Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
About Literature / Student Member NatashaFemale/South Africa Groups :iconchristians: christians
The deviantMISSION - Bloodwashed
Recent Activity
Deviant for 8 Years
Needs Premium Membership
Statistics 205 Deviations 8,855 Comments 30,171 Pageviews

Newest Deviations

Groups

Hi Everyone :aww:

I am still alive!! I'm sorry for not being on DA for such a looooong time ... life threw me a "too busy to do anything other than my full-time job" curveball :phew: But everything is much better, and I'm glad to be back :aww:  So, how have you guys been?  What have you been up too? 

On Another note, I found this ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT article in The Wall St Journal ( Link to awesome article)  I have added it here to my journal :D Please let me know what you think - I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Is science showing there really is a God?


Is science showing there really is a God?
Science is increasingly making a case for the existence of God. Source: Getty Images

IN 1966 Time magazine ran a cover story asking: Is God Dead? Many have accepted the cultural narrative that he’s obsolete — that as science progresses, there is less need for a “God” to explain the universe. Yet it turns out that the rumours of God’s death were premature. More amazing is that the relatively recent case for his existence comes from a surprising place — science itself.

Here’s the story: The same year Time featured the now-famous headline, the astronomer Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given the roughly octillion — 1 followed by 24 zeros — planets in the universe, there should have been about septillion — 1 followed by 21 zeros — planets capable of supporting life.

With such spectacular odds, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, a large, expensive collection of private and publicly funded projects launched in the 1960s, was sure to turn up something soon. Scientists listened with a vast radio telescopic network for signals that resembled coded intelligence and were not merely random. But as years passed, the silence from the rest of the universe was deafening. Congress defunded SETI in 1993, but the search continues with private funds. As of 2014, researches have discovered precisely bubkis — 0 followed by nothing.

What happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. The number dropped to a few thousand planets and kept on plummeting.

Even SETI proponents acknowledged the problem. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: “In light of new findings and insights, it seems appropriate to put excessive euphoria to rest ... We should quietly admit that the early estimates ... may no longer be tenable.”

As factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero, and kept going. In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one. Probability said that even we shouldn’t be here.

Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life — every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing.

Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?

There’s more. The finetuning necessary for life to exist on a planet is nothing compared with the finetuning required for the universe to exist at all. For example, astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental forces — gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear forces — were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction — by even one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000 — then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free to gulp.

Multiply that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds against the universe existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row. Really?

Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology ... The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator ... gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”

The greatest miracle of all time, without any close seconds, is the universe. It is the miracle of all miracles, one that ineluctably points with the combined brightness of every star to something — or Someone — beyond itself.

The Wall St Journal

  • Mood: Cheerful

deviantID

saykha's Profile Picture
saykha
Natasha
Artist | Student | Literature
South Africa

Activity


Outreach Example:  A Love Letter by saykha
Outreach Example: A Love Letter

Hi Everyone :D We did an outreach last month (January 2015), where a group of us went out to the streets of Johannesburg, South Africa (where I live, by the way :aww: ).  We took the above mentioned letter, placed them in envelopes with “God’s Love Letter to You” written on it.  Now, I really encourage everyone to try this - so here's what we did:

We then went to a bus stop and parking lot, and we started to distribute them.  We broke up in groups of two, and split up.  It’s best to do this with someone else, and not to go out alone – this is just a safety precaution.  My friend and I then approached people, beginning the conversation with why we’re there:  We told them that we’re part of a church, and that we’re just going about telling everyone how much God loves them.  We then said what we felt was on God’s heart for that specific person, asked if they wanted prayer and then gave them the letter.  We then asked them if they wanted to give their lives to Jesus Christ.  If they said yes – we would pray a “Salvation Prayer” with them, and then tell them about a church in the area they could join.  If they said no, we would just smile and bid them a good day (don’t get discouraged when this happens – it will happen – just keep moving forward and tell people about Jesus).  Pray for everyone who wasn’t ready to accept Jesus, that God work in their hearts and draw them close to Him.  Pray that they accept Him into their hearts.

Now, don’t be limited to doing only the above mentioned things.  Because you’re depending on God to talk through you, a lot of different things happen, and almost every encounter with a new person goes differently.  Go out in confidence, trusting in God, and you’ll be surprised at what He might do.

The letter is there to give to everyone you encounter.  Give the letter to those who  were open to you, and Jesus Christ – but also give it to those who weren’t as open.  Some people, who weren’t as open to you, might still take the letter because, well, that seems like the polite thing to do.  This is good.  We want this, because the letter is given for two reasons:

:bulletpurple:  For those who accept Jesus:  So that their love for Him can be reignited.
:bulletpurple:  For those who don’t accept Jesus:  So that they might be tempted to read the letter, and change their mind about not accepting Him.  God might still catch their hearts when they read the letter.

