Metaphysics and physics aren't mutually exclusive. If we take a route of scientific discovery we're compelled to follow the observable evidence, regardless of where it takes us. Socrates said, "Follow the evidence, wherever it leads." I believe if people will honestly follow the evidence, they will arrive at the truth which is that the universe and everything in it was created by an intelligent designer.

Logic eventually demands of people, their honest appraisal of what it is that caused everything that they see. Is it God? I believe science will end up leading people to metaphysical conclusions about that. The theory of evolution is dying out. The world didn't create itself, and the internet is littered with accurately documented quotes by evolutionist scientists who state that it is not only not provable, but that there is no evidence for it and it's useless. (*See quotes below*)

When a person makes the realization that Someone created everything that is, it has to get harder and harder logically, to maintain a relativistic attitude about life. It's only by reading the Bible that a person will find out that it's different from other ancient religious books. It isn't just an interpolation of an oral tradition. It has credibility for one thing because of it's connection to extant copies in the original languages that it was written in. People will say that it's outdated and convoluted, but usually they haven't read it or much of it anyway, and they're just continuing an oral tradition of their own.

Archaeology books often refer to the Bible as an historical geographical resource, even by people who for some reason regard it as a book of entertaining myths. Why are people willing to rely on the Bible for geographical accuracy and archaeological references without regard to what is said in the rest of it? As time passes, skeptics of the Bible's historical accuracy when dealing with individuals, cultures and events are being proven wrong time after time and consistently showing the Bible's claims to be correct. If the Bible is archaeologically and geographically and historically sound, why not at least read the Bible and see what it says? Isn't that a logical step, intellectually?

There are a lot of people who get into a place where they think they've read the Bible, when in reality they haven't. They might have been forced to go to Sunday School when they were little, and remembered the "stories," like "Noah and the Ark," "David and Goliath" and "Jesus and the resurrection," but they haven't actually read the Bible from cover to cover. It is the most widely published and distributed book of all time. Logically, it won't go away. It will be a part of the physical and "metaphysical" landscape forever. Mercy, peace and love be multiplied to you.

***“[T]he theory suffers from grave defects, which are becoming more and more apparent as time advances. It can no longer square with practical scientific knowledge, nor does it suffice for our theoretical grasp of the facts…No one can demonstrate that the limits of a species have ever been passed. These are the Rubicons which evolutionists cannot cross…Darwin ransacked other spheres of practical research work for ideas…But his whole resulting scheme remains, to this day, foreign to scientifically established zoology, since actual changes of species by such means are still unknown.” Albert Fleischmann, "The Doctrine of Organic Evolution in the Light of Modern Research," Journal of the Transactions of the Victoria Institute 65 (1933): pp. 194-95, 205-6, 208-9.
***“Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.” Louis Bounoure. The Advocate, 8 March 1984, p. 17.