Thursday, December 13, 2018

The Bible Scientific - Genesis 1:2

This is my third entry in a new series of posts called "The Bible Scientific." Each post will examine a verse or two directly from Scripture and try to explain that Biblical quote from a scientific perspective.

It is often stated that the Bible and Science are not compatible, that the Bible is not a scientific text and that you can not believe the Bible and also believe science. I think this is short sighted as there are a number of places in Scripture where scientific facts were stated even before man understood them. The Bible is not a scientific text in that it is not meant to be the full explanation of scientific fact, but it does direct us to understand the nature of God scientifically as well as spiritually. It complements science. God uses His Word to help us understand Him and His creation with our mind, soul and spirit.

Galileo Galilei said:

"The prohibition of science would be contrary to the Bible, which in hundreds of places teaches us how the greatness and the glory of God shine forth marvelously in all His works, and is to be read above all in the open book of the heavens."

If you have a favorite scientific verse or have a verse you would like reviewed, just send a note in the comment section at the bottom of this blog post. I will try to include it in a future blog entry.

=======================================================================

Now lets move to:

Genesis 1:2 (NIV) – Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Science is just now wrestling with the concept of the earth as the only source of life. Science is starting to find exoplanets, planets outside our solar system, and claiming that they may be suitable for life (any life, not just intelligent life). But on the other hand, science is also finding specific conditions that must exist on such a planet, hundreds of them in fact, such that the earth is the only planet so far that seems to meet them all. It is estimated that there is about 1024 planets in the visible universe.


There is less than 1 chance in 10311
That even one planet capable of supporting life would occur anywhere
In the universe without invoking divine miracles. - Reasons.org

Even then it is a wonder the earth does meet them as the odds are strongly against it, even to the limits of an impossibility (only one planet in over 30 trillion universes in a multiverse existence might meet all of the hundreds of known specific conditions that a planet must have to sustain intelligent life). Reasons to Believe (Reasons.org) has lists of these specific conditions that must be met for life to exist. One such list claims 501 specific conditions just for bacterial life to survive for 90 days. The odds of even one planet meeting all 501 conditions is less than 1 in 10311.

Back to the Six Mile Lake eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)."feed me mom". (19159890706)

The Hebrew words used in Genesis 1:2 point to a formless earth (the primordial soup?), and God hovering over it. The Hebrew word for "hover" is "rachaph" which implies a watchful, loving attention to the entire creation process, much like a mother eagle hovering over her chicks. God watched over His creation, and still does, to bring it to its full glory (reducing those 1 in 10311 chances down to 1 in 1).

Genesis 1:2 also portrays a world covered by water, before the formation of the continents, with a thick blanket of clouds (water or other vapors?) surrounding it such that much of the light from the sun was blocked out (could not see the sun as a sphere from the surface of the earth). The temperature of the surface was no doubt warmer too - possibly a perfect incubator for the creation of the beginnings of life - microbes.

Next up: Job 25:2 (NIV) - “Dominion and awe belong to God; he establishes order in the heights of heaven.

Tuesday, November 20, 2018

The Bible Scientific - Perspective

This is my second entry in a new series of posts called "The Bible Scientific." Each post will examine a verse or two directly from Scripture and try to explain that Biblical quote from a scientific perspective.

It is often stated that the Bible and Science are not compatible, that the Bible is not a scientific text and that you can not believe the Bible and also believe science. I think this is short sighted as there are a number of places in Scripture where scientific facts were stated even before man understood them. The Bible is not a scientific text in that it is not meant to be the full explanation of scientific fact, but it does direct us to understand the nature of God scientifically as well as spiritually. It complements science. God uses His Word to help us understand Him and His creation with our mind, soul and spirit.

Galileo Galilei said:

"The prohibition of science would be contrary to the Bible, which in hundreds of places teaches us how the greatness and the glory of God shine forth marvelously in all His works, and is to be read above all in the open book of the heavens."

If you have a favorite scientific verse or have a verse you would like reviewed, just send a comment in the section at the bottom of this blog post. I will try to include it in a future blog entry.

