God in the gaps

In science, there is no God in the gaps. What we see is a God who is at work within science. Science with its intricacy and properties point to a creator God. Even atheists will concede that the universe is fine-tuned, though they find other premises for this being the case. An atheist might say, but there are things we have said must be God, only later to find out that science explains it. Yes, perhaps saying things we don’t understand won’t ever be explained by science is a foolish argument. But this is not the argument presented by scripture. Like atheists, the scripture allows that science will continue to explain things we currently do not know. For we believe God’s hand is in everything, so we are not surprised when he uses science. Since God is orderly, we expect to find scientific explanations. What atheists ignore is the fact even though we are able to explain more things, the more we know the more we understand how intricate and fine-tuned our universe is. The argument for science pointing to God only grows, rather than diminishes, the more and more science explains our universe. God is far more plausible explanation for what we see, than many of the other atheist explanations out there.

There are two possibilities for existence – an eternal cyclic/cause & effect system or something that is beyond matter or time or quantum physics and all that we know, that is eternal and self-existent. We don’t see any evidence for a cyclic/cause & effect system, as far as we know the universe will petter out. But we do see strong evidence of a universe that is created with fine tuning, and we don’t have an adequate eternal cyclic explanation. Things like the multi-verse only increase the fine-tuning needed and leave us empty with an eternal cyclic construct. And so, the irony is that atheists’ scientific explanations like multi-verse and evolution only increase the need for the fine-tuning of the universe in order to occur. If we want to stand where the current evidence is strongest, one that points to fine-tuning, believing in God, is not appealing to “the God of the gaps”, but following what is supported by the current evidence we have in science. Atheists on the other hand instead of acknowledging this evidence, because of their unbelief, are forced to appeal to the fact that it only “appears” to be fine-tuned and that the “science of the gaps” will someday switch from providing more and more evidence for fine-tuning to finally just explaining it away. How long will it take for this argument to be proven or for the atheists to decide that it is futility. I suppose we will see.