A Wall Street Journal op-ed argues that science “increasingly makes the case for God,” and there’s a new movie trailer from the people behind God’s Not Dead.
Just like Randy Quaid at the end of Independence Day, the weekly buzz is back.
WSJ op-ed argues that science makes the case for God; a rabbi and a physicist respond
Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life—every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing.
Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?
Not surprisingly, some folks disagreed with Eric’s take. Rabbi Geoffrey Mitelman published a great response on the Huffington Post: “Sorry, Science Doesn’t Make a Case for God. But That’s OK.” In all honesty, I side with Mitelman here. He makes some great points:
Yes, it truly is amazing that all of the needed requirements for life on Earth are so precise. But science is a search for an accurate understanding of our world, which means that it can change. And if we’re basing our view of God on the latest scientific research, we’re going to have a very fragile theology. . . . In other words, religion doesn’t need science to prove God’s existence, because the question of God is not a scientific one.
What do you think of Metaxas’s argument, and how Mitelman and Krauss responded?
“Yes, Jesus existed … but relax, you can still be an atheist if you want to”
My goodness, I love this article title. Check out this fantastic work from Christian theologian Michael Bird. Here’s a sample of it:
There are substantial reasons why one might choose to reject Christian belief; but the question of whether Jesus existed is not one of them. Even if there is no God, there was still an historical Jesus.
I absolutely agree. When I hear atheists make this argument, I feel just like sad Keanu Reeves.
What do you think of Bird’s article?
“‘Year without God’ pastor: Why I’m no longer a believer”
One of my favorite people, Chris Stedman, just interviewed Ryan Bell. A former Christian pastor, Bell made headlines last year when he decided to try atheism for 12 months. Well, the year is up, and Bell announced that he’s chosen atheism over theism.
“2014: Revenge of the Creationists”
Karl Giberson, a physicist and expert in science and religion, wrote a Daily Beast article about creationism. He lists “the top 10 anti-science salvos of 2014.”
New Christian movie: Do You Believe?
The creators of God’s Not Dead just released a trailer for their new movie. It stars Sean Astin and Mira Sorvino, among others. (BONUS POINTS if you can spot a former college football/NFL player in the trailer.)
Did you see him? That’s right, Brian Bosworth is in this movie!! If you haven’t seen his ESPN 30 for 30 documentary, Brian and the Boz, you should. It’s streaming on Netflix right now.
What do you think of this preview of Do You Believe?