For this reason the content of the letter must really be God’s heart - how He feels about us.  I specifically love this letter because it catches the heart of God in a very true, and heart-scorching, way.  You can read the letter here – please use this letter for an outreach – it touches almost everyone who reads it:

saykha.deviantart.com/art/God-…

If you want to learn more about the outreach, and everything pertaining to this letter, please go to this blog - it explains everything :D

children-of-god.deviantart.com…


:bulletyellow: Credits :bulletyellow:

Lined paper -
www.deviantart.com/art/Stock-L…
Feather Arrow - thegraphicsfairy.com/vintage-c…
Dove - www.deviantart.com/art/Dove-44…
Bible - www.deviantart.com/art/Holy-Bi…


Loading...
Hi Everyone :aww:

I am still alive!! I'm sorry for not being on DA for such a looooong time ... life threw me a "too busy to do anything other than my full-time job" curveball :phew: But everything is much better, and I'm glad to be back :aww:  So, how have you guys been?  What have you been up too? 

On Another note, I found this ABSOLUTELY BRILLIANT article in The Wall St Journal ( Link to awesome article)  I have added it here to my journal :D Please let me know what you think - I'd like to hear your thoughts.

Is science showing there really is a God?


Is science showing there really is a God?
Science is increasingly making a case for the existence of God. Source: Getty Images

IN 1966 Time magazine ran a cover story asking: Is God Dead? Many have accepted the cultural narrative that he’s obsolete — that as science progresses, there is less need for a “God” to explain the universe. Yet it turns out that the rumours of God’s death were premature. More amazing is that the relatively recent case for his existence comes from a surprising place — science itself.

Here’s the story: The same year Time featured the now-famous headline, the astronomer Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given the roughly octillion — 1 followed by 24 zeros — planets in the universe, there should have been about septillion — 1 followed by 21 zeros — planets capable of supporting life.

With such spectacular odds, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, a large, expensive collection of private and publicly funded projects launched in the 1960s, was sure to turn up something soon. Scientists listened with a vast radio telescopic network for signals that resembled coded intelligence and were not merely random. But as years passed, the silence from the rest of the universe was deafening. Congress defunded SETI in 1993, but the search continues with private funds. As of 2014, researches have discovered precisely bubkis — 0 followed by nothing.

What happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. The number dropped to a few thousand planets and kept on plummeting.

Even SETI proponents acknowledged the problem. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: “In light of new findings and insights, it seems appropriate to put excessive euphoria to rest ... We should quietly admit that the early estimates ... may no longer be tenable.”

As factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero, and kept going. In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one. Probability said that even we shouldn’t be here.

Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life — every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing.

Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?

There’s more. The finetuning necessary for life to exist on a planet is nothing compared with the finetuning required for the universe to exist at all. For example, astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental forces — gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear forces — were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction — by even one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000 — then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free to gulp.

Multiply that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds against the universe existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row. Really?

Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology ... The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator ... gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”

The greatest miracle of all time, without any close seconds, is the universe. It is the miracle of all miracles, one that ineluctably points with the combined brightness of every star to something — or Someone — beyond itself.

The Wall St Journal

  • Mood: Cheerful

AdCast - Ads from the Community

Comments


Add a Comment:
 
:iconvenom-v13:
Venom-V13 Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2014
Happy Birthday!!
Reply
:iconsaykha:
saykha Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2015  Student Writer
Thank you :heart: 
Reply
:iconvenom-v13:
Venom-V13 Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2015
Sure thing! :)
Reply
:iconjasperinity:
Jasperinity Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2014
Happy birthday! :D
Reply
:iconsaykha:
saykha Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2015  Student Writer
Thank you :D
Reply
:iconjasperinity:
Jasperinity Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2015
You're welcome! :3
Reply
:iconzmaj-dragon:
Zmaj-dragon Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2014  Hobbyist Writer
Happy birthday! :D :cake: :iconballooonplz: :party: :hug:
Reply
:iconsaykha:
saykha Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2015  Student Writer
Thank you!!!
Reply
:iconzmaj-dragon:
Zmaj-dragon Featured By Owner Jan 7, 2015  Hobbyist Writer
You're welcome. :)
Reply
:iconfcu777:
FCU777 Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2014  Student Filmographer
HAPPY BIRTHDAY AND GOD BLESS YOU!! 1st Emoticon: Happy Birthday Happy Birthday Grin Happy Birthday Godliek :D happy birthday Birthdy-emote Free Birthday Icon birthday cake Lily Wishing a Happy Birthday
Reply
Add a Comment: