One of the most frequently asked questions is the question of how scientific discoveries affect our faith. Since we’re sticking to the “deep end” issues of the faith in the talks, we’re going to tackle this issue in the blog. I quickly figured out that one blog would not suffice for such a big issue. So it looks like we will get 3 blogs on the issue of faith and science. First, we’ll look at the big picture issue of how science and faith interact. Then we’ll move on to the questions of miracles and evolution.
For many centuries, there was not a clear divide between science and faith. Scholars were expected to study theology/science/math/philosophy all as one discipline. Then, during what we call the “enlightenment” people starting seeing science/math/philosophy as distinct from theology. Later science, math and philosophy would also separate into somewhat distinct disciplines. Since then, it has been a difficult question as to how science (or any other academic discipline) and faith should interact.
Ian Barbour has suggested 4 different ways they can interact (see Tim Keller’s Reason for God, chapter 6). On one end of the spectrum is all out war. In this view, faith and science are always in conflict. It’s always creationism versus evolution, faith versus reason, or scientific evidence versus religious belief. The assumption is that science and faith are enemies. On the other end is the idea that they have nothing to do with each other. People of this point of view think that religious beliefs and scientific information do not belong in the same conversation. Barbour proposes that a healthier response lies somewhere in between. Two other options include the idea that faith and science could either be integrated or at least that there should be a conversation between the two. I propose that one of these middle ground options is better. If God is the creator of the universe, then he is the creator of everything that scientists study. Surely faith and science are not enemies, and they cannot be wholly separate.
There is one more reason for there to be healthy interaction between faith and science. When Christians attack or ignore science, they often attack or ignore people who place their faith in science over Jesus. Though it is clearly untrue that all scientists are atheists, it is a community with many nonbelievers. Christians sacrifice a tremendous opportunity to have a healthy conversation about our faith with a people group who need such a conversation. Let’s quit attacking people who do not believe as we do, and let’s quit ignoring them. Rather, with a love of Christ and a faith in a Savior who is truth, let’s engage in a loving, grace filled dialogue.
More to come on science and faith…
For His glory and our joy,
nr
I would add that Science and Christianity have to work 100 percent together. If God is the creator of the Heavens and the earth (Gen 1:1) then everything, like Newman said, that scientist study deals with God's creation. I think Alister McGrath states it reasonably, "[M]ost of the many unbelieving scientists he knows are atheists on other grounds than their science." Keller, 93. So if science is trying to disprove Christianity, as people like Dawkins is, then they are not being scientific, they are being philosophical. To study science is to study God's general revelation. To study the Bible is to study special revelation. They are both from God, and therefore, cannot be separated. Right?
ReplyDeleteTK