Tag Archives: religion and science

The Death of Science Part 3: Reality Requires Religion

isaac-newton_11606_600x450

Almost every American colony had some form of establishment of religion. This was because their religion consisted of proven and necessary facts of existence. Religion was reliable, logical and rational to them. The modern established religion of Secular Humanism teaches that it is the only scientifically-based belief system in existence. It claims that all other religions are not scientifically-based, but the opposite is true. The Bible, upon which true religion is based, is a book of Science, and Secular Humanism is a religion of mythology.

  • … Scientific history … is that the method that we use is something akin to the scientific method. It is based on at least three characteristics …. The first is to establish that the evidence is reliable. The second is making certain that the analysis being made is logical. And third, the analysis must lead to a generalisation that is based on rational argument.1

Since time began man has only been able to take one of three positions toward a scientific fact. The first is belief, which means to accept the fact as it is and interpret its significance correctly. The second is unbelief, which means to reject a fact or give it the wrong interpretation. The third position is some degree of compromise between the other two, such as accepting a fact but wrongly interpreting its significance. It is also possible to misinterpret the true nature of the fact and misapply it to come to other wrong conclusions.

While entire courses can be written on the Scientific method, applying the universal principles of observation, experimentation, hypothesize, test the results, revise the hypothesis to bring it in line with the observed test results, retest, repeat as necessary, then develop a theory, is based on the work of Sir Isaac Newton. No such system, applied to all observable phenomena existed before him.

Newton understood that, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.” Though Newton understood and believed the Bible, he also understood that General Revelation only leads us to a Intelligent Designer, not the God of Glory revealed in the Word of God.
The scientific method of Newton is based entirely on the principles of the Word of God.

  • 1) Ex Nihilo; The material world we see was made from things we do not see, cannot measure and are not material.
  • 2) Entropy; all energy, matter and matter-energy transformations are toward a greater amount of disorder and less usefulness. In other words in a downward direction. The heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment. Isaiah 51:6 Without intervention, the entire material universe will eventually be motionless at absolute zero.
  • 3) Stability; For I am the Lord, I do not change. Malachi 3:6 An experiment, a test, a measurement performed today will yield the same results under the same conditions as any other time the experiment, test or measurement is performed. Therefore it can be accurately repeated.
  • 4) Order; A stable universe does not have to be orderly. Yet God gave us an orderly universe. Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. Genesis 1:14,15 NASB
  • From these four foundational principles clearly laid out in the Word of God, Newton deduced the Laws of Motion by observing General Revelation, the material world.
  • 5) Inertia; Every object in motion tends to remain in motion unless an external force is applied to it. It is also known as Newton’s First Law of Motion.
  • 6) Force equals mass times acceleration (F=ma) This is also known as Newton’s Second Law of Motion. It is similar to Aristotle’s Force equals mass times velocity (F=mv). Newton defined acceleration as a change in velocity. According to Aristotle these is only velocity when there is force. But according to Newton’s first law, inertia, there is velocity without force when the object is already in motion. Thus acceleration is a more accurate term because it is a change in the preexisting velocity, even if that velocity is zero. Though the word acceleration is always used in physics, if the applied force is opposite the existing motion, it is more commonly referred to as deceleration or braking.
  • 7) For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. This is also known as Newton’s third law of motion.
  • Without these foundational principles, we no longer have science. We a simply left with technology, how things work, not why. And devoid of a moral restraint, technology unchained is the worst of tyrants.

1 Professor Romila Thapar, Frontline magazine Volume 18 – Issue 19, Sep. 15 – 28, 2001 India’s National Magazine from the publishers of THE HINDU.

