Dan Taylor     About     Archive     Feed     Misc     Sunday School

TRFG - Doubt 6 - Science has disproved Christianity

The Challenge

My scientific training makes it difficult if not impossible to accept the teachings of Christianity. As a believer in evolution, I can’t accept the Bible’s prescientific accounts of the origin of life.

The Bible is also filled with accounts of miracles. They simply could not have happened.

The Argument

Many people in our culture assume that science (and evolutionary theory in particular) has made belief in God unnecessary. Richard Dawkins’ book, The God Delusion is a popular example of this type of thinking. In it, Dawkins argues that you cannot be an intelligent, scientific thinker and still hold onto religious beliefs. As evidence for his point, he cites a 1998 survey of scientists belonging to the National Academy of Sciences in which only 7 percent of respondents said they believe in a personal God. Where “atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin,” Dawkins states, “Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.”

Others have a problem with miracles in general. Christianity depends on the reality of several miracles, with the incarnation and resurrection being the two most notable. It is supposed that belief in miracles cannot be reconciled to a modern, rational view of the world. “Science”, it is argued by John Macquarrie, “proceeds on the assumption that whatever events occur in the world can be accounted for in terms of other events… [of this world. So a]… miracle is irreconcilable with our modern understanding of both science and history.” Professor Van Harvey summarized this view in a different way when he said that defenses of miraculous events can never be taken seriously by the critical historian, because such thinking violates “what we now call the common-sense view of the world.”

The Response

At direct odds with Dawkins’ claim that religious belief is incompatible with a scientific mind, many scientists have come to faith in God because of their study of science. Even the modern scientific theory for the origin of the universe (the Big Bang), admits a beginning to the known universe. The question naturally arises, “What started the Big Bang?” This question has led many to a belief in God. In a future lesson, we will discuss further some of the evidences or “clues” that we see in the universe that point to a Creator.

The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork. (Psalm 19:1, ESV)

Further, Alister McGrath, a theologian with a doctorate in biophysics explains that most of his unbelieving peers are atheists because of reasons other than science. Belief or disbelief in God is based on a complex set of circumstances in a persons life. For instance, it is known that a person’s beliefs are strongly influenced by the group of people he wishes to be accepted by. It is not sufficient to say that merely someones intellect drew them away from a belief in God.

What can we make then of the survey results Dawkins points to? The question the scientists were asked in the survey was if they believe in a God who personally communicates with humanity, at least through prayer. This is a very conservative, traditional belief in God and anyone who had a slightly different view of God was automatically placed in the category of unbeliever.

While nearly everyone agrees that some natural selection has taken place, Christians disagree on the role evolution (in the modern scientific sense) played in the Creation narrative. On one end of the spectrum, some argue that God created the world in six literal, 24-hour days several thousand years ago. On the opposite end, it is believed that God was the primary cause of everything and natural processes took over from there. Other groups hold more central positions. I bring this up to stress that there are Christians, who all hold to a high view of Scripture and yet disagree on the proper interpretation of Genesis 1. The hermeneutical nuances of determining literary genre and the use and meaning of idioms are technical and difficult. The person who is just beginning to consider Christianity does not need to take a side on the issue without first grappling with the core tenets of Christianity (e.g. the reality of who Jesus is and the salvation he offers). It is sufficient to know that all positions have tenable points both theologically and scientifically.

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. (Genesis 1:1, ESV)

The issue of miracles is slightly easier. It is fair to say that science is only able to measure the natural cause of a phenomenon. However, it is a completely different thing to say that a natural cause is the only possible explanation. That is a matter of belief. If we are willing to accept that there is a God who created everything we see out of nothing, it is not difficult to comprehend that he would also be able to rearrange those pieces.

The Quotes

[The evidence from cosmology] determines that the cause of the universe is functionally equivalent to the God of the Bible, a Being beyond the matter, energy, space, and time of the cosmos.

Hugh Ross

…[T]o suggest that the very practice of science requires that one reject the idea (e.g.) of God raising someone from the dead…. is like the drunk who insisted on looking for his lost car keys only under the street light on the grounds that the light was better there. In fact, it would go the drunk one better: it would insist that because the keys would be hard to find in the dark, they must be under the light.

Alvin Plantinga

The Questions

Question 1 “The Bible contradicts science,” Mike objects. “For example, we can see from DNA that humans are closely related to monkeys, are slightly less similar to rats, and so on. That proves that all life came from a single source. This contradicts the Bible!” How would you respond to Mike?

Question 2 Talk to your dad about what he believes regarding science and the Bible. Consider the following questions as a starting point:

  • How do we know that God created the world?
  • How do you interpret the creation story in Genesis?
  • Do you think the days referred to in Genesis 1 were six literal, 24 hour periods of time or were they something different?
  • Do you think evolution played any part in creation?
  • What are the theological implications of all these beliefs?
  • What details of the creation story are non-negotiable?
  • In general, how do science and the Bible relate?

We will discuss some of your answers to these questions on Sunday.

Question 3 Watch this interview with Hugh Ross, founder of Reasons to Believe. Dr Ross is an example of someone who through the study of science, came to a belief in God and Jesus in particular.

Question 4 Mike also thinks that anyone who believes in a man getting swallowed by a big fish and then spit back out is a lunatic. What would you say to Mike?