Is Consensus In Science Scientific?

 Science taught or believed dogmatically or by a democratic vote of approval is not science. Despite the fact that biologists have a consensus for evolution, this is not necessitate it’s being truth in itself—they could all be biased or deceived or jumping to the conclusion. They must always be ready for new discoveries that may shed more light on some theory or discovery. The door must be kept open for new light to be shed on a subject. Just because scientists agree on a so-called “fact” doesn't make it true epistemologically. Note: Science is limited to the observable, measurable, and testable.

Because there are limits and parameters to what science can know or study, for instance, it follows that metaphysical questions cannot be answered fully by the scientific method. Science deals in the physical universe. But when scientists harness science for unscientific reasons like making philosophical or religious decrees, it’s not science but “scientism.” That is to say when Carl Sagan said, “The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be,” he was making a philosophical statement, not a scientific one. One example of consensus that proved fallacious was the geocentric Ptolemaic solar system.

Science And Faith Have No Final Conflict...

 God has given everyone a basic awareness of HImself and consciousness of eternity but some suppress the truth and go against the conscience which is a God-given moral compass and God says no one has an excuse to deny Him But just believing in God makes you no better than the devil who also believes. But faith in God is a gift and are to be stewards of it and use it to God’s glory by good works producing fruit that we are known by. However, God must open the door of faith and open the heart to bring one to faith as it’s a gift

However, it’s not wrong to believe in science because most of the early scientists who brought about the scientific revolution were believers. Sir Francis Bacon was a believer that invented the scientific method. But the fault comes mainly in biology when they propagate that we evolved from apes and this is the point of contention because it directly contradicts the Bible. One can be a good Christian and a scientist and a good scientist and a Christian. if you think they cannot be reconciled, you understand neither

However, it is a fact that some 80 percent of people believe in God so don't ‘say that most people believe in science. Only pure Secularists and postmodernists mainly don’t. The question is almost a false dichotomy because you can believe in both science and God and many great scientists do and have no problem with their faith. In my opinion, science has helped to prove God; namely, by the Big Bang.

The only reason I would say that some believe more in science than God is that they are ignorant of God and dont’ realize there’s no final conflict. The Bible states scores of scientific facts that were ahead of their time and only discovered even centuries later by science. Note: The Bible doesn’t say the earth was created 6000 years ago! The cosmos was created “in the beginning,” and we believe that was 13.7 billion years ago.

The fool twists the facts to fit his theory. Science only deals with the physical and not the metaphysical like God, which is a philosophical truth, not a scientific one. Reality is what corresponds to truth, and there are philosophical and scientific truths. To believe that science is the only reliable way to truth is not science but “scientism” making it claim philosophical truth claims that are out of the parameters of science.  Soli Deo Gloria!

Why Do People Believe In God, Not Science?

That’s a false dichotomy. But to have your ultimate allegiance to what science says rather than God is wrong. You can believe in God and be a scientist: of the first fifty scientists who began the scientific revolution, only one was not a Christian. Christianity is the mother of modern science and Sir Francis Bacon founded the scientific method. Anyone who thinks there’s a contradiction between science and God understands neither. There can be no final conflict for Augustine declared: “All truth is God’s truth.” But science has its limits. It cannot make value judgments or philosophical statements To harness science for unscientific reasons is not science but “scientism.”

Belief in God is self-evident and God says no one has an excuse for denying Him, and only fools do. There’s plenty of evidence in nature and in the Bible. Besides, Jesus came to answer our questions once and for all by rising from the dead and proving He is God with “many infallible proofs,” according to historian Dr. Luke. This fact is more attested by various proofs than any fact of antiquity.

Evidence isn’t necessarily conclusive or compelling. There are proofs pro and con. Believing evidence doesn’t make it true and denying the Bible’s evidence doesn't make it false. It must be weighed. You go in its direction according to the facts, or with the preponderance of it. You cannot disprove God because this is a philosophical not a scientific matter; it’s metaphysical, not physical. God will not subject Himself to anyone’s laboratory analysis.

