The idea that science and faith oppose one another exists in the world today, but is this idea true or false? Are we coming to the right conclusions? Or do we continue in certain mindsets because it is easier than seeking truth and changing our minds as truth is discovered?
There are primarily two types of people I have observed with the strong opinion that science and faith don’t mix, that they are enemies, if not in full, at least in part. On one side we have those known as the religious people, who are openly and boldly for their religious ideas regardless of whether science contradicts them or not. On the other side we have those who say they are not religious, perhaps atheistic, who use science as a weapon against faith, trying to disprove faith and convince others there is no God.
Both sides are being dishonest with themselves and others, and are going forward in stubborn opinions rather than a hunger for the truth. Those who desire truth will seek it out even if it means they discover along the way that they have been greatly mistaken about some things in the past.
There are truth seekers on both sides who have come to a balance and been correctable in their opinions and beliefs. Many scientists who were once atheists, through examining the details of creation, have concluded that there is overwhelming evidence for design by an intelligent creator. If we look at the careful and precise construction of the human eye, for example, the obvious conclusion would be design, not random chance. The mathematical probability that the human eye could form in all of its great complexity in detail by random chance over time is extremely small. So small, that not in a Universe trillions of years old would there have been time for such to take place.
Likewise, many religious people who were once dogmatic about something concerning creation, because of their traditional interpretation of their sacred writings, have realized sensibly that if all the facts in creation point one direction, and traditional religious beliefs point the other, it is our religious beliefs that are proving to be incorrect.
For example, many Christians believe that the Earth is only 6,000 to 10,000 years old, based on their understanding of the account of creation in the book of Genesis. However, the book does not actually state this, neither does it give detailed evidence for this belief. Christians way back simply decided such was true because that is what they imagined Genesis was saying, and they have stuck to this imagination, or what the Apostle Peter would call private interpretation.
Many Christians, because of the influence of the Catholic Church tradition, once believed the Earth was flat and literally had four corners, because Scripture says, “the four corners of the Earth,” in some of the poetic and prophetic passages. Instead of taking this as a symbolic statement, they took it literally and based their understanding of creation on it, as if Scripture was making a scientific statement about the shape of the Earth.
Scripture does actually state the shape of the Earth, calling it a sphere. I honestly am not sure how the Roman Catholic Church missed that for so long and stuck dogmatically to their opinion that the Earth is flat. Of course, once men sailed around the world and reported back, with evidences of the new continents they discovered along the way, the Roman Catholic Church wisely changed her position on the matter.
We have the same thing going on today. There is overwhelming evidence in creation itself to show that the creation is much older than 6,000 to 10,000 years old, and has gone through many ages and even drastic changes, including mass extinction events on Earth.
Genesis says that the Earth had become empty and desolate, with darkness covering it. This is a description of Earth in a destroyed state, after some mass extinction causing event. After this brief statement, Genesis goes on to state that Elohim (which by the whole counsel of Scripture we now know to include Father, Son (Word), and Holy Spirit), renewed the Earth. The creation account in Genesis is really a recreation, or renewal account, not an original creation account.
We can come to a correct conclusion on subjects like this if we simply let the facts point to the truth, and be careful not to interpret things based on strong bias caused by dogmatic opinions. We must remain students open to learning and being corrected when in error.
Science is not a religion, but atheistic science is because it is about belief, and in duty to its belief system it seeks to disprove the existence of God. Such is not pure science. There are beliefs Darwin had without proof, and today there still is no proof for the macroevolutionary portion of those beliefs (simpler species becoming more complex ones, for example). Whether they like to admit it or not, those following such beliefs are following a religious belief system built totally on faith in something that has not actually been observed by any eye witnesses among men. Such requires more blind faith than any other world religion, which do have eyewitnesses to supernatural events. Instead of faith being on time proven Scripture inspired by God, it is placed in the imaginations of intelligent men. No matter how intelligent, these men cannot give us faith built on truth. Only the truth itself can reveal itself to us who are openly seeking such.
True science is not what many have made it into in this generation. Science is not a system of disproving God or causing religious battles. True science is simply about knowledge. It is a systematic approach to seeking knowledge of the truth, and documenting what is found along the path of discovery.
I love true science. True science is something God loves as well. Many of the great scientists have been Christians, Jews, or others who believed in a creator/designer of the Universe we live in. The God who has hidden in creation for men to seek and find loves it when we seek and find the truth through experimentation and proving what is true. God does not expect us to blindly believe. God places facts pointing to the truth throughout creation, like sign posts we find along the path of discovery.
For example, through seeking the truth, man discovered the force of gravity and its properties, how they affect man, and how they have shaped history on Earth. Gravity is a very important force to life on Earth. Gravity is one part of the design of this creation. If we thought Scripture said differently, because of tradition and private interpretation, that doesn’t mean we would be able to physically jump off of the Empire State Building and live to tell about it, without special gear such as a parachute or glider, to help us overcome the deadly affect gravity will have when jumping from a tall building.