=======================================================================

So I mentioned in my last blog that we would be moving to Genesis 1:2 next. But that was before a reader's comment made me realize I left something out of my discussion. Lets look at Genesis 1:1 again:

Genesis 1:1 (NIV) - In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

The Hebrew word used for "heavens" here is "shamayim" which means "a high and lofty place," that is, the abode of the stars - the universe. Then the writer uses the word "'erets" which means land or earth - as opposed to the heavens. But isn't the earth part of the heavens?

The point I am making here is one of perspective. I consider the Bible as the inspired Word of God. But, it is written by man and thus the perspective of the writer is one of being on the earth, and what that looks like in the context of the Scripture. In Genesis and the Creation story, the Bible is written from the writer's view on earth looking up into the heavens - what would he see?

In Genesis 1:1 the writer would see (if he was there!) the creation of the heavens - the explosion that was the "Big Bang" and the coming together of the stars and sun and planets. But the writer did not see this, as man was not created until the sixth day!

One of my readers pointed this out to me indirectly. He stated the the Sun and Moon were not created until the fourth day, after the plants. How could this be as plants, created in day 3, need light to grow. A more careful read actually shows that light was created on the first day, and the separation of the light and the dark became the night and the day - essentially the sun and the moon (Genesis 1:3-5). But the sun and moon were not visible from earth on the first day as earth's atmosphere was not as it is today - transparent - it had too much methane, which produced a thick hydrocarbon fog and only light could pass through. From the surface of the earth, neither sun nor moon was visible.


God said, Let there be light: and there was light - Genesis 1:3

On the fourth day (Genesis 1:14-19), God cleared the atmosphere so that the sun and moon and stars became visible from the earth. At this point the movement of the sun, moon and stars relative to the earth also became visible. The word "ma'owr" is used here for the word light, not the same word (but from the same root) as used for light as in Genesis 1:3. "Ma'owr" means a luminous body - the now visible sun and moon. Making them visible was necessary for animals, created on the fifth day, that used them to be guided by the seasons to hunt and migrate. Plus, as Genesis 1:14 says - “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years...", a visible sun and moon ultimately allows for man to mark his lifetime.

Also the verb used in Genesis 1:16 ("God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night.") for "made" is "`asah" which does not mean to create from nothing, as "bara'" does, but implies taking something that already exists and accomplishing an action with it - as in making the sun and moon visible from the earth.

Remember, in my view, that the days here are not 24 hour days but individual stretches of time (the word used in Genesis 1:5 for "day" is "yowm", which can mean an amount of time from a 24 hour day into long periods (millions?) of years for each "day") during which God guided His creation to become that which He wanted, one that can support all the living things He desired to create, including humans - created after His image.

Next time we will look at: Genesis 1:2 – Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Monday, October 15, 2018

The Bible Scientific - Genesis 1:1

I am starting a new series of posts that I hope to be shorter, more focused and posted more frequently than I have in the past. Each one will take a verse or two directly from Scripture and try to explain that Biblical quote from a scientific perspective. I am calling these blog posts "The Bible Scientific" with a notation to the specific verse(s) that I am discussing.

It is often stated that the Bible and Science are not compatible, that the Bible is not a scientific text and that you can not believe the Bible and also believe science. I think this is short sighted as there are a number of places in Scripture where scientific facts were stated even before man understood them. The Bible is not a scientific text in that it is not meant to be the full explanation of scientific fact, but it does direct us to understand the nature of God scientifically as well as spiritually. It complements science. God uses His Word to help us understand Him and His creation with our mind, soul and spirit.

Galileo Galilei said:

"The prohibition of science would be contrary to the Bible, which in hundreds of places teaches us how the greatness and the glory of God shine forth marvelously in all His works, and is to be read above all in the open book of the heavens."

We will start our new series below in Genesis. If you have a favorite scientific verse or have a verse you would like reviewed, just send a comment in the section at the bottom of this blog post. I will try to include it in a future blog entry.