People usually believe the evidence that fits their worldview and believing or disbelieving it doesn't make it true or false—called confirmation bias. Christians don't claim to know all the answers, but scientists and secularists don't know them either. If you believe in science that makes you a person of faith too; faith in science is still faith. It’s not a matter of faith versus science, fact, or reason, but faith versus faith. All of it depending upon which set or presuppositions you are willing to accept.

You are greatly misinformed if you think science has undermined the Bible. If you think there’s a contradiction you understand neither. The Bible contains dozens of scientific facts that were ahead of its time and yet no scientific absurdities. Archaeology has verified biblical references with over 25,000 digs. Many who have tried to disprove the Bible have become believers in the process, including skeptical archaeologists. No amount of evidence will make a person believe who doesn’t want to. There is plenty of evidence for the Bible if you look for it objectively.

Did you know that in 1861, the French Academy of Science declared fifty-one scientific facts that controverted the Bible? Today, none of these so-called facts are believed and the Bible was proven correct.

To answer the question, believers worship God because they love God (“We love Him because He first loved us.”) and have the Spirit of God living in them. They want to worship, not have to. Mankind is a religious being as Dostoevsky said, and if he doesn’t worship God, he’ll worship someone else. People who worship God know God and the appropriate response is a love expressed in worship.  Soli Deo Gloria! 

Is God Scientific? ...

God invented science and all laws of the universe (cf. Job 38:33). Actually, a Christian, Sir Francis Bacon formulate the scientific method. God created the earth by the Word of His mouth by speaking it into existence (cf. Psalm 33:6,8). Science and nature have no power to create but that doesn’t mean God defies the rules of logic and laws of nature (this proves a divine Lawgiver). Nature didn’t create itself and has no power to do so. Nothing can logically create or cause itself according to the law of cause and effect, including God; however, self-existence is possible logically. We know that "out of nothing, nothing comes" (ex nihilo, nihil fit) and if there ever was nothing, there could be nothing now! Something is eternal.

God is the only Creator: “Every house is built by someone and God is the builder of all things,” (cf. Heb. 3:4). This is cosmology. Infinite regress is impossible! All laws of nature are from God (cf. Col. 1:16; Job 38:33). God has power over nature as exhibited when Jesus calmed the storm and showed that He rules.

God cannot be proven in the same way that science does by observation, measurement, and repetition. God is not audible, visible, or tangible to us and cannot be put into a laboratory test tube or under lab testing parameters. We cannot measure a pound of justice nor a foot of love and likewise cannot measure God.

The existence of God is a philosophical question and is up to metaphysics, not physics. You cannot normally prove the metaphysical by the physical. Thus the existence of God is not within the scope and parameters of science to prove or experiment on. God created the heavens and the earth to show His glory but we cannot prove God; there is evidence, not proof. But it goes for atheism: evidence, not proof. Both sides require faith: either in science or in God. It’s not a matter of faith versus reason, but faith versus faith: faith in science is still faith. There is no “smoking gun” evidence either way. You cannot prove either proposition or hypothesis beyond a shadow of a doubt. Soli Deo Gloria!

Does Science Contradict Faith?

 

1. There is no final conflict—apparent difficulties have been reconciled, the Bible proving right after all.
2. Science takes things apart; religion puts them together; many questions cannot be answered by science, but need religion; i..e., the Anthropic Principle.
3. Science is the know-how, while religion is the know-why; science deals in the physical while religion the metaphysical.
4. Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind.
5. He who thinks there is a contradiction between science and religion understands neither.
6. Christianity is considered the “mother of modern science.”
7. There are dozens of scientific facts in the Bible with no scientific anomalies or contradictions; these facts were before science knew of them and were ahead of their time.
8. Science makes the mistake of ruling out the possibility of the supernatural and believes everything can be explained with natural causes and has an explanation without God in the equation.
9. Virtually all the early modern scientists were professing Christians and founded it upon the Christian worldview that definite laws govern nature (cf. Job 38:33).
10. There is no reason a Christian cannot be a good scientist and a scientist a good Christian—both exist.