2 Comments

Filed under Current Issues, Politics, Education, Excerpts from our Nonfiction Books, History, Scientific

The Prime Directive

In 1971 the world was introduced to the Tasaday, a group living in the rainforests of Mindanau in the Philippines. At the time the small group was presented as a stone-age tribe, subsisting nearly naked in caves in a hunter-gatherer style and possessing a unique language. Subsequent studies have caused some to doubt whether these people were “real,” or a hoax manufactured for political purposes by the Marcos government. Clearly they were widely publicized in a day when people were looking for unspoiled, peaceful people living in harmony with nature against the backdrop of war in Vietnam. Some believe their reality was falsely discredited when political conditions turned against Marcos and it became “necessary” to claim that everything Marcos touched was corrupt.

This tribe may have been real or a hoax. Some even believe the truth lay somewhere in between, that  they were in fact “corrupted” by their contact with the outside world and their pristine culture “spoiled” by metal tools and tee shirts. What matters is that an important philosophy came out of the incident, something akin to the TV series Star Trek’s “Prime Directive,” the order not to interfere with a developing culture or species. When the BBC denounced the Tasaday as a hoax, at the close of the
article was included this statement.

“The Tasaday Hoax led many anthropologists to reconsider how they deal with indigenous tribes. It is a situation full of dilemmas. Anthropologists are often faced with situations where members of the tribe they are studying die on a regular basis from easily curable diseases. But administering medicine may be the first step toward the loss of a culture. Many tribes actually express desire to become more technological. Anthropologists usually pressure them not to do so. One Brazilian indigenous tribal chief,
after hearing such a recommendation, is quoted saying, ‘Do they think we like not having any clothes? It may be the way of our ancestors, but the bugs bother us…’ Should tribes like these be exposed to the modern world? There are no easy answers.”

It seems as if “civilized” man has not changed much from Darwin’s day. He prefers to stand back and stare in awe at primitive man, whether to be horrified or to be mesmerized, rather than realize primitive man is just man, not a link with a simpler species or a better culture. People used to think the Australian Aborigines or African blacks were a link in the evolutionary chain and used this to justify outrageous bigotry. Now they just believe “primitive” is better. Perhaps it is better, if these “savages” know enough to want to learn about medicines to help them live and to wear clothes to protect them. How is it civilized to deny lifesaving technology and basic comfort for the sake of preserving what the people themselves don’t like and don’t want to preserve? And even more reprehensible, this philosophy justifies denying people the right to hear of Christ and the Scriptures.

Our civilized modern culture has grasped this lesson very clearly and seeks to impart it to those of us who might not yet have understood it. One episode of Star Trek the Next Generation shows the “correct” handling of such a situation. Scientists had a technological “duck blind” enabling them to study a “Proto-Vulcan” race without being seen. The “cloaking” device failed and in such a way that a native man not only saw the scientists but also was critically injured. The Enterprise crew saved his life and
tried to erase his memories of the incidents to avoid “contamination.” The memory wipe failed and he conceived from his fragmented recollections that a god called “The Picard” (The captain of the Next Generation Enterprise is named Picard) had brought him back from the dead and needed to be worshiped. He led some of his people into a fanatical, violent cult based on this belief.

The catch was that these people had already “evolved” beyond belief in gods, according to the people studying them. The point of the episode was that this belief in a god had to be disproved, because it was based on a misunderstanding of the “fact” that miracles were only the acts of ordinary mortal beings with greater skills and technology. Once this was made clear to the Proto-Vulcans they were able to go back to their atheism with the warm glow of knowing that they could become just like the people they
had been foolish enough to mistake for gods.

The message is unmistakable. The woman who leads the tribe has already stated all the steps in the process of her people’s “evolution” from primitive to civilized, cave dwelling to hut-dwelling, pagan to atheist. She is the one chosen as “advanced” enough to understand the message and she gets it right away. We get it too. Man evolves from primitive to advanced and part of being advanced is giving up the “need” for gods which must be fictitious anyway. Anyone who believes in gods is a wild-eyed,
fanatic who has to shoot somebody with a bow and arrow before he can be straightened out.

3 Comments

Filed under Excerpts from our Nonfiction Books, History, Scientific, Uncategorized