There is no good reason for Christians to ignore true scientific evidence. By true evidence I mean that which is observable and provable through experimentation. True science. I am not referring to imagined theories that are neither observable nor provable, but make it on the Discovery channel and those like it stated by the narrator as if they are fact.
Many scientists today need to start being more honest to their profession and stop stating theories as if they are truth. Theories are theories. They do not become scientific law until they are proven to be observable and provable by experimentation consistently over time. Once they do became facts that are a portion of the truth, then we as believers in God should accept such as a part of the Word forming all Creation.
The truth of the Word of God is what makes up creation. John 1. In the Beginning was the Word…all things were created by him, and nothing that is exists without him…The Word of God has programmed all of the physical Universe, like man might program computer software for a virtual reality.
So, true scientific discover is simply discovering more of the Word. The Word is God and is not confined to Scripture. Scripture is a collection of Word-inspired writings to lead men to faith in the true Creator God. It is not a science book. It is not a detailed account of everything God has ever done or will do. But, creation itself is the science book of the Word. Once coming to God through faith built up by Scripture, we then are free to be spiritual explorers who seek and find more and more, getting to know the Word better, through the natural creation built by him with his very essence woven in, and by spiritual discovery. Science and faith need not conflict.
December 6th, 2009 - 8:12 pm
Here is an explanation from a brother in Messiah that I thought you might find interesting, I can not argue it one way or another.
according to my understanding, i think that Scripturally, the world itself was made about 6,000 years ago, or so. Yah started making things from a sphere of water, and this sphere eventually became the earth that we know, but He also started to expand the water outward, and in the outer part of the water He made the stars and the planets and galaxies. Scripture repeatedly tells us that He “stretched” the heavens. according to the findings of science, if the “fabric” of space is stretched, then time is stretched, as well. this is known as the space/time continuum. if you do something to one, you do something to the other. they are linked. so to stretch the heavens would also mean that He stretched time, or drew it out. but not on earth. we know that the earth and all living things were created in six literal days. but when He stretched the heavens, in which were contained the stars and planets and galaxies, that He was effectively stretching time, allowing for the actual passage of possibly millions of years in regards to the things in space. that is why the details of our solar system point to a very young creation, and the further you get out into space, the details point to an old, falling apart creation. this has puzzled scientists, and they of course don’t go with the young creation theory.
so in reality, ALL creation was made about 6,000 years ago, and so the earth is really that old, but the objects out in deep space have actually aged millions of years (possibly billions), making the earth (and our universe), from which all was made, younger than the other objects in the outer reaches of space. it can kinda boggle the mind, but it works scientifically. basically it is incorporating the theory of relativity, if you are familiar with that. it shows that the Scripture’s witness of creation is perfectly in line with what science understands in regards to relativitiy.
that said, i DON’T believe in evolution at all. man was made, and dinosaurs were right there with him. he named them initially, and he may even have used them for farming/work/building, as some ancient engravings show man and dinosaur together — even man riding them! they were taken onto the ark of Noach — almost assuredly the very young ones, as would have been the case for all the animals taken aboard.
due to the destruction of the Flood, however, and the Scripturally unclean nature of the dinosaurs, only two pairs of each were taken aboard, so if any died out afterwards, it would be the end of that particular species. also, the environment of the world was very likely much different before the Flood, with much higher levels of oxygen, allowing for the massive growth of animals, plants, and man. do to the decrease in oxygen, such animals would have a more difficult time breathing in the newer atmosphere, being relegated to living in lush tropical areas with a more pervasive level of oxygen and environment. much of the modern-day sitings of dinosaurs on this planet actually are in these types of places.
December 6th, 2009 - 8:51 pm
1. The use of the phrase “stretched the heavens” is metaphorical in Scripture. This is an example of how people will make such literal when it suits their argument, but then on other issues call it metaphorical language. The sky from our perception looks like a canvas (think IMAX dome screen) stretched over the Earth. The writer was not making a scientific statement of fact.
2. The creation account itself in Genesis itself does not mention any stretching of time or space. But, no details are given because that is not the purpose of Scripture. It is not a book of the details of creation. It is a collection of books revealing God progressively to man and how to get back to right relationship with God, through Christ. Those who are trying to use Scripture to contend with scientific evidence are mistaken. They are misusing Scripture – using it for another purpose than what God intended it for.
Consider that even all Jesus did and said is not mentioned in the “Gospel accounts,” as John tells us such would fill the whole world with books. The Roman Catholic Church made this same mistake of trying to take metaphorical language about the “four corners of the Earth” to dogmatically believe the world to be flat. How foolish the RCC looked when modern Western man finally explored the whole Earth around and found it to be spherical. They likewise used to dogmatically believed the Earth to be the center of the Universe with all the heavenly bodies revolving around it. They got this idea from their incorrect interpretation of what Scripture says about creation. They were again proven wrong and looked foolish before the whole world.