NB: Augustine said that “all truth is God’s truth,” and Aquinas added that “all truth meets at the top.” John Locke described reality as that which corresponds with the truth. There can be a contradiction between truth and the God of truth.

The Rise Of Scientism

Scientism is defined as the act of harnessing science for unscientific endeavors or academic disciplines. It's when one thinks the only reliable truth is from science.

Some secularist scientists believe all our problems can be scientifically resolved and that science has the answers to our dilemmas if given enough time. Excuse me: Science does not have all the answers! Scientism, by definition, is when you make statements that science has no right to make, or are out of its domain or sphere of knowledge. One notable example is humanist astronomer Carl Sagan saying that "the cosmos is all there is or ever was or ever will be!" This is a metaphysical statement that scientists have no authority to answer.

History, by its very nature, is nonrepeatable, and no one was there at creation or the Big Bang so we have no eyewitnesses to verify the evidence. It's speculation, not science--history is not science, because you need to be able to control variables and have laboratory conditions, as well as repeatability and measurability.

Science is not a source of ethical, metaphysical, or philosophical truth. This is why evolution is out of its realm of knowledge--no one saw life begin and all attempts at creating life in the lab have failed. There is no final conflict between science and the Bible, in fact, it was Christianity that made science possible by promoting an orderly and law-abiding cosmos. The first scientists, such as Sir Francis Bacon, were Christians, and you don't have to deny your faith to be a good scientist--the majority of astronomers today are not atheists at all. Galileo and Copernicus were Christians and they were among the earliest of scientists.

Eastern religions never would've given birth to science, since they believe reality is an illusion called Maya. Christians affirm a Lawgiver, orderly and predictable laws and consequences for violation. Christians believe all truth is God's truth, and that includes scientific truth, and that it all meets at the top as Aquinas said. The Bible has never been proven to be in scientific error, and the scientific statements it does make are accurate: for instance, the water cycle was described long before we figured it out.

Scientism is when scientists hijack their views in the name of science to make philosophical, ethical, and metaphysical claims that it doesn't have any right to make. Several Nobel scientists have written a book called Cosmos, Bios & Theos, and have agreed that God is necessary to explain the complexities behind creation; we are not some fluke of nature!

To show the vanity of putting faith in science, the French Academy of Science published a brochure listing fifty-one "scientific facts" that controverted the Bible--today none of the so-called facts are believed! The Bible doesn't need correction, just faith in its self-attestation--if it appealed to some outside source for authority and legitimacy, then it couldn't be the Word of God, as it needed a higher authority for verification. What we say is that you don't have to defend a caged lion, it will take care of itself--and so the Bible can prove itself, it just needs to be read or reread. When they ask you to prove it, you tell them, "No way! You prove it, just try reading it--it will prove itself!"

In sum, all science can do is discover the know-how and learn by the scientific method, whereas to find the know-why you need religion or philosophy--don't confuse the two domains! It is a sad commentary on our society that science has become a religion. Faith in science is still faith, and is no different than putting faith in God or religion--you just have different presuppositions as your starting point and all knowledge begins in faith. Soli Deo Gloria!

Science Owes Christianity

Science was made possible by the discovery of a rational universe, perceived by a rational mind, using rational modus operandi. Induction, deduction, experimentation, measurement, repeatability, theory and hypothesis make science possible. The Eastern religions don't believe in a rational universe, but in Maya or that the universe is a figment of our imagination and that it isn't really real. It was the Christian worldview of 15th century Europe that really got the scientific method off to its debut. Sir Francis Bacon is considered the "Father of the Scientific Method."

All of the early great scientists (Galileo, Kepler, Copernicus,  Newton, Boyle, Pascal, Maxwell, Boyle, Bacon, et al.) were Christians. In fact, science owes its existence to Christianity. But the ironic thing is that now science seems to be thinking that religion, in general, is the "enemy" and incompatible with the scientific method.

