A LOOK AT  MIRACLES, JESUS, AND SCIENCE;

This essay is intended primarily to talk (philosophize) about the limits of science in areas of miracles and to a very limited degree, science in relationship to the claims of Jesus. Considering the beliefs of Christians about Jesus, to some extent we will also talk about God in general, specifically in regards to the miracles attributed to Jesus.

First of all, science does not limit or define God or God's actions.  The great scientist/physicist Stephen Hawking says on page 85 or his book "Quest for a Theory of Everything; "It is quite possible that God acts in ways that cannot be described by scientific laws."  What an admission by one of the world's top scientists!  It is not really a stretch to believe, however, that if God created the laws of physics that God would not necessarily be bound by them.  Link here to "Science Assumptions about God."   Some thoughts of another physicists on God in Relation to Nature.

This essay is philosophy informed by some science and is intended to refute some invalid arguments (which are not truly scientific) put forward by atheistic scientists, which on the surface appear to argue against a need for belief in God and miracles, but which in fact do not.

This essay, like the atheistic arguments, is philosophy containing reasonable extrapolations based on science in the area specifically of quantum mechanics principles.  The extrapolations are consistent with one logical interpretation of the facts of science and the limits of science. 

Science is not the objective truth teller in all situations that most people think it is.  Science can tell us little about one time events.  In fact, science also only provides basic truth in very simple basic situations which can be duplicated.  In complex situations as found all around us (life and the design of the universe) there is a need for faith in our understandings and there is plenty of room for miracles.

We will argue that there are, specifically, some elements of science from which one can logically argue that a faith in Jesus, miracles, and resurrection is logical and not inconsistent with the basic laws of physics or any other science.  We will argue that in fact the most fundamental law of physics (quantum mechanics) allows extremely unusual/improbable events to take place within the known laws.

Again, if Jesus is in fact the Son of God, then his claims and miracles need to be addressed in the context of some concept of God and how God would relate to the laws of physics and reality.

Sadly, however, there are many atheistic scientists who make pronouncements about God which are no more than atheist science "philosophy" which is disguised as "science" or at least not clearly indicated to be just their personal philosophy. Such pronouncements are not based on some laboratory test or even a logical analysis starting from the core truths of reality and are therefore not even close to science.

Science is also often presented as being able to explain everything, but as noted by world class physicist Stephen Hawkings, scientific laws cannot define what God can and cannot do and certainly cannot "explain" God.  The reality is that there is nothing fundamental about science or any finding of science which would tend to prove that science can explain everything.

If you believe that science is a pure pursuit that can explain everything, you should read the book; A Different Universe, Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down by Robert Laughlin, Nobel prize in physics.  This book is a must read for anyone interested in the truths of science.  Mr. Laughlin exposes many of science's hidden skeletons., including the erroneous idea that science can explain everything.  One of his main themes, as a matter of fact, is that much of reality is emergent and predictable by science. Yes, he doesn't answer all the questions he raises, but the questions and issues he brings to the fore are very deep and important and in many cases fundamental to a real understanding of the truths and limits of science. 

The atheist claims about the power of science are often far from the truth, but if they were true, it would seem on the surface that they might eliminate the need for God and faith from our worldview. If science could explain the origin of the laws of physics, the origin of the universe, the origin of life, and the complete evolution of life such could be strongly argued.  The truth is that science cannot explain any of these four realities.  This leaves a need for faith in God.

Sadly, such atheistic science philosophy is being taught to our children in school and on television. This perversion of true science must be countered. Hard science, in fact, does not support atheism. Science actually points more and more every day to the high probability of a designer of the universe and a designer of life.   COSMOS AND CREATOR.

 This essay is also just a philosophical position based on possible interpretations of the facts and limits of science which are quite similar to those voiced by other SCIENTISTS IN MANY BOOKS LISTED IN OUR BOOK REVIEWS.

It may seem a stretch of science to be talking abut spiritual matter, but very reputable scientist are finding some very INTERESTING CONNECTIONS BETWEEN PHYSICAL REALITY AND SOMETHING BEYOND which gives support to the comments in this essay.  In the book "Schrödinger's Kittens and the Search for Reality, Ph.D. Physicists J. Gribbvin says on page 142; "the whole universe seems to 'know', in advance what experiment an individual human being is going to carry out."

We do believe, like many other scientists, that looking at the profound elements of the Christian faith such as the resurrection from a scientific prospective is worthwhile but of necessity very limited in its scope. Bringing a scientific viewpoint also does not, we believe, reflect negatively on any Christian faith element in any way.

We believe that the profound and deepest elements of faith will always be above and beyond any direct science. Such elements are, in any case open, to speculation by atheists. This essay will counter some of that negative speculation.

Understanding, then, that this essay is philosophical, it is also necessary to keep in mind that, science is especially limited about individual events that have happened in the past. Science can only talk with some degree of certitude about repeatable tests and experiments. Science speculation, such as this essay and any pronouncement about the origin of life is just philosophy. Philosophies which are at least consistent with science, to some degree, are, in any case, necessary to counter those who philosophize almost purely from their bias and hide that bias. We do not hide our bias of a belief in God nor try to portray philosophy based on science fact as hard science.

