St John's Parish Church, Lindow http://www.saint-johns.org.uk

Christianity Speaks Today

Week 2: Science – is it an enemy of faith?

Before we look at tonight’s topic let’s remind ourselves of what a Christian worldview looks like.

Fact or fiction?

• Science is about proof (Fiction)

Our world tends to associate science with certainty. For example, when a scientist makes a statement or a group of scientists release a report there is usually a high degree of confidence in what they say. Most of us, if we’re honest, tend to trust what scientists tell us. Unlike politicians they tend to deliver on their promises and so we tend to believe what they say. When I drive my car I expect it to get me from A to B. I don’t expect it to explode when I turn on the ignition. Why? Well because I trust science. I trust that the scientific experiments have already been carried out to make sure such a thing doesn’t happen. The same is true when I fly in a plane. I trust science. I may be a little scared of flying but generally I’m pretty confident that the plane will get off the ground and won’t go careering into the fence at the end of the runway. I tend to trust science. We all do. We live in a world where science delivers many things to us, cars, planes, mobile phones, microwaves, dishwashers, the list goes on and on. And because of that most of us have a high degree of confidence in what scientists tell us. Yes of course we may disagree on some of the ethics of what they do but we show by our lifestyles that we do trust the conclusions of their experiments. Otherwise we wouldn’t drive cars, we wouldn’t fly on planes, we wouldn’t buy mobile phones and so on and so on.

But there is a danger that can creep into that way of thinking. Although it may be true that science tends to deliver on its promises it is wrong to believe that science proves things. As Dr David Wilkinson, a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society has said: "In terms of the popular view of things, science does not prove things. Science proceeds on the gathering of evidence and then judgements made on the weighing of that evidence."

What he is saying is that science is not so much about proof but about constructing theories that adequately explain how the world works, based on our observations of that same world. Although rather simplistic you could say that the scientific method is to acquire some data, construct a theory, test the theory against the evidence and then to make any changes to the theory that are necessary in the light of the evidence. The scientist cannot prove something. He or she can simply offer their best interpretation of the facts that surround them.

Now don’t get me wrong here. I’m not trying to dismiss the credibility and the trustworthiness of science. I trust in science all the time. No I just want to warn us from a belief in the infallibility of science. The view that sees science as the oracle of all truth that never makes any mistakes. If the past has taught us anything then it’s that scientific theories can change, and do change, in the fullness of time. It’s happened before and it will happen again. Who knows but perhaps some of the most unchallenged orthodoxy of today will be found in the trash cans of tomorrow’s world.

• Faith is believing what you know isn’t true (Fiction)

The old schoolboy definition of faith ‘is believing things you know aren’t true.’ Whereas science is based on evidence, observing the facts and then making decisions, many see faith as a blind leap into the dark on the basis of little or no evidence at all. Well this just isn’t true. The Bible defines faith "as being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." Faith is a leap based on the evidence, not a leap without any evidence. Biblical faith involves certainty and trust based on firm foundations. Faith isn’t believing what you know isn’t true but responding to what you know is true. In some ways faith is like experimental science, you look at the evidence on display and then make your conclusions accordingly.

• All science is the same (Fiction)

It is helpful to understand that there are differences between experimental and historical science. For example, consider the discipline of cosmology, the historical science that investigates the origins of the universe. This is very different from much of the experimental science that gets carried out in laboratories. Cosmology deals with a unique event that happened in the past, the beginning of the universe. You cannot get a universe into your laboratory, set the whole thing off and then study the results. No the only information available is the evidence in the present and on the basis of that evidence reconstructions have to be made about the past. Historical science is a bit like a Sherlock Holmes crime scene report. When Holmes reaches the scene of a crime he has not seen the crime happen, but he tries to reconstruct what actually happened from the evidence he finds. The same is true of cosmologists. They have to observe various pieces of evidence and then try to give the best reconstruction of what may have happened in the past.

Clearly that is very different from the experimental science that gives us microwaves and jet engines. Cosmologists cannot rerun the beginning of the world several times to check out their theories but can only use the evidence that is available in the present to make conjectures about the past. Historical science cannot deal with the past directly. You will find that much of the modern day conflict between Christianity and Science centres around this discipline rather than around the discipline of experimental science. More on this later.

• The Bible either says something or it doesn’t (Fiction)

I often think there is a lot of needless conflict between science and Christianity that results when godly Bible-believing Christians read the Bible without paying attention to the way in which it was written. It seems quite an obvious thing to say, but the Bible is a collection of 66 books.

It contains poetry, historical narratives, psalms, proverbs, laws, prophecies, parables, letters, love songs and other different forms of literature. As a result we need to understand the type of literature we are reading. Take for example the opening few verses of Psalm 19. The author says that God has pitched a tent in the heavens for the sun, who emerges like a bridge groom from his wedding canopy and runs his course across the sky like a strong athlete. Is that true? Should we expect to see a tent pitched next the Sun when we look through the Hubble telescope? Is that what the author is trying to tell us? Of course not. The literature type is a poem and in standard poetic symbolism the author is describing part of the glory of God’s creation. Here is a difference between what the Bible says and what the Bible affirms. In this case the Bible says that God has pitched a tent for the sun but that is clearly not what it affirms. The point I want to make is that what the Bible affirms will always be true but what the Bible literally says may not be true depending on the literary context. Our task is always to find out what the Bible affirms not just what it says! We must always ask the questions: What type of literature is this? And what is the author trying to affirm?