Science is only one avenue to the truth. Some things are not verified by test tube, repetition, observation, measurement or confined to laboratory conditions. I.e., you cannot take a pound of love and a pint of partiality, nevertheless we affirm their existence.

All worldviews require presuppositions and so-called "natural science," as opposed to the supernatural, does too. In fact, it takes more faith to believe a naturalistic universe without any intentional design than it does to simply believe in a supreme being. The evidence is in favor of a deity, but people are not willing to take the leap of faith in the direction of the faith because of moral issues, not intellectual problems. They don't believe because they don't want to believe, not because they can't. "Even though he performed many miracles there, they would [not could] not believe in him" (John 12:37).  Soli Deo Gloria!

What Is Earth Made Of?...

I'm not a scientist, and I certainly don't espouse "scientism," or the belief that science is the only valid source of knowledge, but I do believe that science can find facts, just like the Bible has scientific facts in it without having any scientific absurdities or known mistakes--where the Bible does make scientific statements, it's accurate; though it's not a science manual (though there are several instances where the Bible's knowledge is more advanced than that of current science).  We must make use of all sources of knowledge:  rationality, empiricism, experience, logic, history, philosophy, and revelation from God.  Ultimately, all information is contingent upon its presupposition, and all knowledge depends ultimately upon God, the source.  As Augustine said, "All truth is God's truth."  All truth meets at the top, he would say!  That's why the Bible has the roots of every major academic discipline and has something to say to initiate the study of each one from philosophy, science, logic, ethics, history, economics, theology, psychology, sociology, and even politics.  All these academic endeavors have their fulfillment in the person of Christ.

Science can demonstrate that energy and matter exist, but when they allege that this is all there is, they are presumptuous (you cannot prove a universal negative), such as Carl Sagan saying, "The cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be."  That is a philosophical or theological statement not in the prerogative or domain of science to make.  For instance, when science says that miracles are a violation of natural law, they are saying natural law is God or has His power and that there is no Almighty who is the Lawgiver and is not bound by natural law but can overrule it at will.  And so the question of miracles is really a philosophical and theological one, not a scientific one.

In addition to energy/matter/quanta in the time-space continuum (time being the corollary of space and matter), we see information, design, order, and plans in our cosmos from the smallest sub-atomic particle to the largest galaxy.  Christians adhere to spirit.  New Agers believe in energy in everything, in fact, everything having a spirit and the existence of a Great Spark of life.  How can one not see the Anthropic Principle on earth, with its many contingent laws and nature's conveniences and not see God's handiwork?  "The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork!" (Psa. 19:1, ESV).  Napoleon was asked why he believed:  all you have to do is look to the heavens--"Who made that?"   "The theory of an eternal universe is untenable!" Scientists assume the big bang and "a brief history of time" itself--which the Bible verifies (2 Tim. 1:9; Tit. 1:2).  Steven Hawking wrote A Brief History of Time postulating this hypothesis.

Logic will tell you that if there's creation, there must be a Creator.  If there was a beginning or Big Bang, then there had to be a Beginner or One who got the big bang going.  The Big Bang was so fine-tuned that even slight maladjustments would've made the anthropic principle impossible.  One can also reason that there is a plan because of a Planner, a design because of a Designer, order because of an Orderer, and a purpose because of a "Purposer." Just like you assume an artist looking at art and an architect looking at a building ("For every house is built by someone, but God is the builder of everything," cf. Heb. 3:4, NIV).  Now, think of all the information out there!  Carl Sagan said that he'd believe in intelligence if we would get a message of information from outer space.  Well, there's plenty of intelligence on earth to look at to assume a Great Intelligence: every living thing as DNA or the fingerprint of God and is encoded with information, showing "intelligent design" or ID (the human genome has as much info as an entire set of encyclopedias).

Now, the ultimate dilemma or issue:  we have information, which necessitates thought, which necessitates a thinker!  A mind assumes a Higher Mind (the Logos of Scripture) and scientists don't dare go there because they want to deny His existence.  The logical order of events is this:   Thinker, thought, and then, finally, object or thing comprising forethought, design, or plan.   One of Einstein's earlier statements was that God was a "pure mathematical mind." To some astronomers, the universe appears as one gigantic mathematical equation!   Whether one believes in a personal God or not, there had to be a First Cause, Prime Mover, or Causa Prima, of Aristotle, and logic tells us that eternal regression and crossing infinity are impossible: everything cannot be contingent, but there must be something that needs no one or nothing and is not contingent for the chain of events to begin!  We say this because, according to logic, nothing can create or cause itself, and nothing just happens or appears without a cause.  One rule says that everything that begins to exist has a cause--God had no beginning and no cause and the universe began to exist and had a cause!

In sum, we must start with God and explain the universe, not the other way around!  "In the beginning God..." and "In the beginning was the Word (Logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."  We must start somewhere with the missing ingredient of information and its Creator, or Thinker--the Ultimate Mind!  Point to ponder:  "The only system of thought that Christ will fit into is the one where He is the starting point."  (Athanasius).   Soli Deo Gloria!

The Christian And Science

"Do you know the laws of the universe?  Can you use them to regulate the earth?" (Job 38:33, NLT).  
There is "no final conflict" [between science and Scripture]." --Francis Schaeffer

The National Academy of Science defines science as "The use of evidence to construct testable explanations and prediction of natural phenomena, as well  as the knowledge generated through this process ... and scientists gather information by observing the natural world and conducting experiments." --Dr. Jeff Myers in Understanding the Faith. It is my premise that science does not have all the answers but is only one avenue or vehicle of knowledge and truth, for all truth is God's truth, as Augustine said. In other words, you cannot measure three feet of love or six pounds of justice--values and principles are not subject to scientific analysis.  Scientists have faith in the reliability and predictability of the laws of the universe, while Christians believe in God of the universe who made the laws.  How can there be laws without a Lawgiver?  The first modern scientists laid its foundations assuming there's a God, how can they now deny the one they assume?  Basically, there are disciplines other than an empirical investigation to arrive at the truth:  ethics, mathematics, philosophy, and religion are all outside the scientist's parameters.

We can indeed learn by experience and empirical investigation, but rational thought and revelation are two other avenues of learning. All knowledge is contingent and springs from faith, not just religious!  Even music, art, and mathematics are beyond the scope of science and depend upon insight and rational or creative thinking.  There is objective truth that is true regardless of belief and true for everyone all the time, and then there is an opinion or subjective truth, such as one saying that broccoli tastes good. You cannot prove anything that isn't true, logical, and verifiable. 

Science wouldn't have been founded without an assumption of the Christian worldview of an orderly, predictable, and governed universe.  In fact, the first modern scientists were believers.  But today science has gone too far--they perpetuate the idea they can solve all man's problems.  Moreover, secularists use science for non-scientific endeavors and to solve problems which lie outside its province.  Many things simply cannot be answered by science: ethics, for example, is not in its domain.  Basically, science gives the know-how, not the know-why. Science takes things apart, while religion puts them together, it's been said!  But many things are not subject to scientific analysis, such as history and one-time events of the past, such as creation.  They weren't there and science relies on observation, repetition, measurement, and experiment!

Scientists have been known to make philosophical statements such as astronomer Carl Sagan said, "The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be."  Science doesn't give us answers to the ultimate questions, such as the meaning and purpose in life, and our final destiny.  What's so sad is that people put their faith in science when science is based on faith!  Scientists assume there's no God without evidence.  People that think science contradicts faith don't understand either.  Einstein said that science without religion is lame, and religion without science is blind!

