There is an excellent article by Edward Feser on the false dichotomie of Science and God published by The Witherspoon Institute here
The point for present purposes is just this: From the point of view of the main arguments for God’s existence, it is a mistake to think that the place to look for evidence of God is within the domain investigated by science. Rather, the place to look is somewhere more fundamental—at what any possible science must itself presuppose.
The Rules of the Game
Think of it this way: you can’t find out why checkers boards exist by looking at the rules of checkers themselves, which concern only what goes on within the game. The rules tell you how each piece moves, how the game is won, and so forth. But why are the pieces governed by these rules, specifically, rather than others? Why do any checkers boards exist at all in the first place? No scrutiny of the rules can answer those questions. It is impossible to answer them, or indeed even to understand the questions, unless you take a vantage point from outside the game and its rules.
Similarly, what science uncovers are, in effect, the “rules” that govern the “game” that is the natural world. Its domain of study is what is internal to the natural order of things. It presupposes that there is such an order, just as the rules of checkers presuppose that there are such things as checkers boards and game pieces. For that very reason, though, science has nothing to say about why there is any natural order or laws in the first place, any more than the rules of checkers tell you why there are any checkers boards or checkers rules in the first place.
Thus, science cannot answer the question why there is any world at all, or any laws at all. To answer those questions, or even to understand them properly, you must take an intellectual vantage point from outside the world and its laws, and thus outside of science. You need to look to philosophical argument, which goes deeper than anything mere physics can uncover.
Krauss’s argument is as inept as that of someone who thinks that checkers game boards have no cause, because we can find no reference to such a cause in the rules of checkers. Such a person is looking in the wrong place, just as Krauss is looking in the wrong place when he confines himself to science to find some reason to affirm a divine uncaused cause.
Mark 10:45 For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.
|Mark 10:45||και γαρ ο υιος του ανθρωπου ουκ ηλθεν διακονηθηναι αλλα διακονησαικαι δουναι την ψυχην αυτου λυτρον αντι πολλων|
The Greek word for ransom here is lutron. It is the noun form of the verb luo. Luo means to loose, untie or set free. In noun form the word literally means the price of release or the price of freedom.
It is unique in this form in the New Testament but occurs eighteen times in the Old Testament. Old testament examples include Exodus 21:30 where the owner of an ox that gores someone to death must pay a price for that death, otherwise he himself must be killed. The owners own life was forfeit unless he paid up. This was a ransom price.
There are many other forms of this word in many different contexts yet some general comments can be made:
“(i) They all imply that man was in captivity, in slavery, in subjection to an alien power. There was something which had man it its grip.
(ii) They all imply that by no conceivable means could man have effected his own liberation or rescue. He was helpless in the grip of a power and a situation which he could not mend and from which he could not break away.
(iii) His liberation was effected by the coming of Jesus Christ who paid the price which was necessary to achieve it.
(iv) No where in the New Testament is there any word of to whom that price was paid. [my emphasis] It could not have been paid to God because all the time God was so loving the world. It was in fact God’s love that sent Christ into this world. It could not have been paid to the devil for that would put the devil on an equality with God.
All that we can say is this – it cost the life and death of Christ to liberate man from the past, the present and the future power of sin. Beyond that we cannot go, but although thought may be baffled, experience shows that it cost the life of Jesus Christ to bring us home to God.”
– William Barclay. New Testament Words pg 195
“…postmodernity finds appeals to rational argument problematic. But it is deeply attracted to stories and images. Furthermore, postmodernity is more interested in a truth that proves capable of being lived out than being demonstrated by rational argument. This helps us understand why “incarnational apologetics,” which emphasizes the apologetic importance of faithful living, has become so influential in recent years.” – Alistair E McGrath. Mere Apologetics. pg 34/35