I like to say that he is the God if the gaps between the gaps as well as God of the gaps. To posit God as a scientific explanation is surely a category error.
Yes, but science cannot explain as much as philosophy/mathematics can explain. Science is weak where math is strong. A Creator is a much better mathematical/philosophical explanation for the origin universe--something material science literally cannot explain because there is no material to construct a scientific hypothesis from. There is truth beyond the reach of human science that is still within the reach of the human intellect.
The truth that really matters - the life-changing truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ - is not attainable by any intellectual enterprise, be it scientific, philosophical or any other. It cones by revelation, by the goodwill of our Creator God, who says to us "come, whoever will".
I notice that science never reaches a bottom explanation.
Why do things fall? Gravity. "Gravity" how? Mass/energy bend space-time. "Bend space-time" how? The Higgs boson. How does "Higgs boson" apply force? Don't know yet...
Even if we get a few levels deeper, the question of, "Okay, but how does that work?" never reaches a scientific grounding. Either:
1. There is an infunite regress of answers to "Okay, but how does that work?" (a mathematically dubious idea that contradicts the Peano axiom of induction and the ZFC axiom of foundation).
2. There is a ground truth that "just is" (the classic, "Because I say so; stop asking questions.").
3. A mathematical Mind preceeded the material universe, and that Mind chooses the ground truth.
A Creator Mind is the most intellectually robust hypothesis. It's not a "god of the gaps," it is God as the basis from which everything derives. Its a grounding argument, not a gap-filling argument, and if a Creator Mind exists, that's exactly what we should expect to see--a descent of priors that originates from a mathematical basis, not a "just so" brute fact basis.
Brute facts are always irrational, while a Creator Mind whose very nature is existence is self-rationalizing. Once again, God is a more intellectually robust and better explanation for the laws of the universe, in addition to it's origin.
I think you can make the argument that Christianity was necessary for modern science, but not that it was sufficient. (At least not as it actually happened.) We needed the advances in mathematics that came from India through the Arabs.
Another helpful article from Dr. Salviander at the confluence of science and Christianity. This one is fun to read and spot on!
Every major scientific breakthrough opens the door to a new frontier of potential knowledge. I agree with Dr. Salviander that this is by design. Whether we "look large" through the James Webb, or "look small" through an electron microscope—God is there playing "peek-a-boo" with us. He always will be.
I chuckle every time I dwell on the reality of quantum-entanglement. Spooky action at a distance indeed. It's as though Someone really is holding the whole dance together by His Word and power (Colossians 1:16-17; Hebrews 1:3).
It's important to realize that there are some frontiers that science can't explore. I so admire the attitude of Sir. Isaac Newton at the end of his life. At the height of his brilliance, Newton saw himself as but a child on the sea-shore noticing smoother stones and prettier shells while the whole ocean of truth lay undiscovered before him.
That's the attitude of a good scientist...philosopher...theologian...
I like to say that he is the God if the gaps between the gaps as well as God of the gaps. To posit God as a scientific explanation is surely a category error.
Yes, but science cannot explain as much as philosophy/mathematics can explain. Science is weak where math is strong. A Creator is a much better mathematical/philosophical explanation for the origin universe--something material science literally cannot explain because there is no material to construct a scientific hypothesis from. There is truth beyond the reach of human science that is still within the reach of the human intellect.
The truth that really matters - the life-changing truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ - is not attainable by any intellectual enterprise, be it scientific, philosophical or any other. It cones by revelation, by the goodwill of our Creator God, who says to us "come, whoever will".
I notice that science never reaches a bottom explanation.
Why do things fall? Gravity. "Gravity" how? Mass/energy bend space-time. "Bend space-time" how? The Higgs boson. How does "Higgs boson" apply force? Don't know yet...
Even if we get a few levels deeper, the question of, "Okay, but how does that work?" never reaches a scientific grounding. Either:
1. There is an infunite regress of answers to "Okay, but how does that work?" (a mathematically dubious idea that contradicts the Peano axiom of induction and the ZFC axiom of foundation).
2. There is a ground truth that "just is" (the classic, "Because I say so; stop asking questions.").
3. A mathematical Mind preceeded the material universe, and that Mind chooses the ground truth.
A Creator Mind is the most intellectually robust hypothesis. It's not a "god of the gaps," it is God as the basis from which everything derives. Its a grounding argument, not a gap-filling argument, and if a Creator Mind exists, that's exactly what we should expect to see--a descent of priors that originates from a mathematical basis, not a "just so" brute fact basis.
Brute facts are always irrational, while a Creator Mind whose very nature is existence is self-rationalizing. Once again, God is a more intellectually robust and better explanation for the laws of the universe, in addition to it's origin.
I think you can make the argument that Christianity was necessary for modern science, but not that it was sufficient. (At least not as it actually happened.) We needed the advances in mathematics that came from India through the Arabs.
Another helpful article from Dr. Salviander at the confluence of science and Christianity. This one is fun to read and spot on!
Every major scientific breakthrough opens the door to a new frontier of potential knowledge. I agree with Dr. Salviander that this is by design. Whether we "look large" through the James Webb, or "look small" through an electron microscope—God is there playing "peek-a-boo" with us. He always will be.
I chuckle every time I dwell on the reality of quantum-entanglement. Spooky action at a distance indeed. It's as though Someone really is holding the whole dance together by His Word and power (Colossians 1:16-17; Hebrews 1:3).
It's important to realize that there are some frontiers that science can't explore. I so admire the attitude of Sir. Isaac Newton at the end of his life. At the height of his brilliance, Newton saw himself as but a child on the sea-shore noticing smoother stones and prettier shells while the whole ocean of truth lay undiscovered before him.
That's the attitude of a good scientist...philosopher...theologian...
...human.
God moves the planets. Curved space is how He moves them. And so on. Figuring out God's methods doesn't remove God.
Have you been following Schantz' discussion of quantum mechanics?
Fantastic!
Thank you for your clarity. You were able to reach my old and limited intellect.
Be blessed!
I’ve only been on Substack for a handful of months, and you’re already one of my favorite authors.