What About The Evidence?

Every good scientist knows that the lack of evidence does not mean the evidence or proof of a lack. Bertrand Russell (an atheist who wrote a book, Why I Am Not a Christian), was asked what he would say to God if he were wrong, after all. He would retort: "Why didn't You give us more evidence?" The great legal expert, erstwhile atheist, and Harvard professor, Simon Greenleaf was challenged to consider the evidence. He became a believer! There is evidence (not proof though) against God. God has not coerced belief but has left it an open question. (If faith wasn't required, you could no more deny God than the sun.)

For instance, the problem of evil; there is no easy answer on either side--so don't claim that you have all the answers, because God requires faith ("For without faith it is impossible to please God...") and you don't need all the answers to take the leap of faith. However, an honest scientist must be willing to follow the evidence no matter where it leads, leaving his presuppositions behind. However, there is NO SUCH THING AS TOTAL OBJECTIVITY WITH MANKIND.

Lee Strobel calls Christian belief a "properly basic" belief because the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Christ can be experienced. N.B. that Einstein was not an atheist, but even philosophized about Him: "God doesn't play dice with the universe." Another famous scientist, Blaise Pascal said, "...earth indicates neither the total absence of God nor his manifest presence, but rather the presence a hidden God." The Bible says, "O that I knew where I might find Him" (Job 23:3). God wants to be found, but not by triflers, he promises in Jer. 29:13 that if we seek with our whole heart we will find Him. God's pet peeve with man is that he doesn't seek. We must admit with Isa. 65:1 that God is found by those that aren't looking for Him. Actually, He gets the credit. He found us--we didn't find Him!

But remember that faith is a choice. If someone says to prove God exists, tell him to prove He doesn't. Either way, it takes faith; there are no laboratory conditions for God! God wills that if you want to deny Him you can. One philosopher has said, "If there is no God, why is there so much good? And if there is a God, why so much evil? You have the ability to explain away God if you so desire. God has given us just enough light to have faith, and just enough darkness to deny Him if we want to. "But men loved darkness rather than light..." Where there's the will God will bless as He says in John 7:17, "If anyone wills to do His will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is of God...."   Remember this from Isaiah: "Truly You are God who hide Yourself... (Is. 45:15).   Soli Deo Gloria!

Scientific Creationism?

It is impossible to have a science of creation because no scientist was there to observe the event that only God and the sons of God saw. "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?" An event must also be repeatable to be valid scientifically. The only true knowledge we have on creation is the Bible or from theology, which we believe is a divine revelation--another accurate way to truth. When scientists claim they know how the earth was formed, it is only conjecture and induction and certainly not infallible. They hypothesize and theorize, but cannot know for absolute certain. "By faith, we understand that the universe was created...."

Now there are some Christians who don't believe in a literal 24-hour day in the Genesis 1 account. The sun wasn't created until the 4th day so it might be postulated that a day could be any length of time--like when we say, "Let's call it a day!" There is also the gap theory that says there is a pause between Gen. 1:1 and 1:2. Grammatically this could be interpreted as a title and then an explanation of the opening remark. The Bible doesn't intend to tell how long it took to create the earth, only that God created it.

Now, as far as man being created on the sixth day, it looks like Eve was also created on the 6th day--and I thought Adam had to name all the animals and get time to get lonely first before he met his match. Another discrepancy is that when you take everything literally, there is no time for the angelic rebellion. Were there angels before there was heaven? By the time of the temptation in the garden of Eden, there was already evil present in the cosmos.

The entire six days is looked on like one day later in Genesis ("On the day that I created...") As you may know, "day" in the Bible doesn't always refer to a 24 hour period, but may even be a thousand years, as in the "day of the Lord."

In summary: We have to be tolerant of Christians who believe scientific findings that don't directly contradict the Bible, e.g., evolution. The Bible is not a scientific textbook, but where it does say something scientific, it is inerrant. Keeping the main thing the main thing, we should be glad that one believes God did create the cosmos and not quibble over words or doctrines that have no relation to the Christian life, and are therefore considered "minor" doctrines.   Soli Deo Gloria!

