Science vs Miracles and Multiverses?

.I know this stuff drives most people nuts,,,,but try and give it a stab anyway......I REALLY believe Science exposes ALL illusions....even those perpetrated by disinformation Scientists!

READ THE ARTICLE "MIRACLES AND SCIENCE" BELOW MY COMMENTS FIRST...............

  ...I really liked this article (below) ...some good logic used here , BUT.......I believe the "problem" Science and Religion has is dealing with our mortality.   We see birth and death in life and in the non-living like stars) which creates the illusion of "time."  The result of our dependance on this "illusion of time" (as Einstein called it) is a "need" to have a "beginning" to Existence. The Bible is very clear that "God" ALWAYS Existed, "He was NOT Created out of nothing" because HE ALWAYS WAS.   It is my contention that God and His PERFECT Laws always Existed and it is man who "needed" to "separate" God from Creation which implies two SEPARATE EXISTENCES. ie; Supernatural Existence which is God's Realm, the one that always existed and one "Created" ...the Natural Existence which is our Realm, the Universe (or Multiverse) and ourselves.  This concept requires an alleged "miracle"..... (whatever that is, especially when the author of the article admits a miracle is nothing but God's Laws speeded up or slowed down depending on the situation.) for BOTH Science and Religion.....NOTHING being made into SOMETHING.  If the author of the article stating that miracles are God's Laws speeded up or slowed down, he is logically saying "there was no miracle" involved in making something from nothing because Creation IS God's Laws speeded up or slowed down!   The conclusion is obvious...there was always "something" and that "something" is God.  If I am correct (and I suspect I might be) atheism is the most illogical human belief one can accept as reality.

The other conclusion that cannot be refuted, IF I AM CORRECT, is that the Universe is infinite and could indeed be a Multiverse of "many" Creations existing forever as an infinite number of "Bubble" Universes. This is called Bubble Theory and is a highly favored theory in Cosmology today,  Our "Genesis" in the Book of Genesis in the Torah...our Old Testament Bible, is about the "inflation" of just ONE of an infinite number of Bubble Universes.

Where I differ with Cosmologists and their view of the Multiverse is their idea that the "other" Universes would be governed by a different set of Laws.In my opinion that is an illogical assumption. I disagree because there is ONLY ONE GOD, therefore the Laws are identical in ALL the "other" Universes.  I even suspect that "Black Holes" are the "backsides" of "other" Bubble Universes!   My God does not "need" magic and "cheap parlor tricks" to be God....His Laws apply to ALL of the Multiverses and His Laws do the Creating FOREVER in both directions of what we call "space/time."

I came to the conclusion that there is no "beginning" using  "life" itself as a proof.  Science assumes that the elements of biological compounds made inside the fusion furnaces of stars....(carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen,phosphorous, sulfur, iron, iodine, calcium, sodium, potassium, magnesium and several others)  cooled and by random collisions eventually formed biochemical compounds...(amino acids, proteins, monosaccharide and polysaccharide carbohydrates, fatty acids, lipids, nucleotides and polynucleotides....DNA/RNA and inorganic salts etc.)  Science further assumes these biochemicals eventually coalesced into the highly complex "living" structure known as the "living cell" and eventually into the even more complex multicellular state of tissues, organs and organ systems. Science explains all of this as the  result of Darwinian Natural Selection.with the "beginning" being a "miracle" of nothing becoming the Universe!  Talk about "blind faith!"  Obviously Religion explains all of this as Intelligent Design...namely God being the "intelligent one" and it was He who Created nothing into something by His Will.  I believe Religion is correct that it was by Intelligent Design that Creation Exists although by   because there never was "nothing"except  His Will which always EXISTED!. It is my contention that it is God's Laws that was involved in ALL of Creation, a manifestation of His Will.

I submit that the ideas I have presented above were proved over 150 years ago in an experiment performed by French Chemist Louis Pasteur. (the "S" shaped flask experiment) Science accepts the "Law" this experiment revealed, the Law of Biogenesis which disproves "spontaneous generation" yet because of the "need" for a "beginning" as I stated above.... they  claim "spontaneous generation" had to occur at least once. The Law of Biogenesis is self supporting...."All Life MUST come from pre-existing Life."  The only logical conclusion in light of this Law is that Existence ALWAYS existed because "LIFE" was required to Create Life!