It's not all a matter of facts or reason versus faith (and God doesn't ask us to leave our reason behind), but which set of presuppositions one wants to accept from the starting point of one's worldview.  Both sides have faith!  There's no smoking gun evidence either way. The mystery of life, of which science has no answer, can be answered by faith in God who causes all life to grow. In fact, there's no strict definition of life--science doesn't know what it is in essence!   But what we do know is that life comes only from life (biogenesis, which means spontaneous generation, or producing lifeforms from nonlife matter is impossible), as surely as DNA comes only from DNA!  Cloning is not producing life from nonlife, but another way of reproduction.  This begs the questions of where the first life and DNA came from if not God!  Experiments to achieve life fail to come off and this is the Achilles' heel of evolution.   Infinite regress is impossible--the chain of events had to start somewhere (notably a First Cause).  The Bible makes it plain that God created life and it's His gift and comes from Him, the Source and Author of life.

Teaching science dogmatically and ruling out God from the get-go is not scientific.  Scientists need to learn when they are becoming unscientific and venturing into scientism, or of harnessing science for unscientific means! Scientists must be aware that there is "scientific evidence" for the existence of God:  DNA; the anthropic principle; the Big Bang; the Second Law of Thermodynamics or entropy; and biogenesis!  The Bible is not a science textbook, but where it does make statements about scientific principles, it is right on--there are no scientific absurdities. They cannot explain away these phenomena!   All in all, true science doesn't contradict Christianity and there's no reason believers cannot become scientists.  (Though archaeologists have attempted in vain to disprove the Bible's historical accuracy, it has not yet controverted a biblical reference!)  

In conclusion, science sometimes seems to be at odds with the Bible, but it is always been proven wrong when at variance and the Bible correct after all, such as that the earth was the center of the solar system!  To name some examples of the Bible predating science:  the ocean currents, the anthropic principle, the beginning of time, the water cycle, the round earth to name a few notables!  According to Paul Little, in 1861, the French Academy of Science issued fifty-one scientific facts that "controverted the Scriptures!'  Today, none of these so-called "facts" are believed!  Someday, scientists will have to admit what theologians have been espousing--that "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."  Soli Deo Gloria!

Queen Of Sciences

Theology is the "queen of sciences" and probably the first science since it formulated the basics of all we still know of God.  It is based on Scripture, the immediate revelation of God, and cannot be disputed by man's conjecture or speculation.  We are all theologians in a sense because we all have private ideas concerning God and interpret the Bible accordingly.  It's not that some people are just good at theology and are therefore theologians, but some people just take a liking to this avenue of knowledge--direct from God.

Someday even science will have to admit that the theologians were right and they will meet together where theologians have stood for centuries, contemplating the origin of the universe, of evil, of man, et al.  Theology is not an abstract science that is a fool's errand of speculation, rather it's an exact science based on the faith that God has revealed to us what we need to know.  It's not a matter of faith versus reason, but of faith in God versus faith in science, or which set of presuppositions you decide to accept as your starting point.  In other words, everyone has faith!

You can know all there is to know of theology and miss the boat spiritually, yet theology is necessary, though it's not sufficient.  You must have your heart in the right place and have faith in God, not just head knowledge or consent to a dogma.  We all need a sound theology to mature in Christ, and that is why theologians are necessary--those that devote themselves to this endeavor.  The reason is that you cannot avoid theology--we're all theologians (those who study the nature of God)!   However, you can get A's in theology class and hardly know the Lord, because it's just head knowledge--it must go down 18 inches to the heart.

Many people distrust theologians because they seem to be intellectuals with their heads in the clouds or on abstract ideas, but this is unwarranted because there are theologians who know the Lord and know how to apply theology to the Christian experience.  It's the immature believer who balks at learning the teachings of God in-depth and doesn't go on to know the Lord.  We must get an intellectual grasp on the concepts found in theology because something cannot be in your heart that's not first in your head!   That's why it's vitally important that our heart is in the right place, even before we get our thinking straightened out--which is commanded in 2 Cor. 10:5, ESV, to "take every thought captive to obey Christ."  Otherwise, we will be "carried about by every wind of doctrine" (Eph. 4:14, ESV).   When we are ignorant of basic doctrine we are vulnerable to the assaults of Satan and are led astray by false doctrine and even doctrines of demons.