When Christians do this, it discredits faith based on Scripture because the unbelieving world takes the official statements of Christianity on subjects like this and compares it to the evidence observed in creation, and when they do not agree, people decide Christianity must be false because The Bible is seen as false.
In truth, Scripture is not wrong on these subjects and never was. Scripture doesn’t make a doctrine of the Earth being flat. It does not make a doctrine of the position of Earth relative to the rest of the Universe, and it does not state the age of the Universe or Earth.
3. The very beginning of the account in the book of Genesis tells us that the Earth was, then became desolate and empty (presumed to be by destruction based on other Scripture references), and THEN the creation on Earth for mankind as we know it was made, approx. 6-10k years ago. That agrees with the evidence. Civilization of mankind suddenly springs up in the fossil record 6-10k years ago. Adam’s race was not here before. However, long before Adam, the fossil record existed and shows ample evidence of much before Adam, and thus long before the flood Noah went through.
Whether dinosaurs walked the Earth in any quantity since Adam was placed on Earth is irrelevant. I prefer to let the fossil record speak on that as we explore it, rather than being dogmatic religiously about it, as Scripture does not state that dinosaurs walked the Earth in the time of modern man (the race of Adam). The animals described in Job are not necessarily dinosaurs or even reptilian. Christians may assume such, but they have no scriptural proof.
4. Creation is upheld by the Word of God, while Scripture does not contain information on everything. Scripture has a specific purpose within creation for mankind. Thus, if we explore creation, we are actually further exploring and getting to know the Word of God. When believers ignore the evidence in creation in favor of religious dogma, they are not actually doing the Word service as they usually think. The Word is perfectly holding together everything whether believed or not, explored or not, agreed with or not.
Thus, when we find through observation that the moon, sun, and stars are not all orbiting the Earth, only the moon is, but the Earth actually orbits the sun, like possible other planets may orbit the other stars, we are actually discovering how the Word positioned things. If our former understanding based on what we thought Scripture inferred is different, we should go with the observation of creation itself, not faulty interpretation of religious minds.
The forms of Christianity that refuse this will continue to lose credibility with the intelligent and educated people of the world as mankind discovers more of creation and that Christianity continues to argue against such based on metaphorical or unclear (not detailed) statements of Scripture.
5. The flood did not deposit all of the tremendous amounts of fossil layers. We know this because the layers go in chronological order, as proven by numerous experiments on the organic items found in those different layers. Whether things like carbon dating are accurate or not is irrelevant because even if the dating is off, it will still show chronological order. That is, say it says one layer is 100,000 years old while another is 1,000,000 years old. It could be off by tens of thousands of years, but it still shows that one is older than the other, and that the deeper one goes in the same area on Earth, the older the samples date.
I fully believe in the flood account of Scripture, and further proof of it is found in the fact that all major ancient civilizations had a flood account, as they were all descended from Noah as Scripture says, and the flood story was passed down orally from generation to generation. Though they spread out around the world, some even finding their way to the Americas long before Columbus and the like, they all kept a story of a great flood.
That has nothing to do, however, with whether the Earth is old or young. It was simply one event of many in the long history of Earth. Ice core samples and other evidence on Earth shows that many major destruction events and even ice ages have happened on Earth. The flood event compared to the entire history of Earth as observed through such records is like a spec. Since it was only a year long in total effect, it is no wonder that the great flood does not show up as clearly in the fossil and ice core records like other major things like an ice age which lasted hundreds if not thousands of years.
Again, we can either stick to religious dogma, stubbornly, though Scripture doesn’t speak dogmatically on the details of these subjects, or we can go with what actually exists in creation that man observes, understanding such to be upheld and as is because of the Word of God. We can either witness to scientists and other intelligent, educated people concerning what their discovery is really of (the Word, not just material Universe), or we can contradict their findings without evidence of our own, making us look foolish and leaving us discredited in their eyes, so they will not listen to us about our faith.
Each believer will need to make their choice on this.
December 6th, 2009 - 9:09 pm
I will definitely have to chew on this more. Thanks for the reply.
Without trying to change the subject too much what if anything do you think about quantum physics, such as the double slit experiment. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4237751840526284618#
I think it’s interesting and supports that there is a Creator, Ruler, or Intelligent Designer as is common to say these days. But it seems like “new agers” are also using things like linked above to push their own understanding or that we are all part of God/gods just by our mere existence. If that is changing the subjt I apologize. I am not well versed in Science much less quantum physics LOL.
December 6th, 2009 - 9:27 pm
Quantum physics is a very interesting subject to me. For now, it is comprised of much theory, but there have been experiments with very interesting results such as the one you mentioned.
I’m interested in seeing what is found by more experimentation and exploration of the quantum level of creation.
December 6th, 2009 - 9:38 pm
Well atleast we’ve established it’s interesting and we’re interested LOL. I, for one, am in no danger of becoming a scientist or quantum physician, I mean physicist. I’m done for now atleast.