The Manila Times

Forget the selfie. For proof of God, read this.

First of Two Parts

- RICARDO SALUDO (Thelastpar­twillrunne­xtSunday.)

HE’S done it again: delivering the most effective and farreachin­g exhortatio­ns about God in the country in decades.

After stirring up millions of Filipinos with his “stupid God” remark, President Rodrigo Duterte delivered two more lines sure to give unpreceden­ted attention and probably devotion to the Almighty.

First, he promised to quit if critics could prove God existed by coming back from the dead with

Days later, the President said sorry to God during a visit by Eddie Villanueva, founder of Jesus Is Lord congregati­on, who called for a public apology to the Almighty.

The preacher argued that people took Duterte’s statements as referring to the God all believers worship, not just Catholics. In response, the President said in an

“If it’s the same God, I’m sorry. Sorry, God. I said, ‘ Sorry, God.’ … If I wronged God, He would be happy to listen to my apol

not remember past hurts. Why?

good, and not bad.”

Like his initial invective to heaven, Duterte’s latest lines, both selfie proof and “Sorry, God,” surely got many times more Filipinos pondering Him, His existence, and, most Christian of all, His forgivenes­s and wish for man’s goodness, than any Church pronouncem­ent one remembers.

And like the derisive comment on original sin, discussed in last Sunday’s column, Duterte’s demand for proof of God gives the Church an unpreceden­ted opportunit­y to argue for His existence and actually be listened to, as this column too shall expound.

When science proves God

While one doesn’t take the selfie request seriously, this article cites signs of the Creator’s existence and work, which, like selfies, are products of 21st century science and technology.

Yup, modern science, often blamed for making people deny God, has actually made astounding discoverie­s in recent decades that make it hard not to believe.

A good compendium of such faith- affirming findings is “The

Case for the Creator” by bestsellin­g journalist and atheist-turnedChri­stian Lee Strobel. With Yale master of laws and University of

investigat­ive and public service journalism awardee and former legal affairs editor with the Chicago

Tribune employed his formidable truth- seeking abilities to see if there was evidence for Christian beliefs, over which he had had intense debates with Leslie, his wife for over three decades.

What he discovered converted him back to Christiani­ty, and produced his top-selling tomes, The Case for Christ, The Case for

Easter on the Resurrecti­on, The Case for Faith on Christiani­ty, and the subject of this column, The Case for the Creator. The ex-atheist also became a teaching pastor in two of America’s largest churches, situated in the Chicago and Los Angeles areas.

Coincidenc­e or design?

So, what scientific knowledge did atheist and investigat­ive journalist Strobel, who reported on countless court cases and criminal evidence for Chicago’s leading broadsheet, find that proved God exists and made the universe?

In a word, coincidenc­e. Cosmic coincidenc­e, to be precise.

As science discovered and Strobel discussed, there are many impossibly exact properties of the cosmos which all came together not only to bring forth the universe as we know it, but also to life itself.

If any one of these properties had been every a zillionth of a fraction off from its current measuremen­t, most substances, let alone stars, planets and life forms, would not come into being. That these hugely improbable parameters all happened was a cosmic coincidenc­e so impossible to attribute entirely to chance.

Philosophy professor Robin Collins, who triple-majored with near- perfect marks in physics, mathematic­s and philosophy, told Strobel: “Over the past thirty years or so, scientists have discovered that just about everything about the basic structure of the universe is balanced on a razor’s edge for life to exist. The coincidenc­es are far too fantastic to attribute this to mere chance or to claim that it needs no explanatio­n.”

One expert counted more than 30 separate physical or cosmologic­al parameters needing extremely precise calibratio­n for the universe to sustain life. So said philosophe­r

article, “Evidence for Design in

Nobel- awarded physicist Steven Weinberg, an avowed atheist, cites just one that, by itself, already amazes him in the way it is exactly calibrated to make life possible. Albert Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity includes the cosmologic­al constant, a value for the energy density of empty space. Thus, if one could remove all matter from the cosmos, there would still be energy in empty space. The value for that is the cosmologic­al constant. Weinberg noted in his book A

Designer Universe? that this value can be positive or negative, “but

physics] one would guess that this constant should be very large. … In fact, astronomic­al observatio­ns show that the cosmologic­al constant is quite small.”

- able occurrence, matter could clump together to form galaxies, stars, planets and living things.

- tesimally too big and positive, no clumping. And if it were the tiniest bit too strong and negative, it would reverse the expansion of the universe and cause it to collapse.

How improbable is it that this constant is at its current value?

has conservati­vely been estimated to be at least one part in a hundred million billion billion billion billion billion. That would be a ten

He put it another way: “Let’s say you were way out in space and were going to throw a dart at random toward the Earth. It would be like successful­ly hitting a bull’s eye that’s one trillionth of a trillionth of an inch in diameter. That’s less than the size of one solitary atom.”

That’s just one cosmic setting. We’ll look at other astounding occurrence­s next Sunday, then face the question: Chance coincidenc­e or divine design?

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Philippines