“God’s book, science and proof serve science and faith.”

with their book God and science are evidence (Guy Trédaniel, 2021) and Michel-Yves Polloré and Olivier Bonacez throw a stone into a pond. They aim to describe recent developments in the fields of physics and cosmology, and to conclude Evidence for the existence of God (who are they) Modern, clear, rational, multidisciplinary, can be confronted objectively (sic) to the real universe. after l “The Undivided Covenant of Materialism” In the intellectual world, authors are happy “Science seems to be God’s ally”. Unfortunately, the book contains lies that can only be understood by non-scientists. Simultaneously and erroneously, he proposes an intellectual scheme of the question of God, which one might call “empty materialism.”

→ Read also. Sometimes a difficult dialogue between science and faith

Nature is sublime and everyone, especially scientists, can be surprised by its exact arrangement. According to M. Bolloré and Bonnassies, contemporary science would have explored this arrangement to such a level of detail that we are no longer too far from laying our finger on the Creator, as in the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. It is neither more nor less than a teleological argument: nature, perfectly harmonious, can only be the work of a whole being, God. The authors fit this argument without naming and distorting it to serve their purpose. Should the sensitive experience of nature pass through the practice of science? No, of course: a solitary walker who surprises birds flying over a lake experiences breathtaking nature without exercising a scientific approach. Whatever mm. Bolloré and Bonnassies, no one waited for the Hubble Space Telescope to contemplate creation and feel God’s gesture around them.

See also  Fermat Science: An Extraordinary Public Meeting in Beaumont-de-Lomagne

Realistic mistakes

The authors state that modern cosmology “It means that the universe had a beginning”, Confirmation of the story of creation and the existence of the Creator. This is wrong: the Big Bang theory proposes that the universe occupies a state of increasing density and temperature as we go back in time, to the point where it reaches regimes of density and temperature where our current understanding of physics no longer applies. So science is no longer predictive and any scientific statement about the beginning can be just an uncertain extrapolation. But what does it matter, mm. Bolloré and Bonnassies sell bear skin: we would have found the original point.

→ Read also. La Catho de Lille inaugurates a chair to renew the dialogue between faith and science

But do we really prove that way God’s presence ? In the background, we understand that the authors invoke the cosmological argument: for any movement to have a cause, there must be a primary movement, which is God. Again, the point is delivered by reducing the historical argument to a hollow expression: Science has found the first motion, God is the first motion, and thus science has found God. But this evidence does not satisfy the believers! This great watchmaker who set off the Big Bang and calculated the fundamental constants of physics, is he the God of Mercy who came down to earth and suffered from a passion for the forgiveness of sins? Obviously, no one believes that.

Spiritual dead end

Certainly, think of the harmony of the universe or God as first mobile Believers can be consoled in their faith, but cosmological and teleological arguments are a spiritual dead end, they do not help progress on the path of belief in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

See also  Scientific news in small doses | Journalism

→ Read also. Teilar is a man of science and God

This spiritual quandary hides another logical thing this time around: God’s existence cannot be an object of science. As Karl Popper teaches us, only statements that are falsifiable, that is, the contribution of new experiments can be invalidated, are scientific statements. This is how science advances: through the gradual falsification and refinement of its content. This excludes from science, in principle, a number of statements, including the existence of God. Thus resorting to science to prove the existence of God is a double predicament, moreover well known.

God is revelation

First, God is revelation. Then, for those who want to meditate on the truth, “Faith and reason are two wings”, John Paul II wrote in Faith and reason, an inescapable monument to the current question, and a gap in working references. In addition, these wings are not alien to each other. Faith is nourished by knowledgeEspecially knowing God through the study of Christ’s life and teachings, through interpretation and theology, which are two sciences. Naturally, believers are called to acquire this knowledge to strengthen their faith as suggested the post The light of faith.

→ Read also. To get out of the misunderstanding between God and science

By seeking to banish materialism to a state of ‘irrational belief’, M. Boluri and Bonassis conflict with each other. The suggestion that God appears in nature as evidence of his existence is materialistic. Rather, limiting the understanding of this aspect to science is even worse: it is hollow materialism. Their work presents a mystical scientific discourse that serves science together, suddenly deprived of its principles and subject matter, faith, which has suddenly withdrawn from the field of the human heart.

See also  Scientists get their first look at an asteroid sample from space

However, the human heart is where God appears in his first dimension, the spiritual. The power of love, the joy of forgiveness, the persistence of faith and hope, the happiness of love: if there is to be preached, it is surely these inner movements that we must seek to describe and awaken. For if God is also manifested in the contemplation of creation, the latter, though transcendent, is not his only work.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *