大辯論—美國遺產概要22
科學像基督教一樣，長期受到聲稱管轄它的機構和政府迫害。隨著美利堅合眾國的誕生與其對自由的熱愛，受威脅的科學家就像受逼迫的基督徒，在美國找到避難所。在美國早期，基督教和科學在我們歷史上是好朋友，正如它們都在自由之處茁壯成長。
真正的科學和真正的基督教應該是最好的朋友，就它們最純淨的形式來看，兩者都是真理的追求者。在歷史上，真正的科學和真正的基督教不僅是好朋友，而且常常還出於同樣的人，例如牛頓。基督教和科學於1925年在美國開始產生裂縫，由當時有名的斯寇普斯案，別稱猴子審判（Scopes Trial）所點燃，此裂縫需要被醫治，有令人鼓舞的跡象顯示此正在發生。
若不瞭解基督教和科學，就無法全然瞭解美國歷史。宗教和科學常常被強加於它們的政治議程和其他議程所扭曲，有時則是雙方試圖將彼此的議程強加於對方。因為宗教和科學皆需要自由才能茁壯成長，所以對真理和自由的重新委身，吸引雙方陣營的真實面重新在一起。
幾乎每個團體都會有一些極端份子，歷史上一些最毀滅性的欺騙，始於用某個人或某個團體中最極端的元素來評斷他們。這也是造成我們時代越來越多困境的同樣欺騙，或許在每個人類團體中，大多數都不像他們所發現的那樣極端。
那些致力於純科學和純基督教的人，都深受對真理的愛驅動。這樣對真理的愛越深，越會驅動我們不停留在表象，因此也不會以表象論斷他人。當我們超越表象，我們常會發現我們所認同的遠超過我們不認同的。在人類歷史上其中一個最大悲劇就是幾乎認同每件事，卻在極小部分的不認同產生對立。然而，不成熟和沒有安全感的人通常會對不完全贊同他們的人感到威脅。
我們對他人一些極端看法也可能是以他們生活中的一小部分來評斷他們，即使那一小部分不是他們的常態。舉例來說，愛因斯坦常被視為無神論者，他年輕時的確如此，但當他注意到哈伯發現紅移現象（red shift），愛因斯坦開始相信有一位造物主。此紅移現象證明一個擴張的宇宙，這位睿智的物理學家立刻知道此意味著一定有一位造物主。
對於愛因斯坦曾推斷造物主是誰是可爭辯的，但他對他認為的造物主應該像什麼而做出的描述，和聖經中對神的描述很類似。他的生命證實聖經所言，藉著所造之物，神是「明明可知的」（羅馬書1:20）。
熱力學的第二定律是一個物理定律而非理論，在科學中定律和理論有一個主要不同，定律是已經被證實而無疑問的，但理論仍被視為一種看法。有了熱力學第二定律，從來沒有觀察到任何可以挑戰它的事件。讓那些只接受與既定立場、偏見或偏愛相符合之事實的偽科學家驚恐的是，此物理定律證實有一位造物主。
熱力學的第二定律又稱為熵增原理（Law of Entropy），其聲稱自然傾向混亂而非秩序，除非有一外在智慧源頭採取行動。藉此我們可以斷定，若在宇宙中有秩序、有合成體，那一定出於外在的智慧源頭。無論是否喜歡這名詞，此智慧源頭指的是造物主。
此定律顯然是對進化論的反駁，進化論需要無限數量隨機事件藉著偶然才發生，而不是來自外在的智慧源頭，以完美的接續和特定時間來取代所產生的混亂，帶來宇宙間的秩序與合成體。根據物理學的基本定律，這樣的事件完全不可能發生，遠遠少於進化論所要求產生生命的數萬億分之一。
正如有一位科學家形容，這就像龍捲風擊中一個垃圾場，最後卻自動建造成完美的波音747飛機，這樣的機率還多過進化論要求如此隨機的偶然所帶來的一條單鍊DNA。複雜的生命有可能經由隨機事件產生的機率，公然挑戰所有數學上的可能性和理性。然而，以這樣單一愚蠢的理論來評斷所有科學公平嗎？儘管有些人抱持著此極端偏離常軌的理論，我們怎能不驚嘆科學的卓越貢獻與對我們所帶來的利益呢？
那麼為何仍有許多科學家堅持進化論，甚至教導它好像是事實一樣？正如會有「假新聞」，也會有「假科學」。幾乎在所有其他學科或思想流派中也存在許多虛假，正如聖經警告我們小心「假弟兄」或假基督徒。要找到真理，我們必須學習分辨真假。
幾世紀前，由於政治上有技巧地篡奪真正領導人的權力，導致今日的基督教仍從中挖掘出深度腐敗和黑暗。同樣的事也發生在科學上，真正的科學家被那些帶著其他議程的人取代。就像偉大的真理擁護者幫助基督教挖出這些黑暗一樣，科學也是如此，科學中也有如此的擁護者。
要學到歷史教訓，我們必須瞭解在宗教、科學、政府和權力機構之內和彼此之間的衝突。此閱讀的主要目標之一即是幫助闡明這些衝突，以及其在塑造我們國家和我們自己世代所帶來的影響。
虛假不是受到追求真理的驅使，而是想要建立預定議程。假新聞結合假科學以支配機構，但此並不否定仍有一些誠實的真媒體、真科學，正如制度化基督教儘管受到假基督徒所掌管，仍有一些真基督徒持守真道。
耶穌指出到了一個時候「麥子和稗子」會被分開，稗子看起來很像麥子，卻是有害沒有滋養的。這似乎是我們世代正發生之事的完美比喻─曝光並分開真假。當麥子和稗子更顯而易分時，我們可以預期兩者之間會有更多的衝突，但那不過是部分過程而已。我們知道真理比任何謊言都強大，真理終將得勝。
************
～摘錄美國知名作家─泰瑞司·麥肯南（Terence McKenna）～
問題不在於找到答案，而在於面對答案。
～摘錄美國天文學家─賈斯特羅（Robert Jastrow）～
對於那些一直信奉理性力量的科學家而言，故事的結局就像一場噩夢。他攀登了無知之山，即將要征服最高峰。當他攀爬至最後一塊石頭，卻發現一群早已坐在那裡數百年的神學家向他問候。
(摘自喬納word for the week, Week 22, 2020)
The Great Debate—Heritage Brief 22
Like Christianity, science has a history of almost constant persecution from the institutions and governments that claimed dominion over it. With the birth of the American Republic and its devotion to liberty, threatened scientists found a haven in America just as the persecuted Christians had. Christianity and science in America were good friends for most of our history, as they both thrived where there was liberty.
