Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Sensible Faith 1
Transcript of Sensible Faith 1
... the builder of all things is God
Goal - Confident Faith in God
The Existence of Anything
First Cause - The Cosmological Argument
Science has strongly established that the Universe
had a beginning.
Cause has a very specific relationship with effect.
Science has absolute laws governing matter & energy.
The Organization of Everything
Design and Details - Teleological Argument
From the very beginnings of the universe everything was HIGHLY organized.
From sub-atomic to cosmic extreme complexity reigns.
The Anthropic Principle
Science proves that Organization doesn't just happen.
Life is a very, very special thing.
Life is built with very complicated structures.
These are too complicated to form by chance.
DNA - The language of God.
Science has long established rules on life.
There is Good and there is Evil
Good/Evil, Right/Wrong, Etc., only make sense if there is an objective standard.
People like Ethical Relativism until...
Only God is Good.
Human conscience & Human consciousness.
Free Will & Personal Responsibility.
The Bible presents itself as Truth.
The Bible has repeatedly been proven reliable.
Know how to read it and use it.
Have confidence in the details.
Spend your time in it.
By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.
Not Faith vs Science
Now faith is the assurance
of things hoped for,
the conviction of things not seen.
Everyone has a Bias.
We will not "prove" God.
Theism, Atheism, Agnosticism
And without faith
it is impossible to please Him,
for he who comes to
God must believe that He is...
> Faith is never to be BLIND FAITH!
No one has ever seen God...
" Jn 1:18
BUT He fills our universe with evidences of Him.
> Everywhere we turn, in every area of study, from the tiniest to the grandest, we find confirmations that God is.
I am the Lord (YHWH),
that is My name;
I will not give My glory to another,
Nor My praise to graven images.
Who created the heavens and stretched them out,
Who spread out the earth and its offspring,
Who gives breath to the people on it
And spirit to those who walk in it.
> The Sciences are respected, accurate, and nobel collectors of KNOWLEDGE.
> Science is
and therefore looks for natural explainations.
> We should take in and enjoy scienticfic
data and research
, but be wise and careful before accepting unobservable conclusions.
But a natural man does not accept
the things of the Spirit of God,
for they are foolishness to him;
and he cannot understand them ...
1 Cor 2:14
> Some attack and insult those who hold different views.
> We are all looking at the same information.
> But we are coming to some very different conclusions.
> It helps to be understanding and patient...
> Theism - There is a God.
> Atheism - There is no God. (Faces the problem of proving the negative.)
> Agnosticism - I (or you) don't (or can't) know if there is a God or not.
"My road to Atheism was paved by science ...
so was my later journey to God."
"Science without religion is lame,
religion without science is blind"
> Everything that begins
to exist must have a cause.
> The universe began to exist.
> Therefore the universe
must have had a cause.
Well! What caused God???
> God is, by definition, uncaused.
> Like asking to draw a 2 sided triangle.
"Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God."
None of us believe in created Gods
Dr. John Lennox, Oxford
"With the proof now in place cosmologists can no longer hide behind the possibility of a past eternal universe. There is no escape, they have to face the problem of a cosmic beginning. ... All the evidence we have says that the universe had a beginning."
Dr. Alexander Vilenkin
Director of the Institute of Cosmology
"This would mean that science could predict that the universe must have had a beginning, but that it could not predict how the universe should begin: for that one would have to appeal to God."
Dr. Stephen W. Hawking
"Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing,"
"Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.
It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the universe going."
Dr. Stephen Hawking
Oxford, from The Grand Design
> Cause must be contiguous to the effect.
> Cause must prior to the effect.
> Cause must be greater than the effect.
For by him were all things created,
That are in heaven,
And that are in earth....
All things were created by him and for him.
And he is before all things,
And by him all things consist. Col 1
" is Scientifically Impossible
The 1st Law of Thermodynamics
- The law of conservation of energy.
Newton's 1st Law of Motion
- Uniform Motion Law
Out of absolute nothing came: Space, Time (Space/Time), Matter, Energy (Matter/Energy). These built the entire universe.
In the BEGINNING
and the EARTH
In the various fields of physics and astrophysics, classical cosmology, quantum mechanics, and biochemistry, various discoveries have repeatedly disclosed that the existence of intelligent life on Earth at this time depends upon a delicate balance of physical and cosmological quantities, such that were any one of these quantities to be slightly altered, the balance would be destroyed and life would not exist.
Dr. William L. Craig
Research Professor of Philosophy
For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse
> Laws of Logic
> Laws of Mathematics
> Laws of Chemistry
> Laws of Cosmology and Physics
“There is for me powerful evidence that there is something going on behind it all ... It seems as though somebody has fine-tuned nature's numbers to make the Universe. ...The impression of design is overwhelming.”
Dr. Paul Davies
Physicist, Az State Univ
A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.
Sir Fred Hoyle, Astronomer &
Forever, O LORD, Your word is settled in heaven.
Ps 119: 89
"In physics, we see uncanny degree of harmony, symmetry, and proportionality. ... I mean that the laws of nature seem to have been carefully arranged so that they can be discovered by beings with our level of intelligence. That not only fits the idea of design, but also suggests a providential purpose for humankind ...
Dr. Robin Collins
Chair, Philosophy Dept.
