One of the biggest misconceptions that people on both sides of the debate hold, whether theists or atheists, is that science runs contrary to religion. The reality is this: true science at its core is not only lockstep with the Bible, it’s also encouraged.
We are told in Romans 1:17-23 that God has put His signature in all that was created…
Romans 1:17-23 (KJV)
17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
True science is based upon the observable. Speculative science takes what is observable and derives theories based upon the information to provide theories. The divide that occurs between secular science and Biblical truth is worldview.
Most scientists enter the arena with a secular worldview. Many are converted; some of the most noted scientists throughout history have reconciled science and a Biblical worldview to draw some pretty amazing concusions. It’s even more pronounced today. Thanks to cutting edge scientific research, more scientists are starting to realize that the Biblical account is easily revealed by what
One of my favorites is Brian Thomas from Your Origins Matter. He was an atheist scientist until he was 27 when the Holy Spirit filled him. Since then, he’s been a great champion for reconciling modern scientific theories with the Biblical worldview.
Presuppositions determine the way that we interpret data. It’s human nature. If you see the world and life as a random occurance, the data can be tortured to back up theories of how that could be the case. If you believe the universe and life were created by God, the exact same data will back up that concept.
The Big Bang is a perfect example of this. Before the 20th century, before Einstein’s relativity, Hubble’s red shift, and Georges Lemaitre’s Big Bang theory, scientists believed in a static state of the universe. Einstein didn’t like it because it didn’t quite jive, but he ran with it.
Some herald the Big Bang theory as proof of creation, but there’s a problem with this. Lemaitre wasn’t just the father of the Big Bang theory. He was also a father in another sense. It irritates many atheists that the man who revealed the prevailing theory of the birth of the universe was an ordained priest. However, even Lemaitre with his dual understanding of existence in physics and the Bible was quick to note that the Big Bang theory neither proved nor disproved creation.
Fast forward to today and the mathematical models surrounding the Big Bang theory still break down the closer you get to the singularity. I’m not going to go into this problem, nor the proposed solutions such as string theory, quantum inflation, or the multiverse concept, but it’s important to note that the theory itself is derived from scientific observations that attempt to backtrack from today all the way back to a singularity. It’s important because, as with so many modern scientific discoveries of the 20th and 21st century, the concepts that surround the data can point to creation or quantum fluctuation. It all depends on the worldview
of the theorist.
A recent study now says that there was no Big Bang, that the universe has always existed, and that Hubble’s discoveries of red shift expansion were flawed. I respect secular scientists for their attempt, but I’ve always wanted to see what happens when they apply their funding and resources towards taking the data and plugging it into a Biblical worldview. This is very challenging because the ability to get funding for such research is almost always tied to having a secular worldview.
What modern science tries to do is to take the observable data and fill in the unobservable blanks with theories and mathematical models that rely on unknown. It’s speculative by its very nature because that’s how this branch of science thrives. You take the data, build a model that works at or near solvability, then devise experiments to prove or disprove the likelihood of the model. This is what CERN does. It’s the environment that most modern physists call home. There are many theoretical concepts that fill the holes in their equations such as dark matter, supersymmetric strings, gravitons, axions, or the star of the latest non-Big Bang theory, superfluids. The irony is that these concepts are brought about to fill in blanks that can, in my opinion, all be filled if they plug in the Biblical account of God.