The Great Question: Why Is There Anything?

This is a good short piece. It ultimately lays out the fact that science ultimately cannot explain the beginning. A clear example of the limitations of science in space where people choose to feel that it can eventually provide the answer. Science, if an explanation is developed, keeps pushing back the answer to the question, how did it start. It points to the verse, "For what can be known about God is plain to them. For his invisible attribute, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made." It is ultimately plain that something beyond science has to explain the beginning.

Agree. I’m pro-science, but it’s not pro-wrench to say wrenches are good for brushing your teeth.

Respecting the work of science includes recognizing what it’s good for. That said, I do appreciate the work of guys like Stephen Meyer who are looking at science and saying, okay if you’re going to try to explain origins, let’s use your own rules to show why your explanation doesn’t work, and even why another explanation looks better.

This is not really science explaining origins, though. It’s really just showing that valid reasoning points toward a particular answer. Some pretty much equate valid reasoning with “science,” but I think that’s usually not a good idea.