=======================================================================

So for this first post of "The Bible Scientific," let's start at the beginning - Genesis 1:1

Genesis 1:1 (NIV) - In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

The Hebrew word used for "create" here is "bara'" which means "to create absolutely," that is, to create from nothing. Scientifically, this verse declares something akin to the Big Bang, that in the beginning the universe was created from nothing.

CMB Timeline300 no WMAP.jpg

Up until about 90 years ago, science stated that the universe was eternal, had always existed (and thus had no cause). It wasn’t until the 1930’s that the concept of the explosion of a singularity blooming into the universe was first conceived, and with it the beginning of time, space and the physical laws of nature. It took until the late 1950’s for scientists even to agree on such a theory.

(By NASA/WMAP Science Team - Original version: NASA; modified by Cherkash, Public Domain, Link)

Moses, identified in the Bible as the author of Genesis, is estimated to have lived about 1500 BC. Secular sources identify Genesis as being written between the 10th and 5th century BC. In either case, if Genesis 1:1 labels the creation of the universe as something synonymous to a "Big Bang," it was certainly much earlier than it was defined by science.


[Big Bang theory] suggested that matter and motion originated
Rather as Genesis [in the Bible] suggests, ex nihilo, out of nothing,
In a stupendous explosion of light and energy. - Newsweek

And it appears that the Big Bang had to be fine tuned to such a degree that even the smallest of change would have resulted in no universe at all.

Steven Hawking said:

"If the rate of expansion one second after the Big Bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, it would have recollapsed before it reached its present size. On the other hand, if it had been greater by a part in a million, the universe would have expanded too rapidly for stars and planets to form."

Then there is the "cause" of the Big Bang. Science, at first, said it must be creation:

Newsweek, in 1998, said:

"[Big Bang theory] suggested that matter and motion originated rather as Genesis [in the Bible] suggests, ex nihilo, out of nothing, in a stupendous explosion of light and energy."

And Steven Hawking said:

"Many scientists did not like the idea that the universe had a beginning, a moment of creation."

Now some scientists are questioning the Big Bang again, it seems, because it speaks of something beyond the beginning of time. This is the "Cosmological Argument" - that everything that had a beginning had a cause - a transcendent cause outside of itself. Genesis 1:1 shows that there was existence before the creation - God (who by definition had no beginning) had to exist outside of, and before, the dimensions of time and physical space came to be - the universe has a transcendent cause, AND a Creator. Science does not like that (it can not be proven or tested scientifically). New theories are looking for a universe created by the Big Bang but without the need for God to be the transcendent cause.

Scientific American said in 1999:

"The big bang theory does not describe the birth of the universe … Another theory describing even earlier times will be needed to explain the original creation of the universe."

So is another theory needed? Can science develop a theory that will truly answer the question "What caused the Universe?" If the creation of the universe was the start of space and time, everything "physical" and the natural laws that govern it all, is it possible to find something else that could have created the universe from outside of those restraints when science cannot even see beyond them?

Science in the past explained that the universe, "just existed," and needed no explanation for its existence when it was thought that the universe was eternal. Why is it not possible to say the same for a God who created the universe. Could not an eternal God be that cause, even though we can not prove that or even prove that God exists, scientifically?

Psalm 102:25 – In the beginning you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of your hands.

Next up: Genesis 1:2 – Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

Tuesday, July 3, 2018

Independence Day - The Chemistry of Liberty - Revisited

I published this back in 2012 and thought it worth publishing again. The principles of this Declaration, along with the Constitution, have governed us for almost 250 years. Hopefully they will continue to be the law of the land for many years to come. Remember that individual FREEDOM plus personal RESPONSIBILITY(accountability) equals LIBERTY within society! True Liberty is living as we should not as we please. We can not and will not remain a free nation (have a free society) if we take personal responsibility out of how we live. Freedom without Responsibility results in Lawlessness.

The definition goes as follows:

  • Freedom = The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint
  • Responsibility = The state or fact of being accountable for your actions
  • Liberty = The state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority

Freedom + Responsibility = Liberty

OR

The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants + The state of being accountable = A free Nation (society)

Paul summed it up in 1 Corinthians when he told us to "seek the good of many," not just our own good.

1 Corinthians 10:32-33 (NIV) - Do not cause anyone to stumble...try to please everyone in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved.

======================================================================

In CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

On July 2, 1776, the Second Continental Congress of the United States approved the Lee Resolution and declared their LIBERTY from the tyranny of King George and the British Empire. A committee was already working on a formal declaration and John Adams had proposed Thomas Jefferson to draft the document for Congressional approval. On July 4, 1776 Jefferson's draft, a formal explanation of why Congress had voted to declare independence, was approved.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

The document declared that men have certain God given rights - to be governed justly, to be represented equally, and to not be oppressed. No one person is born more important than another. No elite has a right to rule over the masses by virtue of their birth.

--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

And that governments are established to guarantee this equitable treatment, establishing the law based on the will of the people, something we seem to be forgetting today.

--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Whenever the existing government becomes oppressive, the people have the right to alter or to institute a new form of government. In a representative government such as ours, this means the right to elect new representatives.

Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

And this right can not be taken lightly. The decision to change must be made only after patient pursuit of all possible solutions to the problems at hand. But once all efforts are exhausted it is their (and our) right, indeed their (our) duty, to look to move to independence from such tyranny.

--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.

So having patiently tried all means to make such change as to allow the United States to continue under the rule of the British Empire, the only possible solution was the succession from that government in the pursuit of LIBERTY and the establishment of a new government.

To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

So the Congress let the evidence of British Tyranny be clearly stated to the world. King George had:
  • He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
  • He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
  • He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
  • He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
  • He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
  • He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
  • He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
  • He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
  • He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
  • He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
  • He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
  • He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
  • He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
    • For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
    • For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
    • For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
    • For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
    • For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
    • For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
    • For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
    • For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
    • For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
  • He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
  • He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
  • He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
  • He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
  • He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
Are we seeing some of these same injustices today?

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

With these offenses, the King and his country were no longer fit to rule the Colonies.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

With repeated warnings, the Continental Congress informed the British of their injustices and of the consequences of continued oppression. Separation was inevitable.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

By signing this Declaration of Independence, the Colonies broke away from all allegiance to the British Crown, totally dissolving all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain. They declared themselves FREE and INDEPENDENT.

All thirteen colonies, a total of 56 representatives, signed the declaration, including John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. John Hancock, as president of the Second Continental Congress and one of the representatives for Massachusetts, signed his name largely and clearly so that King George could read it without his spectacles.


True Liberty is to Live As We Should, Not as We Please
Liberty = Freedom + Responsibility


All of this struggle began years earlier. Originating in the 1750s and 1760s, the notion of "taxation without representation" was one of the primary grievances of the British colonists and was one of the major reasons for the American Revolution. Many colonists believed the lack of direct representation was an illegal denial of their rights as Englishmen, and therefore laws taxing the colonists or laws applying only to the colonies, were unconstitutional.

One of the early actions against the British was the Boston Tea Party. It was the culmination of a resistance movement throughout British America against the Tea Act, which had been passed by the British Parliament in 1773. The Tea Party Colonists objected to the Tea Act for a variety of reasons, primarily because they believed that it violated their right to be taxed without representation in the Parliament. On December 16, 1773, after officials in Boston refused to return three shiploads of taxed tea to Britain, a group of colonists, the Sons of Liberty, boarded the ships and destroyed the tea by throwing it into Boston Harbor.

The Boston Tea Party was a key event in the growth of the American Revolution. Parliament responded in 1774 in part by closing Boston Harbor until the British East India Company had been repaid for the destroyed tea. Colonists in turn responded with additional acts of protest, and by convening the First Continental Congress. The crisis continued to escalate, and the American Revolutionary War began near Boston in 1775.

Other memorable actions strengthening the American resolve were the Gadsden flag and Patrick Henry's "Give me Liberty, or Give me Death!" speech. "Give me Liberty, or Give me Death!" is a quotation attributed to Patrick Henry from a speech, given on March 23, 1775, to the Virginia Convention. Reportedly, those in attendance, upon hearing Henry's speech, shouted, "give me liberty or give me death!"

In 1754, during the French and Indian War, Franklin published his famous woodcut of a snake cut into eight sections. It represented the colonies, with New England joined together as the head and South Carolina as the tail. The other colonies were listed in between, in their order along the coast. Under the snake was the message "Join, or Die". This was the first political cartoon published in an American newspaper. This was followed by the Gadsden flag which has a yellow field with a rattlesnake coiled and ready to strike. Positioned below the snake are the words "DONT TREAD ON ME". The flag was designed by and is named after American general and statesman Christopher Gadsden. It was first used by the Continental Marines in the fall of 1775. The symbol of the rattlesnake became one of the images of the resolve of the colonists.

The Declaration of Independence, drafted by Thomas Jefferson between June 11 and June 28, 1776, is at once the nation's most cherished symbol of Liberty and Jefferson's most enduring document. Jefferson concisely expressed the convictions of the American people. The philosophy was not new; the idea of individual freedoms had already been expressed by John Locke and the Continental philosophers. What Jefferson did was to summarize it in "self-evident truths" and set forth a list of grievances against the King justifying before the world the breaking of ties with the mother country.

The American colonists revolted for Liberty over a list of grievances, chief among them the lack of representation in the British legislature and the accompanying tyrannical rule, and the rest is history.

2 Corinthians 3:17 (NIV) - Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty.

Saturday, March 10, 2018

The Chemistry of Prayer

Prayer, what is it? Webster’s says it is…

“…an address (such as a petition) to God in word or thought”

For most non-Christian religions and even some Christian ones, it is a ritualistic expression of obedience to an unknown or unknowable God. A monologue with something beyond themselves. And yet over half of the world claims to pray daily and 75% say that prayer is an important part of their daily life. I would dare to say that almost everyone prays or has prayed at some point, even if it is just saying “Oh my God!” or “God help me,” without thinking, in a moment of crisis or stress.

But for many Christians, the focus of this blog, prayer is indeed an essential. For us, it is a dialogue with our Savior; open, continuous communication with the one we love and the one who loves us. Paul says in 1 Th 5:16-18 (NKJV) – “Rejoice always, pray without ceasing, in everything give thanks; for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus for you.”

Prayer is communication with God, who is, by definition, outside of our space-time continuum. He exists everywhere, not just in the physical world, so He cannot be quantified by physical scientific measures. We see that when we say that the world was created by God, juxtaposed to Evolution and the Big Bang. Science can create theories and perform tests and study these terms because they exist fully inside our physical existence. A Theory of God cannot be tested, nor can prayer be fully examined and quantified by science as it is partially in that realm of God and partially in our physical realm.

Scientific studies examine what happens when, as an example, drug A is given to Patient B with disease C and then a certain outcome is expected when all the variables are accounted for. When a study looks at anything outside the physical universe, the variables can’t even be known, let alone accounted for in total.

But science has tried and will continue to try as this is the nature of man, to want to know and understand his world, with or without God. Because prayer crosses over from our physical world into the spiritual world, we can “test” that part which lies with us, but because we cannot test it all, our answers may not satisfy nor be complete.

Scientific (and not so scientific) studies have been conducted for centuries attempting to quantify the effects of prayer, focusing on physical healings. Are the sick or injured comforted by prayer? Are they cured? Do miracles really happen? Individual prayers, group prayers, specific prayers derived from Scripture, and free form prayers have all been tested.


No form of scientific inquiry presently available
Can suitably address the subject
Of Prayer

Recent studies on prayer have had a focus within medicine. According to the Washington Post, "...prayer is the most common complement to mainstream medicine, far outpacing acupuncture, herbs, vitamins and other alternative remedies." In much of the scientific research when people learn they have been prayed for, many say they feel comforted, both physically and emotionally.

An article, printed in the Indian Journal of Psychiatry in 2009, where numerous clinical trials involving prayer were studied reported on the efficacy of prayer in healing. The authors share evidence from studies where prayer was effectual, where it had no impact and where it actually appeared to be detrimental to the prayed for subjects. In their work, the authors report that this line of scientific research has led nowhere, and that future research, if any, will forever be constrained by the scientific limitations that they outline in their article. They conclude:

“Where does this leave us? God may indeed exist and prayer may indeed heal; however, it appears that, for important theological and scientific reasons, randomized controlled studies cannot be applied to the study of the efficacy of prayer in healing. In fact, no form of scientific inquiry presently available can suitably address the subject. Therefore, the continuance of such research may result in the conducted studies finding place among other seemingly impeccable studies with seemingly absurd claims...”

“The aim of science is not to open a door to infinite wisdom but to set a limit to infinite error.” Bertolt Brecht, from the play: The life of Galileo.

One scientist proposed a study with a clear cut endpoint, prayer would result in the regrowth of an amputated limb. His thought was that this is something that can only be done by a power outside our physical world. He suggests if all the amputees in the world were gathered and prayed for over the course of a year, and monitored and tracked in a scientific fashion, if just one limb grew back, it would be proof.

But would it really? I think not! In Matt 12: 9-14 (NIV) the miracle of the man with a shriveled hand shows Jesus miraculously restoring the hand back to normal and the Pharisees not only did not believe, they went out afterwards and plotted how they might kill Jesus! I am sure the same would be true with the amputee study, it would be claimed as trickery or as a random though extremely rare event, unrelated to an act of God. There would be many who would not believe in this, nor any evidence that could be presented, that God exists.

Mankind has been praying since Adam and Eve. And though we may never be able to scientifically establish that God actually hears our prayers, recent scientific research suggests that prayer may be very beneficial.

In an entry in his Psychology Today blog in June of 2014, Clay Routledge, Ph.D. identifies:

“Five Scientifically Supported Benefits of Prayer”

  1. Prayer improves self-control
  2. Prayer makes you nicer
  3. Prayer makes you more forgiving
  4. Prayer increases trust
  5. Prayer offsets the negative health effects of stress

These benefits are focused on how we relate with one another in an increasingly complex and stressful world. Although not specifically religious, they are valuable traits that help us live a better life. But in addition to these, the secular, religious and medical literature is abounding in extemporaneous examples of healings and answered prayer.

Just as physicians use individual case studies from the literature as a source for evidence of a new treatment or for alternative uses for older medications or procedures, so too can these examples be used as evidence for the power of prayer. Prayer may not be stated as the reason for the successful treatment or healing but when a spontaneous cure comes about, many times it is accompanied by prayer.

Could we take the experiment proposed above for amputees and turn it around? Might this be a better study? A review of the medical literature could be done to find “miraculous” healings – unexplained by expected science (or any physician could submit them), and then these cases could be examined to see if the subject of the “miraculous” healing prayed or was prayed for during their illness. I would suspect that most would have had prayer involved in the process but would skeptics be convinced? Most likely, as with the other experiment, the results would be brushed off as meaningless since, as stated above, 50% of all people pray daily and 75% consider prayer an important part of their lives. Just these sheer numbers make it improbable that prayer would NOT have been involved.

I am sure most of us who routinely pray or have friends who do so can expound on a story or two (or more!) of answered prayer. If the walls within the many prayer rooms and churches worldwide could speak, the stories would be endless.

To say that God does not answer prayers is like saying that He does not exist or He did not create the Universe. Although the proof does not neatly fit within the scientific worldview, I think the anecdotal evidence is overwhelming. Just as “the heavens declare the glory of God..." (Psalm 19:1 (NIV)), the sheer number of healings and miracles seen in the Bible (the words “pray” and “prayer” occur 259 times in the NIV) and in our world today declare that God hears His people when they pray!

Matthew 21:22 (NIV) - If you believe, you will receive whatever you ask for in prayer.

Romans 12:12 (NIV) - Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer.

Philippians 4:6-7 (NIV) - Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

James 5:15-16 (NKJV) - And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up. And if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven. Confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much.