In this blog, l like to show the non-scientific world of anti-God crowd does not even realise the Bible laid the foundation for science. Take a look at Isaiah 41.21-23 and 43.9-10 and be amazed at God’s omniscience.
But first, what is it about science? Whenever someone says, “Trust the science”, what does it mean. Simply put, it is a way of seeking truth based on evidence and logical reasoning. One takes a certain position after having evidentiary discovery, not from speculation or faith.
Europe emerged out of the Dark Ages led by learned men schooled by an education system provided by early Christian churches. In other words, Science evolved out of Faith. Men learnt a new way to discern the world by inductive reasoning and evidence. At its basic core, this led to the Protestant Reformation, the doctrine of sola scriptura. Men do not need churches or the clergy, we can read and interpret the Bible ourselves. Sola scriptura led to schism in the Roman Catholic Church and sprouted a thousand denominations. On a higher level, it led to the Age of Relativism prevalent today where everybody perceives their own truth. As absolutes are abandoned, Truth then becomes subjective.
Francis Bacon (1561–1626) is generally accepted as the father of empiricism, a theory that all knowledge is derived from sense-experience. Empiricism emphasizes the formation of ideas based on evidence rather than innate ideas or traditions. Bacon proposed inductive reasoning and observation as a way to gain scientific knowledge. Although it is a move away from dogma, Bacon’s scientific experimentation was primed for the objective of fulfilling scripture.
From Bacon and many other thinkers after him, the idea has evolved to present day Scientific Method as an approach to inquiry on science or other matters.
Make an observation - Ask a question.
You observe or thought of, something. Start asking questions - what, how, when, why, who.
Research
Check up on related matters, past experiences or observations, learn from past mistakes of others, etc.
Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation.
With the knowledge gained from research, form hypothesis or guesses as to probable answers to questions raised. Hypothesis should be testable.
Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
Prediction is a speculation on the outcome of the test.
Test the prediction.
Conduct fair experiments or tests to confirm actual results to predicted outcomes. Experiments or tests can be done several times to make sure that the first results weren't just accidental. Such repeat tests can be done with a change in a variable or factor one at a time.
Analyse the data
Does the result support the hypothesis. If yes, write report. If not, do iteration, repeat.
Now let’s take a look at Isaiah 41.21-23. Here the Lord is showing how to determine the truth whether the idols are the Gods of Israel.
“Present your case,” says the Lord.
“Set forth your arguments,” says Jacob’s King.
“Tell us, you idols,
what is going to happen.
Tell us what the former things were,
so that we may consider them
and know their final outcome.
Or declare to us the things to come,
Tell us what the future holds,
so we may know that you are gods.
Do something, whether good or bad,
so that we will be dismayed and filled with fear.
See how uncanny these verses relate to the Scientific Method:
Present your case (form a scientific theory)
Set forth your arguments (make a hypothesis based on evidence, some versions translate as "show us your proof")
what is going to happen (make predictions or guess outcomes of tests)
Tell us what the former things were (historical data, past observations)
so that we may consider them (do studies, analyse, tests, experiments, do validations)
and know their final outcome (whether results support hypothesis)
In verse 43.9-10 the Bible further confirmed empiricism is based on experiences, ie observations.
Let all the nations be gathered together,
And let the people be assembled.
Who among them can declare this,
And show us former things?
Let them bring out their witnesses, that they may be justified;
Or let them hear and say, “It is truth.”
“You are My witnesses,” says the Lord,
“And My servant whom I have chosen,
That you may know and believe Me,
And understand that I am He.”
Tell us what the former things were (historical data, past observations)
so that we may consider them (do studies, analyse, tests, experiments, do validations)
and know their final outcome (whether results support hypothesis)
In verse 43.9-10 the Bible further confirmed empiricism is based on experiences, ie observations.
Let all the nations be gathered together,
And let the people be assembled.
Who among them can declare this,
And show us former things?
Let them bring out their witnesses, that they may be justified;
Or let them hear and say, “It is truth.”
“You are My witnesses,” says the Lord,
“And My servant whom I have chosen,
That you may know and believe Me,
And understand that I am He.”
…. show us former things : In the world of science, truth is not ferreted out by reason alone. It has to be supported by evidence. The Lord can show what he has done for the people of Israel : taken them out of captivity in Egypt, led them to the Promised Land, took them out of Babylon. All these past experiences, and more, are evidential proof of the truth, that He is the real God of Israel.
The non-scientific world of Bible deniers do not realise that more than 2,000 years before Francis Bacon, the Bible had laid the foundation for science. One can certainly speculate that as a devout Anglican, Bacon’s book Novum Organum which proposed the Baconian Method, was in fact inspired by the Bible.
A parting shout out :
Plato said:
“The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.”
If you like what you read here and feel it matters Singaporeans know stuff like this, please click and share with your social circle. This makes my effort worthwhile.
This platform has withdrawn it's subscriber widget. If you like
blogs like this and wish to know whenever there is a new post, click the
button to my FB and follow me there. I usually intro my new blogs
there. Thanks.
19 comments:
The Devil can quote the Bible to suit his purpose - Shakespeare. Merchant of Venice.
Anonymous October 14, 2023 at 4:43 PM
Hahaha
“The devil can quote Scripture for his purpose; and the text of Scripture which he now most commonly quotes is, ‘The kingdom of heaven is within you.’ That text has been the stay and support of more Pharisees and prigs and self-righteous spiritual bullies than all the dogmas in creation; it has served to identify self-satisfaction with the peace that passes all understanding. And the text to be quoted in answer to it is that which declares that no man can receive the kingdom except as a little child. What we are to have inside is the childlike spirit; but the childlike spirit is not entirely concerned about what is inside. It is the first mark of possessing it that one is interested in what is outside. The most childlike thing about a child is his curiosity and his appetite and his power of wonder at the world. We might almost say that the whole advantage of having the kingdom within is that we look for it somewhere else.”
― G.K. Chesterton
Half the world’s troubles are caused by self-important people like you who cannot keep your religious beliefs to yourself. What makes you think that your religious beliefs are superior to others.
Anonymous October 14, 2023 at 5:07 PM
The other half are caused by self-righteous like you who cannot tolerate religious beliefs and so think that no one must belief anything except their new liberal religion under pretext of science.
I understand it hurts to find out your non-science science is actually founded on a few thousand years old religious book.
I am a Buddhist but I don’t go around proselytising or banging the drums for Buddhism as you do for your god and the Bible.
Anonymous October 14, 2023 at 5:45 PM
Why are you shy and ashamed of your beliefs?
And by the way, Buddhism is not a religion.
Me I am proud the religion I believe in is first in science. I bang drums and more to share what I know with anyone who likes to hear.
Hi Pat,
Thank you for sharing this. Reading this, it seems that while the scientific method can be used a means to glorify the Lord (against other religions or gods), it can't prove his existence, at least till date. To a certain extent, I hope his existence can be proven for good, as it could solve many current world problems.
While Science has allowed men to discover more about this universe (e.g. expansion of universe), religions have more or less stagnated. Religious believers are generally stuck in the past teachings. Worse, the past is sometimes used to validate the actions of current.
Since Science is founded upon the bible, I strongly encourage all Bible believers to switch to Science.
Des
Thank you, Des. Good to see someone who can put up meaningful objections to my views.
Those who say God does not exist says Science simply cannot prove His existence.
The believers say neither can Science prove God does not exist.
The Science-God argument boils down to this :
Should the one making the positive proposition show proof?
Should the one making the negative proposition show proof?
There have been lots of arguments on either side and no clear cut winner to the debate.
Non believers tend to two interesting analogies of Bertrand Russel's "invisible teapot" and Carl Sagan's "Dragon in the garage". But these too have their fair share of criticisms.
For believers, the faith involves a fair amount of personal experiences of each person.