Natural Selection can explain "changes" within a given phylogenetic group as it does in "antibiotic resistance" by pathogens but Intelligent Design is the only possible way to explain the major phyla of both plant and animal Kingdoms.  Religion is correct that God Created these "phyla" by Intelligent Design by His Will but if they really knew the God revealed in the "flesh" 2000 years ago by Yeshua Ben Joseph (Jesus the Christ in Greek) and were not so anti-Science, THEY would realize the mechanism of "The Law" of Intelligent Design as been discovered through Science....RECOMBINANT DNA. (rDNA)

I have no clue why Science rejects Intelligent Design of the major phyla via rDNA except maybe they have been seduced by the entities revealed in Ephesians 6:12 causing them to reject the Truth revealed in the Bible. (Hmmm....or maybe some of them are part of the conspiracy of disinformation?)

“For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” Ephesians 6:12

When interpreting this Scripture above or ANY other Bible Scripture....remember the words of the illusionist "The Amazing Kreskin....The Supernatural is the undiscovered Natural."   This statement is TRUTH because God's Laws are PERFECT...it is man who limits God with the illusion of the "supernatural" and requires Him to Exist EXTERNAL to His own Creation and Laws!

Miracles and Science

By its very nature, atheism must appeal to science as a basis for its unbelief, for without science it would have little intellectual ground for its beliefs. Of course, most knowledgeable people know that science cannot prove God's existence or disprove it.[i] At best, science can only offer a naturalistic way of looking at things. This raises the question: Are miracles contrary to nature?

Einstein once said there are only two ways of looking at the world—everything is a miracle or nothing is a miracle. At first, I did not quite know how to take Einstein's statement. Then I realized that for Einstein, time no longer mattered. He had found the eternal now through his theory on relativity.

You may say: Okay, what has this to do with miracles? It has a lot to do with miracles if miracles are in any way connected to time, which I believe they are. But, before pursuing that thought, it is important for us to clarify the word miracle. The word miracle has been so abused that anything which cannot be explained or creates wonder, for example, the birth of a child, is often spoken of as a miracle. When I use the word miracle, I mean something which is outside the ordinary course of nature if it was left to itself and in that, we could call a miracle supernatural. We could say that miracles do not break the laws of nature, but simply slow or speed them up. In this definition, a miracle is time supercharged or supernatural. For miracles cut through time and in that moment of their occurrence, we enter the eternal now, which is knowable, but can only be experienced by humans in a limited way in a three-dimensional existence. Einstein knew of this other dimension of the eternal now, but never experienced it, at least not in this life.

I have had a number of atheists tell me that the difference between science and religion is that the latter believes in miracles and science does not. However, I do not believe that is true. There are two miracles which both science and religion believe in, though they may not call them miracles. It is the creation of the universe and the beginning of life. I say this because these things happened one time and fall outside of natural law and beyond a reasonable probability. Remember, to be consistent, atheists must conclude that nature and its laws did not exist at the time of the creation for they were created by “the big bang” like the rest of nature.

No one can explain by observing nature as it now is how nothing could be turned into something, and no one can explain how something could turn into something else without a miracle. Of course, there are many who believe that they have explained these things, but we need to remember that the explanation is not the observation and the explanation is not the evidence. Authentic science is based on the scientific method, which says that for a thing to be a true scientific fact, it must be observed and one must be able to reproduce it and falsify it. Now, neither the creation of the universe nor the creation of life was observed by anyone living today or in recorded history, nor can these things be reproduced, which puts these things outside the area of science and into the area of speculative philosophy or religion. It all comes back to the metaphysical or religious question of why there is something instead of nothing. [ii]

Now here's the astonishing thing. Both religion and science believe in the miracles of creation (something from nothing) and in the evolution of life (something turning into something else).[iii] The only difference is the time factor. One believes in fast miracles (religion) and the other in slow miracles (science). Either fast or slow, both fit into the category of miracle. Now, I know that religion does not like slow miracles, and science does not like fast miracles, but remember what Einstein taught: time is relative. Time is an awareness of humans and means nothing to the deity (unless when dealing with humans), or for that matter, it means nothing even to animals. There is no evidence that they are even conscious of time.

By now, I am sure that those who believe in scientism[iv] are about to blow their tops. Well, let it blow; it may help you to get into your right mind. Your right mind is the mind that can discern the difference between facts and the interpretation of facts, between the data and the explanation, and the difference between science and philosophy. Blowing your top may help you get rid of your fuzzy thinking about existence.

 What have we learned? We have learned that when talking about a metaphysical thing like the creation of something out of nothing, i.e., things relating to the transcendent or to a reality beyond what is perceptible to the senses, that science and religion seem to believe in the same supernatural event. That event is the creation of something out of nothing, which is totally outside of nature and space-time as we know it. Then in space-time, we find both religion and science saying that something changed into something else. In religion, we see God turning the dust of the ground (star dust) into life, and in science we see a similar idea, but a lot slower.

Some of you science buffs are probably saying, “Wait a minute. The big bang theory, science's creation story, is backed up with facts." Well, if there is evidence for the big bang theory, the same facts could prove that God created the universe ex-nihilo out of nothing. The only difference is that instead of referring to God, scientist call the Alpha a singularity, which is a convoluted description of infinite, the nothing or unknown. No matter what you call it, it sure looks like a miracle. It is something coming from nothing. By far, this must be the greatest miracle of all. It even tops one being resurrected from the dead, which is another example of something changing into something else and nothing becoming something.

When someone tells me they cannot believe in miracles, but at the same time tell me they can believe in the big bang theory and evolution, I have to wonder if they either misunderstand miracles or the big bang theory and evolution. The statistical probability of the big bang and life coming from nonlife and then evolving undirected to its apex in mankind is just unbelievable. Yet, many believe in both. Why is it so hard for these folks to believe that God did it? Could it be the conditioning of an atheistic and secular culture? I know nature has its laws and that some believe they are never suspended or superseded by an outside source. However, from my perspective, a miracle is not the deity suspending natural law, but simply speeding nature up or slowing her down to serve His purposes. So, a thing in my thinking is a miracle, whether it happens swiftly or slowly. When Jesus turned water into wine, He was simply speeding up what nature with the help of what man does every season in turning grapes into wine. When Jesus healed people, it was always instant demonstrating that He had the power to speed up the natural healing process. When he calmed the storm, he was not overriding nature's laws, but simply speeding them up. Storms always pass given enough time. However, sometimes God gives them a little nudge. I think some scientists might call this the butterfly effect.

Nature never changes its mind on its own for it is quite dumb. In fact, it is mindless. It is totally controlled by cause and effect in itself. It needs intelligence outside of itself to speed it up sometimes, as when Jesus turned water into wine. I know a lot of people have a problem with this, but it happens on a small scale every time humans exercise their will. When I hit the cue ball and set in motion the law of cause and effect, the laws of nature take over until one of my friends reaches down and quickly removes one of the balls. My friend's action, which came from his will (mind) has changed the game. In essence, the game was started by a will and it was changed by a will every time the players interacted with the balls. The game did not create itself nor did it start the game by itself. The game is the effect not the ultimate cause, nor is the game the maker of the rules for the game. If the game has rules, there must be a rule maker and one of the rules of the game is that the creator of the game can speed it up or slow it down or for that matter, change the rules of the game. Of course, the expression speed up or slow down are completely irrelevant to the Uncreated One who is outside space-time. However, He does seem to respect our finiteness and accommodates the failure of our language to communicate His reality, i.e., His game.

For those wishing to pursue the subject of miracles, I would suggest that you begin with C.S. Lewis's book on miracles and The Everlasting Man by G.K. Chesterton. Both books will give you plenty to think about.

[i] The US National Academy of Sciences has gone on record with the following statement: “Science is a way of knowing about the natural world. It is limited to explaining the natural world through natural causes. Science can say nothing about the supernatural. Whether God exists or not is a question about which science is neutral.” Taken from "Who made God? A Searching for a Theory of Everything by Fay Weldon.

[ii] Note: The Everlasting Man by G.K. Chesterton. . The ultimate question is why they go at all; and anybody who really understands that question will know that it always has been and always will be a religious question; or at any rate a philosophical or metaphysical question.

[iii] Religious people need to remember that God did not make man out of nothing. He formed him out of the dust of the earth or you could say star dust. In this God changed man from one thing to something else. How He did it is debatable for no one was there watching. It could have been fast or slow.

[iv] Scientism is an expression used by some to designate a group of people who have made science into a religion.