As I have again started working my way through the TrueU: Does God Exist? hosted by Dr. Stephen Meyer, I am reminded at how fair his approach to the "big questions" about our existence is.
Meyer masterfully utilizes what scientists and philosophers call "Inference to the Best Explanation" to determine the causality of our universe. As Meyer points out, this leaves the reader or listener to judge for themselves what the best explanation of the topics being discuss such as, "What is the thing in which everything else comes?" This approach utilizes logic, reason, and evidence.
In this article, Reasons to Believe's Kenneth Samples explains that while many believers have been guilty of invoking the so-called "God-of-the-gaps," the Theistic God is actually the best explanation for many of the things we observe throughout various disciplines.
You can find the article here.
I would further encourage you to checkout Reasons to Believe.
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
Comments
I found this section interesting:
"Yet while modern science has been quite successful in explaining many particular aspects of the physical universe, some observers of the scientific enterprise think that it may have reached its limits when explaining the truly big questions of existence. Those limits may not allow answers to such profound questions as the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the origin of consciousness. If this admittedly hotly contested perspective is even close to being true, then the grand natural explanations of science may have been exhausted. If so, naturalism as a worldview has not been able to adequately explain reality (especially its grand features). Given this pessimistic scenario (from a naturalist's perspective), it seems that appealing to the supernatural to explain reality may have some legitimacy after all."
It's encouraging to see that some naturalists in the scientific world have run out of options in trying to explain the origin of life without a Creator. I also found the section describing how Christian scholars use abductive reasoning very informative. After reading this article it would be hard not to agree that "Skeptical philosophies of life such as naturalism have great difficulty explaining universal realities. On this basis, Christian theism's explanatory scope appears far superior to that of naturalism."
Thank you for your ministry!
Yes; as I mentioned in my brief intro. to this article, the inference to the best explanation is difficult for the honest inquire to argue with.
Godspeed