Science, by definition, cannot directly talk about God since God, as generally believed in, is a being beyond this universe. Science cannot directly address God who is outside this universe, therefore, and so cannot speak on any divine aspect of Jesus. Science is restricted to physical evidence and science as such can say very little directly as to Jesus, his nature, his works, and the resurrection. indirect evidence in support of Christian beliefs is another matter, and is very positive.
 SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE EXITS IN SUPPORT OF THE POWER OF PRAYER.

Specifically, when one looks at Jesus, the key questions are his assertions that he is the son of God, his the biblical miracles, and his resurrection. It turns out that the basic laws of the universe (as they are understood by many leading scientists leading physicists) leave all these assertions by and about Jesus open to reasonable possibility and a valid matter for rational faith which is consistent with the findings and limitations of hard science.

Even more specifically, if the resurrection involved God simply suspending the laws of physics in some way, science could not affirm or deny that possibility. Science cannot explain the origin of the laws of physics nor can it fully explain the connection between the laws of physics and time. Most laws of physics would be the same with time running backwards.

There is no scientific experiment that could say that the laws could not be suspended without upsetting the reality of the universe in some way. This possibility is by definition outside the realm of science or any extrapolation of science.

Atheists and some others often assume, however, that miracles would have to violate the laws of physics (which science cannot say is not possible for God) and upset the universe. Atheists also assume that that is something God would not do since God in his perfection made the laws of physics perfect. Many such atheistic arguments are based upon such questionable assumptions about God. Somehow atheists assume that they can define God and how he would operate relative to this universe.  It is the epitome of arrogance to believe that one can define and limit God as they wish to.

Atheists ignore the possibility, however, that God may have made the laws of physics so that he could perform miracles without other than local effects in this physical world. If the laws of physics were suspended locally by God for a "time" for God to achieve a miracle, that would not necessarily inherently violate and upset the universe as a creation. The reality is that time is apparently not absolute in physics and if so, a suspension of time would inherently not violate the laws of physics.

There is also always the question and possibility that there is an undiscovered law or laws of physics which would allow miracles to be even more amenable to God's action. There is no reason in physics to believe that no other law of physics could exist; rather, there are inconsistencies in the known laws (models) which make it quite probable that additional or at least significantly modified laws do exist.

Considering the many limits of science, if we do not accept the assumptions of atheists, we can examine, the consistency in Jesus performing miracles. We can also examine if there are logical consistencies in considering if Jesus could have been resurrected without God in any way upsetting his creation.  The Christian belief in the divinity of Jesus and his miracles are, as one time historical events, however, beyond any examination of the laws of physics. As we will argue, however, there is a logically consistent argument for each.

There are at least three ways God could perform miracles;

1) simply act within the uncertainties of quantum mechanics. (Improbable for mankind but not for God outside of time)

2) God acts to localize the effects of the miracle by interference effects with quantum action at a distance affected by God's consciousness.

3) God makes use of some as yet undiscovered physical law or undiscovered effect within the laws we now know.

       Looking first at what is consistent with quantum mechanics;

Quantum mechanics embodies the idea of uncertainty (or limited freedom from a human perspective) and this is fundamental to the law of physics. The deepest known law in particle physics is called quantum mechanics.

One way to look at quantum mechanics is to say that almost anything is possible to a given probability.  The probabilities may be very close to zero, but science does say that it is even possible for someone to walk through a wall!  They would  have to try for far longer than the age of the universe, but it is according to science, not impossible!

If that is the strange reality of the universe, then one cannot rule out God making a miracle happen even if it represents an extremely low probability in the normal world.

Reality as viewed from the concepts of quantum mechanics is unquestionably a very complex subject. At a very basic level, Quantum mechanics is also considered to be the most accurately proven law of physics. Efforts are being made, in fact, to make all other theories of physics (even gravity) consistent with quantum mechanics.

Until fairly recently, quantum mechanics was believed to just relate to individual atomic particle interactions and what can happen primarily at the unseen level of subatomic particles. It is now known from laboratory experiments, however, that quantum mechanics with its uncertainty (leaving room for some form of God's interaction with the material world) also applies at the level of structures of particles as well. This is an amazing finding since the most widely accepted interpretation of quantum mechanics not only involves uncertainty but also seems to require some form of consciousness! That is not a misprint, one interpretation of the most basic law of physics requires consciousness or an observer!  God would, of course, be the ultimate consciousness.

If consciousness, which cannot even be measured, by science, is accepted as interacting with physical reality, it is not a large stretch to believe that God interacts with physical reality. Though not provable, it is reasonable to argue that uncertainty of quantum physics leaves room for prayer and miracles! Again, noted physicist Stephen Hawkings says; "It is quite possible that God acts in ways that cannot be described by scientific laws."

At the quantum mechanical level (at to a lesser extent above that level), quantum mechanics (based on actual laboratory experiments) says that way reality works is not what we would expect/believe. Our perspective is based on our having a limited and narrow view of reality. Quantum mechanics allows for possibilities to exist for events to occur far outside of our normal experiences. Even that which appears to be chance or extreme improbability may in fact be governed by factors and relationships which we cannot easily or simply have not been detected.

 Laboratory experiments have also proven that every particle in the universe is instantaneously interconnected (by theory, infinitely faster than the speed of light.). How this can be is not understood at all by science and certainly leaves open the possibility that there are undiscovered laws of physics (which we will discuss as the third possibility.) God will always remain, of course, one of those possibilities for the source of that interconnectedness of every particle in the universe. This will be true even if a "law" (better mathematical model of quantum mechanics) is found.

Quantum mechanics also implies (by no means proves) that the universe could have been created out of nothing. The probability of that happening is, however, infinitesimally smaller than anything we can comprehend. The act of a creator in a resurrection or other miracle at the least appear to be much more probable than the creation of this entire universe with all its wonders by mere chance.

If our ideas seem far out, we suggest you refer to the book; "strange matters, undiscovered ideas at the frontiers of space and time" by T. Siegfried. On the cover it says; "if you think physics was weird in the twentieth century, wait until you read about the ideas coming your way in the twenty-first...." on page 268 the authors says; "some physicists are really pursuing the idea of a second dimension of time." A second dimension of time could dovetail with the concept of God outside this universe acting in miraculous ways viewed from our "time".

In any case the origin of the universe is either a miracle or extremely close to it. If science says that the entire universe arising from nothing is not even a violation of the laws of physics, science cannot simply dismiss a physically much more localized miracle like the resurrection of Jesus or the miracles of Jesus.
This leads us to the second possibility and the question of the implications of a "local" miracle.
Its hard for a non-physicists to believe, but quantum mechanics (the most precisely verified law of physics) even leaves many scientists believing that it is possible in a limited sense to be both dead and alive at the same time (click here and read Schrödinger's cat thought experiment.) science seems to say that death is not absolute in some way. This certainly makes resurrection more within the realm of God if quantum mechanics is right.

Quantum mechanics even says that cause and effects will break down locally inside black holes (click to site, second sentence from bottom.) there is even some reasonable evidence that such black holes actually exist.

Quantum mechanics also says that reality is not mechanistic or atomistic. Quantum mechanics shows that reality is wavelike (click to site and read the abstract) and deeply interconnected with consciousness. These facts plus the probabilistic nature of reality as some level has many profound implications.

One implication is that science says that miracles are not impossible. Science can only say that miracles are so improbable that they cannot be explained by chance alone. Science cannot say that Jesus could not have performed miracles. Science will, however, also never prove that the miracles (events outside laboratory demonstration) did happen.

A second implication is that if the theory of an entire universe arising from nothing is accepted by science, and if the possibility of a cat being simultaneously dead and alive at the same time is accepted by science, then the possibility of a resurrection which is arising from a previous living state is clearly also not to be ruled out by science. This is the case without God having to "upset" his creation.

The third possibility in finding miracles consistent with science is that there is some as yet undiscovered law.

Basically, science can never rule out the possibility of some undiscovered physical (or for that matter spiritual phenomena being found. Science only addresses affirmations of physical laws (models of reality) which can be tested in the laboratory.

One question that atheists like to bring up is something like; if God can do miracles, why does he not change the path of a hurricane, if the flap of a butterfly wing could change the weather? One answer could be that if it is true that a butterfly could effect the weather, then changing a hurricane could upset the weather worldwide and cause an even greater problem than the hurricane left to itself.

Such questions about Gods actions, especially in terms of why of God's actions are, however, clearly far beyond science with the probably logic that without changing creation in large ways, God has by his own design/creation and the true laws of physics (certainly more complex than man knows now) has himself possibly defined how he can act on a large scale without fundamentally messing up his creation. Certainly the universe is lawful and that would indicate that God is lawful. A lawful God. It seems from simple logic alone, God would not want to mess up his creation, so miracles which are at or beyond the boundaries of his laws would naturally be rare.

Virtually all such essays as this are just personal science based philosophical opinion. Our opinion is, however, quite similar to that of many other scientists. CLICK HERE TO GO TO THE WEB SITE OF THE "FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ENGINEERS AND TECHNOLOGISTS."

Science does not prove Christian beliefs about Jesus, but science at the deepest levels cannot refute such a belief and has elements itself which also require faith in what is unseen.  A CASE CAN BE MADE THAT SCIENCE IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH CHRISTIANITY.  Ref. "The Case For Faith" by L. Strobel, Chapter 2 and "The Case For A Creator" by L. Strobel.

Do you remember how electrical currents and “unseen waves” were laughed at?” (Albert Einstein)  When some scientist questions miracles, remember, science has historically been proven wrong and shortsighted many times.  The same could be true about negative pronouncements about miracles.

Physics and the Mind of God.

Is There Scientific Evidence for the Existence of God?   How the Recent Discoveries Support a Designed Universe

Physics Has Its Principles.

Science and Faith (Quite a number of links about science and faith.)

Prayer, Noetic Studies Feasible; Results Indicate Benefit to Heart Patients

God AND THE BIG BANG - AND OTHER ARGUMENTS ABOUT SCIENCE AND FAITH

Scientific Evidence for Answered Prayer.

Science and faith introduction.