With those principles in mind let’s see what our Christian worldview has to say to modern science – both experimental science and also historical science.

• Creation principles (a look at Genesis 1)

When we approach this chapter of the Bible we inevitably come with our own questions on our lips. Were the seven days of creation seven, 24-hour days? Does the order of creation square with the modern theories of evolution? Is there a basic conflict between Science and Christianity? I’m sure you know all the tricky questions that have been asked over the years. But I often wonder if the writer of Genesis would have been interested in answering most of our questions. I think he had plenty of his own to answer. Let’s see if we can turn to the text and find out what the author is trying to tell us. Perhaps there will be a few surprises in store.

Read Genesis 1:1-2:3. See if you can identify some common patterns or themes. Some good questions to be asking:

What type of literature is this?

Are there any words or phrases repeated? What might this mean?

Who is mentioned most of all? What might this mean?

What is the correspondence between the days?

How does this relate to Genesis 1:2?

What is mankind’s role to be?

I think we can learn a lot from this first chapter of Genesis - about our God and about his creation. The first plank of our Christian worldview would tell us that:

1. God is distinct from his creation. When we investigate the creation we are not prodding the divine.
2. God is presented as a God of order, purpose and design. Is it not sensible to assume his creation will show some of those traits as well? The scientific process could not be undertaken if there was not some order and regularity in the world around us.
3. Mankind is expected to interact with the earth (Genesis 1:28). Certainly exploitation is not commanded but a caring role for the planet. Does experimental science not help us in our duties?

It may seem rather strange but in many ways experimental science and Biblical Christianity should be the best of friends. As Kirsten Birkett has said, in her book ‘Unnatural Enemies’: "The very fabric of God’s creation provides a rationale for the scientific enterprise… This is a world which we might well expect to be able to study and investigate; a world we might come to understand, and therefore to manipulate technologically; a world ripe for science." In other words a Christian worldview would encourage the pursuit of science. It is a good thing to be doing and we should affirm our brothers and sisters who are actively involved in its activity. With the belief that the world contains patterns and order the Christian can have confidence that scientific enterprise will not be fruitless. Far from being frightened by science the Christian should see science as a fellow brother that can be used to discover more about our God’s creation. Experimental science need not be a foe but can be viewed as a friend.

• Will the real creation please stand up? (a look at Genesis 3 and Romans 8)

As much as we would love to live in the world of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 the reality of our existence points us to look at the world described in Genesis chapter 3. We live in a fallen world, a world corrupted and disfigured by human rebellion against God. The fact of the Fall must challenge us to reassess how we view the past.

Read Genesis 3 and try to work out what the consequences are of Adam and Eve’s rebellion. Some good questions to be asking:

What happens to the relationship between man and woman? (verse 16)

What happens to the planet? (verse 17)

When does death and decay enter the world? (compare with Gen 1:29-30; 2:16-17)

Read Romans 8:18-22 (if you have time read Isaiah 11:6-9)

How cosmic was Adam and Eve’s sin?

Is what we see around us ‘natural’?

What implications does this have for how we understand the past?

What does the future hold for God’s creation?

Without realising it many Christians have forgotten about the cosmic consequences of Adam and Eve’s rebellion against God (and also the impact a global flood would have had on our environment). That first sin was not limited to mankind’s relationship with God but had a devastating effect on the universe as a whole. As Romans 8 tells us the whole creation is now groaning, waiting to be released from its bondage to decay. In other words in wasn’t always like this. Nature wasn’t always red in tooth and claw. Genesis 1 seems to imply that all the animals were originally vegetarians. The lion wasn’t always pursuing the lamb for his three-course dinner. Our Christian worldview tells us that a past event of cosmic proportions changed God’s good creation into a fallen environment.

A very common assumption in historical science is that the world that we see today – a world of death and struggle – has gone on for millions of years. I think the Christian worldview challenges that assumption. As we have said before the past has to be reconstructed from the evidence of the present but surely any reconstruction that fails to take into account the cosmic effects of the Fall needs to be questioned? There need not be a conflict between experimental science and Christianity but there does need to be a challenge from Bible believing Christians to some of the secular reconstructions of the past.

In his book ‘Debtor to Grace’, Colin Craston, says that "All truth we discern in Scripture must be congruous with all the truth discovered in creation and the history of humanity." But I would want to say the complete opposite of that.

All truth we discover in creation and the history of humanity must be congruous with the truth we discover in Scripture. Whatever the mechanics of the beginning of the universe they must take into account and not contradict the over arching principles of the Biblical revelation:

• Death and decay came as the result of sin. Therefore could death really be used as a mechanism of creation?
• What we have now is a fallen world. Much of what we see is not how things were meant to be.
• Sin had a cosmic effect. The whole creation has suffered.

It may seem silly for us to challenge established and orthodox beliefs in these areas but I think such an attitude should be part of our Christian make-up. Let me finish with a quote from Harry Blamires, where he says the Christian who has a renewed Biblical mind will "challenge current prejudices … disturb the complacent … obstruct the busy pragmatists … and question the very foundations of all about him … he is a nuisance!"

Summary

• A Christian worldview affirms and encourages experimental science in its endeavours.
• This branch of science is no enemy of the Christian faith. Remember this in your evangelism.
• A Christian worldview challenges some of the theories underlying the common explanations of our origins.
• The Christian should gaze in awe at God’s creation but be filled with longing for the day when the lion will lie down with the lamb.

[Home]  [Top of Page]