I rest my faith on two beliefs:
One is the duality of life. This is in fact both and Eastern and scientific reality. So many aspects of life is a metaphysical duality. The Ying and Yang of life - male/female, positive/negative magnetism, binary base in technology data, light/darkness, life/death, etc. I believe humans have a soul. The numerous 'out of body' near death experiences make this undeniable (but science cannot prove nor disprove this.) So duality of Life - if there is ghosts, there must be God.
Two, I strongly believe in Intelligence Design Argument.
You said : "Since Science is founded upon the bible, I strongly encourage all Bible believers to switch to Science."
Equally valid for me to say science should approach inquiry with a Biblical world view. Perhaps then a ot of things which do not seem to make sense may suddenly become crystal clear.
Pretentious pseudo-intellectual gobbledygook.
Religion is faith, science is fact. That is all.
Faith believes water can be turned into wine, science believes wine can be turned into urine.
Anonymous October 16, 2023 at 8:22 AM
"Pretentious pseudo-intellectual gobbledygook.
Religion is faith, science is fact. That is all.
Faith believes water can be turned into wine, science believes wine can be turned into urine."
I am sure you have utmost faith in the mRNA vaccines. Wonder if you have taken your 5th booster and heeded Ong Ye Kung's call to guinea pig the latest Comirnaty vax.
And if only you had googled on making wine out of water you probably would have changed to a different example. But that's science, isn't it? Keep on changing parameters.
But of course you wouldn't know the term science was hijacked from religious inquiry nor that William Whewell (1834) standardized the term “scientist” to refer to practitioners of diverse natural philosophies.
Nor heard of Karl Popper (1959) claimed that scientific hypotheses (unlike religious and philosophical ones) are in principle falsifiable.
Science is Fact based in its inquiry. But you swagger in to posit as if it is absolute Truth. However, unlike pseudo-scientists, the real science-world understands Science is never final and what is accepted as a fact today may be modified or even discarded tomorrow.
"If You Say ‘Science Is Right,’ You’re Wrong
It can’t supply absolute truths about the world, but it brings us steadily closer" : Naomi Oreskes
I tested positive for Covid but survived because I was vaccinated. You are alive today because your mother had you vaccinated when you were a baby against diptheria, measles, smallpox and polio.
Was your mother stupid or clever?
Anonymous October 16, 2023 at 12:28 PM
There you go. Definition of blind faith.
Prior to mRNA nouveau vax, all vaccines went through robust tests and trials.
These mRNA vax do not.
Period.
Perhaps you can explain on behalf of MOH since they are publicity shy why in the last 4 quarters Singapore has the highest excess death rate of more than 30%.
I am glad you survived Covid. I had Covid in 2021 and again recently Oct 11. And I am 73. Unlike you, I never had mRNA jab. Thanks be to God. I'm grateful.
But that's that. Similar blind faith.
Difference is as a believer, I am grateful to the Divine.
Whereas, you will never know whether you will also be alive had you not taken the jab. You see, Science deals with fact, so here you are, speculating that the jab saved you. Actually you should know when they first sold you the jab it was meant to prevent you from getting Covid. See, parameters change all the time.
Jesus did not save you from covid. Statistics and probability did. The world wide mortality rate for non-vaccinated cases was about 2% meaning 98% survived. I doubt all the 98% were saved by your god.
Anonymous October 16, 2023 at 2:37 PM
Oh I see, so Statistics and probability are your Gods.
"The world wide mortality rate for non-vaccinated cases was about 2% meaning 98% survived. I doubt all the 98% were saved by your god." So I suppose your science saved them.
Yes, science saved them, including the 98% who live in countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and India who don’t care much about your gud.
Anonymous October 16, 2023 at 3:42 PM
We are diving into ridiculousness. Your science, which the unvaccinated never believed and never took the a jab, saved them from not getting covid. Indeed.
You want to critique my views, by all means. But present a mature point like commenter Des above.
I will have to stop this discussion unless you have something to discuss as adults because sooner or later Godwin's Law will prevail.
