciseness is much needed underlines the importance of this phrase. It is as if God spoke to the evolutionists, "Hey, I said, each according to its kind, there is no evolution from one kind to another."

The other advance in science is the development of "the big bang theory". The big bang theory is based on half experiments and half theory. Certainly, no one can reproduce the big bang experiment in his lab. So it is again, a hypothesis. The theory explains that the whole universe was formed from "nothing" or singularity. But that "nothing " or singularity, is a mystery. If you talk to a physicist, that "nothing" is actually not "nothing". They say it is very simple: no matters, no energy, no gravity. Physicists can only tell you what "nothing" does not have, but they cannot tell you what "nothing" actually has. Therefore, after you listen to them explain "nothing" for a while (or you read their books if you have enough taste of scientific sophistication), you will know "nothing" is a very complicated concept. The bottom line is, nobody really knows what "nothing" or singularity means in the big bang theory, including all the physicists who developed this theory. However, many atheists are very excited about this theory, because now they can explain that the universe can just emerge from "nothing" without God. However, they forgot this theory assume the existence of physical laws. A few questions: what is "nothing"? Who created "nothing"? Since from nothing to something, some physical laws are needed. Who created those physical laws and where are these physical laws when there is "nothing"? The big bang theory might as well corroborate the Genesis of the Bible: it might be our all mighty God who did the "big bang", who indeed has the power to create everything from nothing, a real nothing.

Today, science is still advancing. Science creates technologies and machines, empowering us to 1) do things we could not do before; 2) do things more efficiently or effectively; 3) understand cause-and-effect more fully: if we do this, then this will happen. However, science does not guide us to decide what to do and what not to do, a moral decision. As science, by definition, only study "laws" and "matters" in the universe, science will never prove and disprove God, the creator, who is beyond all creations and the universe. God alone, is the only objective moral rules giver. Without him, the best we can say is "we are all together, alone", and the best we can do is "let's fight and vote for our own justice, the justice that we can define by ourselves, alone."

The scope of science with respect to morality is well summarized by William Jennings Brian for the Scopes Monkey trial, "Science is a magnificent force, but is not a teacher of morals. It can perfect machinery, but it adds no moral restraints to protect society from the misuse of the machine. It can also built gigantic intellectual ships, but it constructs no moral rudders for the control of storm-tossed human vessel. It not only fails to supply the spiritual element needed but some of its unproven hypotheses rob the ship of its compass and thus endanger its cargo. In war, science has proven itself an evil genius; it has made war more terrible than it ever was before. Man used to be content to slaughter his fellowmen on a single plane, the earth's surface. Science has taught him to go down into the water and shoot up from below and shoot down from above, thus making the battlefield three times as bloody as it was before; but science does not teach brotherly love. Science has made war so hellish that civilization was about to commit suicide; and now we are told that newly discovered instruments of destruction will make the cruelties of the later war seem trivial in comparison with the cruelties of wars that may come in the future. If civilization is to be saved from the wreckage threatened by intelligence not consecrated by love, it must be saved by the moral code of the meek and lowly Nazarene. His teachings and His teaching alone, can solve the problems that vex the heart and perplex the world."

Science is provisional - it gives you a so-far-so-good explanation of the nature. To some, it could be a path to truth, but it is not truth itself. The totality of truth is in God and in Him alone. Jesus proclaimed, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Science is taken away more and more excuses from humanity not to believe in God. The book of the Holy Bible has been opened for some time, now the book of the nature is being opened as well, by science, so that man will have no excuses.

Why did Jesus have to die for you?
https://steemit.com/god/@shiyonglu/why-did-jesus-have-to-die-for-you

Why is it so difficult to believe in God?
https://steemit.com/god/@shiyonglu/why-is-it-so-difficult-to-believe-in-god

If God exists, then why is there suffering?
https://steemit.com/god/@shiyonglu/article-2-if-god-exists-then-why-is-there-suffering

Does God exist?
https://steemit.com/god/@shiyonglu/does-god-exist