True science and true Christianity should be best friends. In their purest form, both are seekers of truth. In history, true Christians and true scientists were not only good friends, but were often the same person, such as with Newton. A bitter rift developed between Christianity and science in America during 1925, sparked by the famous “Scopes Trial,” and this rift needs to be healed. There are encouraging signs that it is.
We cannot fully understand American history without understanding both Christianity and science. Both religion and science have often been perverted by political and other agendas forced on them, and they both tried to force their agendas on each other at times. Because both need freedom to thrive, it is a recommitment to truth and liberty that is drawing the true in both camps back together.
Virtually every group has some extreme people in it. Some of the most devastating deceptions in history began with the tendency to judge people or groups by their most extreme elements. This is the deception that has caused increasing trouble in our own times. In perhaps every people group, most are not like the extremes that are found in them.
Those devoted to pure science, and those devoted to pure Christianity, are compelled by a love for the truth. The deeper this love for the truth is, the more it will compel us to go beyond the superficial and therefore not judge others by what is superficial. When we get past the surface, we will often find that we agree on more than we disagree on. It has been one of the greatest tragedies in human history for people to agree on almost everything, but divide over the little they disagree on. However, the immature and insecure will often be threatened by those who do not absolutely agree with them on everything.
Some of the extreme perceptions we have of others can also come from judging them by a small part of their life, even if it were an aberration and not normal for them. For example, Einstein is often spoken of as having been an atheist. That was true when he was young, but he came to believe in a Creator when he observed Hubble’s discovery of the red shift. This proved an expanding universe, and the brilliant physicist knew immediately this meant that there had to be a beginning at a single point and time. He knew this meant there had to be a Creator.
That Einstein ever concluded who the Creator was is debatable, but some of his descriptions of what he considered the Creator to be like were parallels to descriptions of God in Scripture. His life confirms the Scripture that says God is “clearly seen” in the things that are made (see Romans 1:20).
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is a law of physics, not a theory. There is a major difference between a law and a theory in science. A law has been proven beyond reasonable doubt, but a theory is still considered an opinion. With the Second Law of Thermodynamics there has never been an observed event to challenge it. To the consternation of pseudo-scientists, which are those who only accept as fact what agrees with their predetermined positions, prejudices, or biases, this law of physics proves that there is a Creator.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics is also referred to as The Law of Entropy. It states that all of nature trends toward disorder, not order, unless acted upon by an outside intelligent source. By this we can conclude that if there is any order in the universe, any synthesis, then it is caused by an outside intelligence source. Like the term or not, this means a Creator.
This law is also an obvious disproof of the Theory of Evolution, which requires an almost infinite number of random events to have happened by accident, not by an outside intelligent source, in perfect sequence and timing, and instead of creating chaos, it resulted in order and synthesis. Not even one such event is possible according to the basic laws of physics, much less the gazillions required by the Theory of Evolution to have produced life.
As one scientist put it, it is more likely for a tornado to hit a junkyard and leave behind a perfectly built 747 jumbo jet than for such random accidents as the Theory of Evolution requires resulting in a single strand of DNA. The odds that the complexity of life would be possible through random accidents defy all mathematical possibilities and reason. However, is it fair to judge all science by this one foolish theory? How can we not marvel at the extraordinary accomplishments of science and its benefits to us, even if some do hold to this extreme aberration?
So why do so many scientists hold to this Theory of Evolution and even teach it as if it is fact? Just as there is “fake news” there is “fake science.” There are fakes in just about every other discipline or school of thought also, just as we are warned about “fake brethren” or fake Christians. To find truth, we must learn to discern between the true and the fake.
Christianity is still digging out of a deep corruption and darkness that resulted from the politically skillful usurping of the authority from the true leaders centuries ago. The same has happened in science, with the true scientists being displaced by those with other agendas. Just as it took great champions of the truth to help Christianity dig out of this, the same is true of science, and there are such champions in science.
To learn the lessons of history we must understand this conflict both within and between religion, science, government, and powerful institutions. A main goal for this study is to help illuminate these and the consequences of them in shaping our nations and our own time.
The fake is not driven by the pursuit of truth as much as to establish a predetermined agenda. Fake news has combined with fake science to dominate institutions, but this does not negate the fact that there is some honest and true media, and true science, just as there are true Christians even though institutional Christianity is often dominated by those who are not true.
Jesus spoke of the time when the “wheat and tares” would be separated from one another. Tares look a lot like wheat but are noxious instead of nutritious. This seems to be a perfect metaphor for what is starting to happen in our time—an exposure and separation of the true from the false. As both the wheat and the tares become more apparent, we can expect more conflict between them, but that is just part of the process. We know that truth is stronger than any lie, and the truth will ultimately prevail.
The problem is not to find the answer; it’s to face the answer. –Terence McKenna
For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance, he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries. ― Robert Jastrow
