I came across an article with this title while surfing the net today.
It is interesting that science pretends to be objective and dispassionate and yet shows a passionate bias against the possibility of God's existence. Of the 15 arguments I read, I found none to be persuasive. The writer was open to the possibility that aliens from outer space may have introduced life on earth -- that would be OK -- but not God.
Because modern science works within a closed system or box called naturalism. All that is and came to be exists through natural (as opposed to supernatural) means.
Here's an extract from the article:
"Thus, science welcomes the possibility of evolution resulting from forces beyond natural selection. Yet those forces must be natural; they cannot be attributed to the actions of mysterious creative intelligences whose existence, in scientific terms, is unproved."
Note the phrase very carefully: "those forces must be natural".
Because we are scientists, and natural means are the only things we are capable of checking.
Fine. But by saying this, they are saying, "we are closed-minded". It is important to note what they do not say. They do not say, "God may well exist, and it is good to believe in him, but he is beyond the scope of scientific investigation". No, rather, they say, "God cannot exist, and it is foolish to believe in him, because he is beyond the scope of scientific investigation." Do you see the difference? "We do not believe in God because it is an impossibility or even an improbability that he may exist, we do not believe in him because we cannot put him under our microscopes and verify his existence. We cannot control him, therefore, he cannot exist". It's like scientists in a primitive society saying, "radio waves cannot exist because we cannot detect or measure them".
I wonder what scientists think of love. Can its existence be scientifically proven? Can it be detected, measured? No, but I suspect that there are few scientists who would deny that it exists. The point is, there is more than one way to know something, and scientists overstretch their bounds with their unverifiable, unproven assumption that science is a sufficient means for knowing all things.
Back to God.
It is understandable that scientists have a personal, subjective interest in the non-existence of God. If there is a God, he de-thrones scientists from their present god-like status as arbiters of reality, and they would have to bow before His infinite wisdom and power and acknowledge that He is Lord, they are not, and their brains, as brilliant as they may be (created in his image!) are as ants in his sight.
Much preferable to "be as gods".
As for me, I enjoy beholding God with the eyes of faith, and contemplating his wonderful attributes. As a human being, I have made my choice. I am a worshipper of the Most High God.
Like love, this cannot be proven, but it is just as real.
And that's the way the Ball bounces.