If the world's finest minds can unravel only with difficulty the deeper workings of nature, how could is be supposed that those workings are merely a mindless accident, a product of blind chance.
Dr. Paul Davies
Physicist, Az State Univ
"If the 6 numbers that underlie the fundamental physical properties of the universe were altered even to the tiniest degree, there would be no stars, no complex elements, no life."
Dr. Martin Rees
Cosmologist, Astrophysicist Cambridge
It is quite easy to understand why so many scientists have changed their minds in the past thirty years, agreeing that the universe cannot reasonably be explained as a cosmic accident. Evidence for an intelligent designer becomes more compelling the the more we understand about our carefully crafted habitat.
Dr. Walter Bradley
Distinguished Eng. Prof. Tx A&M, Baylor
The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics
The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium—the state of maximum entropy. Equivalently, perpetual motion machines of the second kind are impossible.
"It is probably no exaggeration to claim that the laws of thermodynamics represent some of the best science we have today. While the utterances in some fields seem to change almost daily, the science of thermodynamics has been noteworthy for its stability. In many decades of careful observations,
not a single departure from any of these laws has ever been noted
Dr. Emmett Williams
The law that entropy always increases, holds, I think, the supreme position among the laws of Nature. If someone points out to you that your pet theory of the universe is in disagreement with Maxwell's equations — then so much the worse for Maxwell's equations. If it is found to be contradicted by observation — well, these experimentalists do bungle things sometimes.
But if your theory is found to be against the second law of thermodynamics I can give you no hope; there is nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation.
Sir Arthur Stanley Eddington
"Now, according to the Second Law of Thermodynamics,
there is always a tendency for the hot areas to cool off and the cool areas to warm up—so that less and less work can be obtained out of it.
Until finally, when everything is one temperature, you cannot get any work out of it, even though all the energy is still there. And this is true for EVERYTHING in general, the universe all over."
"Another way of stating the second law then is, 'The universe is constantly getting more disorderly!' "
Author, Biochemist, Boston U
"...then the LORD God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature."
"...not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father."
"If we could wind back the universe big bang, our confidence that any kind of life would result should be close to ZERO."
Dr. Roger White, MIT
Life is built upon complex molecules
> Proteins ( made up of Amino Acids)
> Nucleic Acids (DNA & RNA)
These molecules must be present for the cell
to support the life of the organism.
> Darwin had no way of knowing how complicated a "simple" cell is.
> Biology lessons for generations have taught on the "simple one celled organism."
> There is no such thing as a "simple" cell.
> The 1st living thing would have had to come together by sheer chance of the forces of physics and chemistry.
> There would have been no "self correcting" forces to correct an error in the first Amino Acids or Proteins.
“A junkyard contains all the bits and pieces of a Boeing 747, dismembered and in disarray. A whirlwind happens to blow through the yard. What is the chance that after its passage a fully assembled 747, ready to fly, will be found standing there? So small as to be negligible, even if a tornado were to blow through enough junkyards to fill the whole Universe.”
Dr Fred Hoyle
"The question, could life have originated by a chance occurrence of atoms, clearly leads to a negative answer. This ... leads to the conclusion that some sequence other than chance occurrences must have led to the appearances of life."
Dr. J.D. Bernal, Research Prof.
on life origins
"Organic molecules, therefore form a large and formidable aray, endless variety and of the most bewildering complexity. One cannot think of having organisms without them. This is precisely the trouble, for to understand how organisms originated we must first of all explain how such complicated molecules could come into being. And that is only the beginning. To make an organism requires not only a tremendous variety of these substances, in adequate amounts and proper proportions, but also just the right arrangememt of them. Structure here is as important as composition - and what a complication of structural. The most complex machine man has devised ... is child's play compared to the simplest of living organisms. The especially trying thing is that complexity here involves such small dimensions. It is on the molecular level; ... detailed fitting molecule to molecule..."
Dr. George Wald, 1906-1997
Nobel Prize in Physiology, Evolutionist
"The statistical probability that organic structures and the most precisely harmonized reactions that typify living organisms would be generated by accident, is zero."
Dr. Ilya Prigogine, physical chemist
2 x Nobel Prize
"An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had been satisfied to get it going."
Dr. Francis Crick, Discovered DNA
"We now know that the probability of life arising by chance is far too low to be plausible, ... there must be some deeper explaination that we are yet to discover."
Dr. Roger White, MIT
(Spontaneous Generation) is the natural process by which life arises from inorganic matter.
"Never will the doctrine of spontaneous generation recover from the mortal blow struck by this simple experiment."
"... God, who gives Life to all things, ...
1 Tim 6:13
Something from Nothing!?
If we are to be honest, then we have to accept that science will be able to claim complete success only if it achieves what many might think impossible: accounting for the emergence of everything from absolutely nothing.
Dr. Peter Atkins
Professor of Chemistry,
Author, University of Oxford
One thing that is clear, in our framing of questions such as 'How did the Universe get started?' is that the Universe was self-creating. This is not a statement on a 'cause' behind the origin of the Universe, nor is it a statement on a lack of purpose or destiny. It is simply a statement that the Universe was emergent, that the actual Universe probably derived from an indeterminate sea of potentiality that we call a quantum vacuum, whose properties may always remain beyond our current understanding.
U. of Oregon Physics Lesson
Indeterminate Sea of Potentiality!?