Balancing science and God

There is certainly evidence for God-- PLENTY of it, but some of the claims that people make based on some interpretations of some evidence clearly conflicts with discoveries of objective scientific analysis. For example, because of some English translation of the wording in the bible, it was concluded that the earth was about 6000 years old. Scientific evidence now demonstrates that this is clearly not the case. In such instances where objective analysis conflicts with traditional ideas, objective scientific discovery should basically ALWAYS be given the trump status. Objective scientific discovery is like taking off the mask at the end of a Scooby Doo episode, or pulling away the curtain in front of the wizard of Oz.

Long ago, some people saw lightning and volcanoes and had no idea why they were occurring. They theorized that it might be because God was upset. Under their circumstances, that may have been a reasonable conclusion to make. Many commonly accepted hypotheses are hanging in the void of baseless conjecture. They are as founded as an opinions and are not backed by evidence at all.

When evidence of radiation was observed, people attributed all kinds of silly things to radiation. "My headache is caused by radiation." "My arthritis is caused by radiation". "My bad mood is caused by radiation". People even put harmful radioactive particles in their drinking water, thinking that it would “cleanse” them or make them stronger. They would expose themselves to harmful radiation, thinking that radiation would do good things for them.

I believe a similar thing has occurred when evidence of God was observed. People attributed all kinds of fallacious things to “Gods manipulation”. "I lost my job—that was God". "I got a job—That was God". "Someone died—that was God". "Someone got better—that was God". etc. etc.

Perhaps the reason you lost your job was because your boss chose to fire you because they have freedom to make that choice. Perhaps, the reason that you were hired was because you interviewed well. Perhaps the reason someone died was because they were very sick and the natural laws by which this universe functions no longer worked to sustain the functions of their physical body.

The fact that sometimes people die from radiation exposure, or are cured of their cancer by radiation therapy—DOES NOT mean that radiation kills everyone, causes all cancer, or cures all diseases. Yes, sometimes radiation is the cause of these things.

If divine intervention is truly something that has occurred at points in human history, (as there is evidence to suggest, and I believe)—it does not mean that ALL occurrences are direct divine manipulations or alterations of natural laws that are already set in place. Surely this would be a most impractical and unreasonable way for the universe to operate. If the law of gravity can keep the moon in place, certainly there is no need for a legion of heavenly flying personages to push it around the earth.

The false assumptions and associations regarding radiation do not nullify, counter or erase the actual evidence that exists for radiation. All of the bizarre and false ideas that people have about radiation and all of the harmful things that people do with radiation do not and cannot erase the evidence that radiation exists and that according to some accounts it has caused harm and according to some accounts it has eliminated cancerous tumors when used in cancer treatments. So it is with God. Though obviously the field is approached differently as it theology—not radiobiology (just as psychology and history are also studied differently).

Comments