Science

“The heavens declare the glory of God; and the sky proclaims his handiwork.” (Psalm 19:1)

Science is a body of knowledge about God's universe, discovered by the human process of predicting, testing, observing and concluding. It is a process performed by fallible scientists who bring their own presuppositions to bear on their observations, their logic and their conclusions. As a result, many scientists disagree with each other, particularly over the many ethical issues that face us today. Some of the more controversial issues debated today include the bioethics concering human fertility, the creation-evolution issues concerning age and origins, and the use/abuse of energy resources with their long-term effects on the earth.

Here are some questions worth asking. To find answers click on the link. Below are some issues in Science that I have been asked.

Science Issues

What do you think about the theory of evolution and its relationship to what the Bible teaches?

I teach students that it is important to understand the various views about the origin of the universe. My view is the fourth view, labelled Biblical fundamentalism.

There are many views about origins, not just two. It is important for us to realise that there are many Christians who accept that evolution occurred. It is also important to realise that there are different assumptions that are built into each of the four views.

According to many people, the origin of the universe is explained by the theory of the Big Bang. People who study the origins are called cosmologists. They use logic and scientific evidence, but, since they cannot go back in time to test their ideas, cosmologists do not use the scientific method.

There are four main views about the origin of the universe:
(1) Atheistic evolutionism
This view is sometimes called naturalistic evolution. According to this view, energy and matter are related but can never, ever be created, nor destroyed totally. This view says that present-day processes give us clues to the past, e.g. starlight must have originated billions of years ago, weathering of rocks is very slow, movement of galaxies must take a long time. Each process can be extrapolated backwards from the present sets of data. This view claims that life has evolved from non-living material and that our space-time reality expanded from the Big Bang about 15 billion years ago.
(2) Theistic evolutionism
This view states the same view as above, but also adds that the First Cause is a god or supreme being.
(3) Biblical evolutionism
This view states that the Bible is true. God created the universe for a purpose using the process of evolution in 6 long eras (called “days”). The first chapter of Genesis is not literal, according to this view, but poetic in order to teach certain truths about God. It is not a science textbook, but points to the God who created everything.
(4) Biblical fundamentalism
This view states that the Bible is the Word of God and the plain reading of God’s Word is the truth. The universe came into being by God’s word in 6 days.

Science is NOT opposed to the Bible. So we should not try to cause unnecessary divisions among each other by emphasising differing views. We each ought to respect each other. Having said that, some of the views mentioned above are incompatible with being a Christian. Salvation depends on God’s grace and the atoning work of Jesus Christ on the cross, not on having the correct view about origins. It is important for Christians to develop a consistent worldview, attuned to God’s word.

I often ask students write down which view they think best represents their own view. We also look up Genesis 1:1 – 2:4. From that passage, we fill in the table below, noting the pattern of FORM and FILLING shows God’s handiwork and that God declared it to be “very good” (Genesis 1:31).

FORM FILLING
Day 1: Light / darkness Day 4: Sun / Moon and stars
Day 2: Sky / sea Day 5: Birds / fish
Day 3: Land / sea Day 6: Animals and humans
Day 7: Rest in relationship with God “It was very good.”

We discuss the underlying assumptions in each view, as shown below:

Atheistic evolutionism assumes …

Theistic evolutionism assumes … Biblical evolutionism assumes … Biblical fundamentalism assumes …

The first chapter of the Bible in its plain reading means what it says. That is, the word for “day” means a period of 24 hours. The Hebrew word for day is yom and this can mean either daylight time, a full day of 24 hours or a long period of unspecified time. However, when the word yom is used with numbers in other places in the Old Testament, it only means 24 hours. This would suggest that the writer of Genesis 1 only intended the meaning to be 24 hours. The Hebrew word for “create” is the word bara’ and is only used in the Bible with God as the subject. It is different from the idea of forming from pre-existing materials. It carries the meaning of creation ex nihilo.

Furthermore, the phrase “according to its kind” suggests that macroevolution is not in view. This means that the Bible is opposed to the view that humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor, as macroevolution proposes. The scientific evidence that is supposed to support macroevolution can also be used to support a “young Earth” view, depending on the underlying assumptions. People who hold to macroevolution disagree with people who hold that macroevolution is false. Both groups of people use the same data, but use it to support there own views. This argument seems like a stalemate, until we recognise that both groups have presuppositions that are usually not stated in the debates. To break the stalemate, we need to question the presuppositions of each view.

In the first view, the atheist needs to prove that all knowledge is revealed through the scientific method. This is simply not possible. Moreover, the process of scientific endeavour has shown conclusively that life cannot come from non-life. The first view has an assumption that is unsubstantiated. The second view tries to fill the gaps left by the first view. This is inadequate to explain miracles. It is even lacking to provide meaning and purpose in life. The third view retains some inconsistencies. For example, the view understands the Bible to be the word of God, but it is accepted as a means to point to the truth as well as scientific endeavour. If there is conflict between the two, then the third view assumes that Science holds the truth.

This leaves the last view, the one which I have come to accept and defend. This view understands that the Bible is the Word of God and is the truth. It is authoritative over all other sources, including the human endeavour of the scientific method.

Home My email Back to Issues