Introduction To Science & The Bible

You know that in the early 20th-century modernism was the rule and society thought that science had all the answers. Evolution, a time-honored scientific tenet of FAITH has infiltrated philosophy and ethics, man even justifying himself by it. The so-called "survival of the fittest" and "law of the jungle" are the rules of nature. Today we are in danger of lapsing into "scientism" where we see science as a faith or religion and the ultimate authority. (It is actually deifying science.)  

Some things are out of the REALM of science--like ethics and morality. Some things simply cannot be measured, such as love or patience; for instance, you cannot take a foot of love or a pound of patience. If you cannot measure something is it out of the jurisdiction of science. Science, in other words, is only one way to truth. Miracles are not contradictory to science, they are just outside the realm of a scientific experiment.

In sum, there are LIMITS to our powers of observation, rationalization, experimentation, and knowledge via scientific endeavor. That is, when some scientists make deductions, they leave miracles outside of the pool of live options. (Lee Strobel refers to this as "inference to the best explanation.) There is nothing wrong with Sir Francis Bacon's scientific method, it's our presuppositions that are leading us astray. There is no such thing as total objectivity, except with God.

The main reason people believe in evolution is that they don't want the consequences of believing in God and that would affect their sexual mores, as Thomas Huxley maintained. There is absolutely no proof of it and it can't be proved, but they believe it nevertheless because the only alternative is unpalatable-- theism.

Science can tell us the "know-how" but not the "know-why." To existential and metaphysical questions we must turn to philosophy or religion. Jesus is the answer to the equation and he is also the "Answerer!" To know Christ is to know the truth. He did not just tell us the truth but became the embodiment of truth itself.

We must be careful not to personify science and make it an idol; anything that comes between us and God is idolatry. Truth does not go against reason, but beyond it.

St. Augustine said that "deep within man there dwells the truth." However, "the big lie of the West is that there is no absolute truth"--truth with a capital T! If there is no truth as Pilate thought then there is no God by inference. The Bible is not a science textbook, but it has no scientific absurdities, and where it does say something scientific, like the water cycle, it is accurate. The French Academy of Science in 1861 said that there were 51 "facts" in the Bible that were controverted by scientific fact--today not one of those scientific facts is believed and so you see that "science is a moving train," but the Bible stays the same. It is never outdated.

Theologians (viz.  Thomas Aquinas, and St. Augustine of Hippo) like to say that "All truth is God's truth." All religions have an element of truth mixed in with the error. They have just enough truth to be dangerous and religion has just enough reality to vaccinate you from the real thing. Psychology has some truth and Psychiatry has part of the answer and a piece of the puzzle, but the Scripture is sufficient to solve our problems and Jesus not only has the answer but is the Answerer! Christianity is not true because it works, as Lee Strobel says, it works because it is true. TM works for some, but that doesn't mean mantras are good, we should meditate on the Word only.

We all have preconceived ideas that prevent us from being objective--in fact, total objectivity is impossible, except for God. Dr. S. Lewis Johnson, Jr. says that the scientific method cannot arrive at absolute truth. (Inference is flawed) We are all prejudiced and that means "being down on what was not up on." God gives enough light to see the truth if you can accept it and are looking, but he leaves it an open question and doesn't force truth on anyone. Truth cannot be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, then we would be forced to accept it. If God were proved, then He would be no greater than the mind that proved Him! One needs faith because the "supreme function of reason is to show man that some things are beyond reason." (Blaise Pascal) It is said, that if a scientist is not willing to go anywhere in his quest for the truth, he will not arrive at it.

Faith is prejudiced, and we all have some bias--there is no such thing as absolute objectivity, except with God. Sir Isaac Newton said, "No sciences are better attested than the religion of the Bible. Theology is known as the "queen of sciences."    Science is the stepchild of Christianity itself.  The Bible is not a scientific textbook, but where it does say something as a scientific fact, it is right--there are no "scientific absurdities."   And when it speaks of the rising of the sun, for example, it is merely using convention like we do. Newton wanted to reconcile science and the Bible--they are not antithetical at all.  Francis Schaeffer wrote, No Final Conflict between the two disciplines. It is said that if you think there's a contradiction, you either don't understand Christianity or science or both.

One can be a Christian scientist without committing intellectual suicide!  Theologians used to be students of science as well.  It has been said that he who thinks there is a conflict between science and the Bible understands neither.   Soli Deo Gloria!