The mistake is to be overly convinced that the primary goal is to be right in everything; however, it's imperative that our hearts be in the right place more so than our doctrine be "impeccably correct." There are some controversies worth the fight to see what the truth is; godless ones are not.  Sound doctrine must be ascertained and heresy denounced--this is the calling of polemics or of defending the faith.   Soli Deo Gloria!

What About the Queen Of Sciences?

You cannot avoid theology as a believer; it is a "given" that you must know the basics; R. C. Sproul has said that to "avoid theology is to avoid Christ," and is "spiritual suicide."
NB:   one can be well-versed and familiar with theology and be a good student of it, be talented or excel at it in seminary, and still hardly know the Lord, because one doesn't apply what one learns. We are all theologians, it just is a matter of what kind of one we are.

Theology is often called the queen of sciences because it is a search for truth that predates the scientific method (or scientific empiricism) laid down by Sir Francis Bacon. In short, you must be willing to go where the truth leads you and keep an open mind ("If any man wills to do His will, he shall know of the doctrine..."), and be as unbiased as possible (total objectivity is impossible to achieve). Theology has been called "God-talk" because it is literally the study or "ology" (Greek) of God or "theos" (Greek). Spurgeon says that the proper study of the Christian is the Godhead. He adds that nothing will so expand the intellect or humble the mind that the study of the Deity.

An ancient Greek philosopher was asked to describe God: He couldn't come up with one, needless to say.  In the Bible we get no adequate description of God, they help us know Him--other so-called holy scriptures do not do the job. It is really an exercise in futility to make speculations about God--we must rely on special revelation as the Bible claims it has. What is God like becomes the million-dollar question? We engage in mental gymnastics to ponder the depths of God: There is no higher science, loftier speculation, or mightier philosophy. J. I. Packer adds that in the 17th-century theology was the hot topic and every gentleman had this as a hobby. People used to be well informed of what the Bible taught.

Is theology just theoretical? No, it has practical applications too. We study the holiness of God to see how to be holy and what God expects: to always do the right thing (Mother Teresa of Calcutta says that "holiness consists in doing the will of God with a smile." We must study God to learn to be godly and knowing God keeps us in touch with reality (we often need a reality check). "What you think about God is the most important thing about you," according to A.W. Tozer.  The most important thing about us is our character and I believe the most important aspect of that is our integrity--God isn't necessarily trying to change our personality, but our character. God's character or the sum total of His attributes shows us how to have godly character. We are to imitate God and emulate Jesus: "What would Jesus do?"(WWJD?)

So who needs theology? It is paramount to our getting to know God. However, knowledge about God is no substitute for knowledge of God and it can remain purely theoretical if we don't apply what we know. We must learn to contemplate the Deity and meditate on His attributes as we interact personally with Him to get to know our personal God.   Soli Deo Gloria!

Science Owes Christianity...

Science was made possible by the discovery of a rational universe, perceived by a rational mind, using rational modus operandi. Induction, deduction, experimentation, measurement, repeatability, theory and hypothesis make science possible. The Eastern religions don't believe in a rational universe, but in Maya or that the universe is a figment of our imagination and that it isn't really real. It was the Christian worldview of 15th century Europe that really got the scientific method off to its debut. Sir Francis Bacon is considered the "Father of the Scientific Method." All of the early great scientists (Galileo, Kepler, Copernicus, Newton, Pascal, Maxwell, et al.) were Christians. In fact, science owes its existence to Christianity. But the ironic thing is that now science seems to be thinking that religion, in general, is the "enemy" and incompatible with the scientific method.

Science is only one avenue to the truth. Some things are not verified by test tube, repetition, measurement or confined to laboratory conditions. E.g., you cannot take a pound of love and a pint of partiality nevertheless we affirm their existence.

