WHAT WOULD YOU SAY? Must We Choose Between Science and Faith?
Another myth that has grown up in recent decades about science and faith is that, thanks to the proliferating advances in human knowledge gained as a result of increasingly sophisticated science, there is no longer any “need” for faith.
There are multiple unstated assumptions involved in such an assertion, most notably that humans created religion out of a need for some kind of an explanation for the cosmos and our presence in it. Faith conceived in that manner assumes there is no such thing as God.
But as the following installment in the Colson Center’s “What Would You Say?” video series, there is a great deal more to understanding the relationship between science and faith than a casual, unthinking dismissal of the latter in favor of the former:
Previously on HillFaith:
TESTIMONIES: Why Does God Allow Suffering In This World?
CONSIDER THIS: Is John 3:16 The Most Distorted, Misunderstood Verse In The Bible?
WHAT WOULD YOU SAY? Are Humans And Chimpanzees Basically The Same? Or Is That ‘Zombie’ Science?
This video is a smokescreen of misdirection and non-arguments
1. If Christians started the scientific revolution, why did it take them 1500 years to get going? Or was it more of a coincidence that it took place at the same time as the Enlightenment? Nor is this an argument. Starting something doesn’t imply staying in alignment, any more than parents and grown children imply that they will always see eye to eye.
2. That there are Christians who are also scientists isn’t an argument, it is just a fact. It doesn’t speak to whether Christianity and Science are in conflict.
3. Religion doesn’t just contemplate Why, there are 100’s of stories that explain What. Ask any inerrantist if the Gospels only tell us why but not how Jesus died. Light before stars, talking snakes, global floods, tower of Babel, pillar of salt, etc. all seek to explain why things are as they are by providing a story of how things happened. But these are all directly in conflict with a modern scientific understanding of the world.
And alternatively, science provides a lot of “why” explanations, it is just Hillfaith doesn’t like evolutionary answers regarding love, meaning, purpose and morality because they aren’t “Ultimate” like they think their God is.
4. Science can’t explain everything. So what? Neither does Christianity. It is a null set they have in common, and reminds me of Cliff Clavin’s answer on Jeopardy: when asked what some celebrities have in common, he answers “Who are 3 men who’ve never been in my kitchen.” At least science can be honest and say they don’t know. Christianity instead makes faith claims that often contradict with different sects of Christianity and of course with other religions and their faith claims. How is that truly an answer you can have confidence in?
Trun Cated, let’s stipulate that all four of your points are true. Now, what about the empty tomb of Jesus Christ?
It’s no mystery why a lot of people perceive that faith and science are in conflict: There seem to be so many fundamentalists (for lack of a better term) who will deny the basic foundations of modern science in order to hold on to their extreme views on biblical literalism and “inerrancy”. If one is unwilling to learn from science, then for all practical purposes he has rejected it.