Hi Pat,
Thanks for responding. As your article is informative and factual, it is only fair we engage in a meaningful manner. It's nice you brought up Russell teapot and Carl Sagan. When I first encountered Russell teapot, it provoked my mind, and made me realize that I could not disprove the existence of God.
I find it interesting that you quoted duality. Correct me if I'm wrong, I had assumed Christianity is monistic in nature. Previously, I even read about a theory of rejecting the dualism concept of good vs evil, as the being of evil should not be seen as an equal opposite of God. Furthermore, the Holy Trinity is a core concept in Christianity. How do we reconcile dualism with God?
I feel that Intelligence Design only serves as a simple argument, due to the limitation of the human mind to comprehend complexity. Humans had understood the universe through the lens of classical mechanics. In recent decades, quantum mechanics had shown that this world is more complex than originally thought. For e.g., quantum entanglement, a phenomenon where two subatomic particles remain connected even when separated by vast distances. Such a phenomenon cannot be observed from the human eye, but it still exists. Of course, one may argue that this is simply an intelligent design. But, think about it, if we had simply believed in this, we could not have reached the current state of knowledge about the quantum level.
Another point is, humans simply cannot comprehend randomness. We must assign everything to something, things cannot happen randomly. Even a random statistical process is pseudo-random by nature. However, quantum mechanics had already proposed the probabilistic nature of physical phenomena at sub-atomic levels.
However, please do not get me wrong. I do not reject the concept of God, because if we apply the widest definition, I feel God is simply the beginning of everything. And we must begin from somewhere. It is the religious beliefs such as humanization of God that we should relook at.
@ Des
“Holy Trinity is a core concept in Christianity. How do we reconcile dualism with God?"
When I refer to dualism, I was simply alluding to physical manifestations that we see everywhere, such as laws of gravity, electricity, etc. If you are bringing in Plato’s Dualism, it’s an entirely different matter in the metaphysical realm.
But it’s an excellent question to which my small cranium is unqualified to probe. Worthy of greater minds to examine.
“Correct me if I'm wrong, I had assumed Christianity is monistic in nature.”
Yes Christianity is monotheistic. I am sure you know Christians believe God is One in Essence but three in personalities. The Doctrine of Trinity came out of 2nd Synod in Constantine in the 4th century. For centuries after Christ’s death the idea of Trinity was hotly debated in Minor Asia and Levant regions, even long after 2nd Synod. Today there are some sects who are non-Trinitarians. In fact there are some historians working on a theory Islam actually evolved out of a non-Trinitarian offshoot in the Levant region. This is not a cheap shot polemic, but supported by much evidence. It stands to reason why the Koran vehemently proclaims the non-divinity of Christ and the constant fixation God has no wife and no Son, so much so it became the Islamic Shahada.
“Intelligence Design only serves as a simple argument”
Of course the “watch maker “ makes a simple parable. How many folks can go on a journey of natural laws such as First Cause Law, the Fine Tuning of the universe in the Nuclear Force, the Electro-magnetic Force and the Gravitational Constant, the irreducible complexity of the mechanics of our cells, and DNA codes. All these point to an incredibly intelligence beyond our comprehension.
“...one may argue that this is simply an intelligent design. But, think about it, if we had simply believed in this, we could not have reached the current state of knowledge about the quantum level. “
Good point. For these reasons, the science world has moved away from the “conflict theory” of Science-Bible argument. And for this I quote again Naomi Oreskes:
"If You Say ‘Science Is Right,’ You’re Wrong
It can’t supply absolute truths about the world, but it brings us steadily closer"
You might want to ponder about Plato’s proposition about “Divine Idea”.
“...humans simply cannot comprehend randomness”
Not everyone has a mathematical mid. Me included.
“It is the religious beliefs such as humanization of God that we should relook at.”
Absolutely agree.
Thank you for your comments. They made me reassess, refresh myself and learn.
Hi Pat, thank u for replying. Will definitely ponder on what u shared. Looking forward to your posts.
Post a Comment