All worldviews require presuppositions (propositions that cannot be proved), and so-called "natural science," as opposed to the supernatural, does too. In fact, it takes more faith to believe a naturalistic universe without any intentional design than it does to simply believe in a supreme being. The evidence is in favor of a deity, but people are not willing to take the leap of faith in the direction of the faith because of moral issues, not intellectual problems. They don't believe because they don't want to believe, not because they can't. "Even though he performed many miracles there, they would [not could] not believe in him" (John 12:37).  "The heart of the matter, is that it is a matter of the heart," says Rick Warren.    Soli Deo Gloria!

Science & The Bible...

You know that in the early twentieth-century modernism was the rule and society thought that science had all the answers. Evolution, a scientific tenet of FAITH has infiltrated philosophy and ethics, even justified itself by it. The so-called "survival of the fittest." Today we are in danger of lapsing into "scientism" where we see science as a faith or religion and the ultimate authority.

Some things are out of the REALM of science--like ethics and morality. Specifically, you cannot put God or religion in a test tube and say, "How interesting!" God is neither tangible, visible, nor audible to most of us and there are no laboratory conditions for God--"For without faith it is impossible to please Him" (Heb. 11:6).

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. 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 in our search for the truth; anything that comes between us and God is idolatry. We have nothing to fear from the truth. 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 the 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. Truth is always relevant.

Theologians 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.,l (professor of systematic theology at Dallas Theological Seminary) says that the scientific method cannot arrive at absolute truth. (Inference is flawed.) We are all prejudiced and that means "being down on what we're not up on." God gives enough light to see the truth if we can accept it and are looking for it, but he leaves it an open question and doesn't force truth on anyone, leaving enough darkness for people to reject the truth.

If truth could 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) The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as they say. "Taste and see that the Lord is good..." (Ps. 34:8). Soli Deo Gloria!

   Soli Deo Gloria!

Is Science Compatible with Faith?

Science was made possible by the discovery of a rational universe, perceived by a rational mind, using rational modus operandi. Induction, deduction, experimentation, measurement, repeatability, theory, and hypothesis make science possible. The Eastern religions don't believe in a rational universe, but in Maya or that the universe is a figment of our imagination or that it isn't really real. It was the Christian worldview of fifteenth-century Europe that really got the scientific method off to its debut. Sir Francis Bacon is considered the father of the scientific method.

All of the early great scientists (Galileo, Kepler, Copernicus, Newton, Pascal, Bacon, Maxwell, et al., were all Christians). In fact, science owes its existence to Christianity. But the ironic thing is that now science seems to be thinking that religion, in general, is the "enemy" and incompatible with the scientific method.  Every system of thought begins with some presupposition that cannot be proved.

All worldviews require presuppositions and so-called "natural science," as opposed to the supernatural, does too. In fact, it takes more faith to believe a naturalistic universe without any intentional design than it does to simply believe in a supreme being. The evidence is in favor of a deity but people are not willing to take the leap of faith in the direction of the faith because of moral issues, not intellectual problems. They don't believe because they don't want to believe, not because they can't. "Even though he performed many miracles there, they would [not could] not believe in him" (John 12:37, NIV).

Be sure to note that he who believes science conflicts with the Bible understands neither. Einstein said, "Religion without science is blind; science without religion is lame."

NB:  SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE THAT SCIENCE IS THE ONLY WAY TO TRUTH OR KNOWLEDGE DON'T REALIZE THAT THERE ARE DOMAINS OUTSIDE THE PROVINCE OF SCIENCE SUCH AS ETHICS, HISTORY, AND PHILOSOPHY.  THEY ARE BETTING THE FARM THAT THE ONLY WAY TO TRUTH IS SCIENTIFIC EMPIRICISM:  BOTH POSITIONS REQUIRE FAITH AND ARE BASED ON SOME PRESUPPOSITION THAT CANNOT BE PROVED.   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!