THINK ABOUT THIS: 10 Reasons Why Christianity Ignited The Scientific Revolution
Men and women have been doing mathematics, philosophy and tool design for thousands of years, but what we today know as “science” is a modern phenomena that started in the Medieval period of Europe and led to a revolution that changed virtually every facet of daily life and continues to do so today for billions of people.
Photograph courtesy of Louis Reed on Unsplash.
Daniel Currier of iApoligia points out that for the Scientific Revolution to happen, it had to be in “Christian medieval Europe [which] was the perfect utopia for science. Brilliant European Christians led the fight against superstition and irrationality by promoting reason, progress and biblical worldview.”
Because that is true, Currier continues, “many fields of science must thank Christians as being their progenitors.” He then names more than two dozen of them and the scientific field each played a major role in opening, including, to cite just three, Robert Boyle for electrodynamics, Gregor Mendel for genetics, and Lord Kelvin for thermodynamics.
It is true that many scientists today are not Christians, but many are — likely more than most of the intellectual elite are willing to concede — and in any case both stand on the shoulders of dozens who were, including several who were fervently so.
Currier then claims something that will likely raise eyebrows among the highly educated ranks of Capitol Hill staff, many of whom are products of university curriculums that minimized or outright denigrated “Western Civilization” as repressive, imperialistic or otherwise disreputable:
“Before scientists can do science, they have to believe certain non-scientific ideas. You need to assume such things like order, uniformity in nature, value of hard work, truth, progress, freedom, ethics and a promotion of progress. Some ancient civilizations may have held to some, but not others. However, the Judeo-Christian worldview held all.
“Put otherwise, the Scientific Method is uniquely a product of a specific time and place in history, and that is Medieval Christian Europe.”
“This is not to say philosophies, technological advancements and mathematical progress of other cultures did not help. Yes, the Greeks, the Romans, the Chinese and the Mohammedans contributed, too. But they never started the scientific enterprise because of beliefs that stymied progress.”
Just to clarify the point, there were non-Christians in the ancient and succeeding ages who did things we would recognize today as science, but it was uniquely western civilization beginning in medieval Christian Europe that gave birth to science as a societal enterprise of first significance. Put otherwise, the Scientific Method is uniquely a product of a specific time and place in history, and that is Medieval Christian Europe (understood to include both its Catholic and Protestant Reformation influences).
To illustrate his point, Currier points to what he calls “the 10 Commandments of science,” axioms that are direct products of the Christian view of the world. To illustrate, the most basic is the first of the 10, that we humans have minds capable of rational thought:
“The Christian worldview asserts that we were created by a rational God with a rational mind. God is presented as logical, the essence of logic.”
“We need more than just rational minds to study the universe, we must also assume that our minds are rational. The Christian worldview asserts that we were created by a rational God with a rational mind (1 Corinthians 2:16). God is presented as logical, the essence of logic. John uses the Greek word Logos (same root as logic) to describe Jesus (John 1:1),” Currier explains.
“Jesus would point out logical fallacies, such as a false dichotomy (Mark 12:19-27) and would make logical arguments (John 5:19–46). Since it teaches we are created in his image, we too must have rational minds. Thus, we can think God’s thoughts after him, looking at the wonders of his creation.”
Currier continues in a similar vein with the remaining nine commandments of science and I encourage readers to consider them carefully, especially congressional staffers. Without Christianity and the civilization it sired, much of the comforts and capabilities we take for granted today would not exist. It’s our heritage and it’s worth defending and preserving.
Now, How About Some Coffee And Conversation?
Mark Tapscott, the alleged “brains” behind HillFaith blog.
Did the post above make you think of some uncomfortable questions ? Make you mad? Or maybe deliver a gut-punch to your intellectual or faith solar plexus? Let’s talk about it. Coffee is on me. Totally off the record. See the “Office Hours” schedule in the sidebar to the right.
If you wonder how such a unique blog as HillFaith came about, check this out. And if you think you’d like to see what’s being posted from day to day, click the Follow tool in the upper right corner of the homepage, so you will get an email each time something new appears.
That’s it! Don’t think we don’t know all that.?
I completely disagree. The author does not even define science. I guess it’s like porn – we know it when we see it.
Let’s talk reality. Ancient science was a joke. Modern science required a social transformation, pushed by Christianity.
The reality is simple. Only Christianity said all men were created equal. Relationships between others, how you think of others, is a spiritual choice and depends on your religion. The entire organization of your society flows downstream from how you think about your fellow man (or woman).
This gets to the deepest core of Jesus’s teaching – love your neighbor as yourself, and everyone is your neighbor. Treat equally the just and the unjust, your enemy and your friend.
Science is a spinoff of that change, because science is largely a spinoff of money. Jesus radically changed economics, which are, at bottom, relations with your neighbor.
Science is a spinoff of money, because science is a product of technology. Until about 1850, science did not affect technology at all. Occasionally, science borrowed from technology. It also financed technology into new areas, with the expectation of greater profits.
An ancient Greek scientist would be horrified by that. They were aristocrats who kept themselves aloof from grubby trade.
Anyway, I’m writing a book on the subject and wanted to get this off my chest.