Tag Archives: science

The Compatibility of Science and Faith

Photo by ThisIsEngineering on Pexels.com

In my last post about the possibility of Biden listening to and acting upon questionable or sinister science, I might have given the wrong impression. I say that based on a comment I received from a friend, Joel Ziegenmier.

If Joel was correct, then I do apologize for the confusion or spurious impression. Please allow me to clarify my stance on science and faith.

I believe that science and faith are completely compatible and non-exclusionary. Both can exist side-by-side without conflict. Why do I believe that?

First of all, we must understand what faith and science are. Once we do that, everything will become a little more clear.

Science, unlike what it’s made out to be in the news media, is a process of acquiring knowledge. It is not dogma, doctrine, philosophy, or religion. All it is – or what it is supposed to be – is a process through which knowledge and understanding can be acquired through theorizing, testing, observing, repeating and replicating, and so on. The scientific method is not a Truth in itself, but a process by which we discover and make application.

Faith is trusting in something. Blind faith is putting one’s trust in something without any evidence that the thing is trustworthy. On the contrary, orthodox Christianity is not a religion or set of beliefs based on a blind faith, but on tangible, historical, and verifiable evidence and Truth claims.

Science and faith are not opposites, but complimentary. Where faith can be tested, it should welcome it. Where science yields information, faith is placed in the interpretation of the evidence obtained.

Certain things, however, are beyond the realm of the scientific method. Those things that are supernatural (outside of the realm of what is considered naturally possible) cannot be observed, tested, and repeated, especially if the supernatural event is beyond natural capability.

Science, too, is limited in its ability. A prime example is the question of the origin of the universe. Although observable and repeatable theories can be applied to current natural processes, science in and of itself cannot observe and test the origin of the universe, nor account for where natural law may have been broken. Ironically, it takes faith for both the Christian and the naturalist or atheist to make dogmatic claims about the origin of all that is.

But for the Christian, science is not an enemy; it is only a tool. Thanks to a quick Google search, I was easily able to find a list of famous scientist whose works contributed to the way we live today, and each one was a Christian. They include the likes of Robert Boyle, Michael Faraday, Arthur Compton, Gregor Mendel, Isaac Newton, George Washington Carver, Francis Collins, and winner of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine John Eccles.

So therefore, it’s not a matter of whether or not Joe Biden listens to the scientists, for that’s a fine and noble thing to do. The problem is which scientists he’s listening to. Every scientist has presuppositions and assumptions. Every scientist has a personal worldview. Are the scientists that Biden trusts knowledge seekers or agenda pushers? Are they rabid naturalists who deny their own presuppositions and assumptions, or simply honest men and women who simply go where the facts lead them?

I’m not trying to be hyperbolic, but just keep in mind that it was the “scientists” of the 1930s and 1940s who concluded that a perfect and superior race was achievable through the elimination of all who were sick, retarded, deformed, homosexual, and Jewish.

It’s when “science” determines that faith is a detriment to society, a scourge on humanity, or a drug from which society must be weened for its own sake, that we have a problem.

It’s happened before. It’s been observed. It can be repeated.

11 Comments

Filed under Abortion, America, Christianity, Culture Wars, current events, Faith, politics

He’ll Listen to the Science

Lately, it’s been both a jab and a stinging response, the punchline of President Trump’s that’s become sort of a campaign slogan for Joe Biden: “He’ll listen to the science.”

Trump’s point is that Biden will make decisions based on bad science from bad scientists; Biden’s point is that Trump doesn’t care about scientific facts.

In my opinion, neither their arguments are going to make much of a difference right now. However, there’s a much more disturbing truth to the statement that, if Biden really does “listen to the science,” could potentially lead us down a very dark and sinister path.

Which Science?

To be fair to President Trump, it’s not that he doesn’t listen to science, it’s that he listens to the science he believes.

Stop for a moment and think about what is really meant when we use the word science. Science is NOT truth. Science is NOT immutable. Science is NOT determined by consensus (or vote). Scientific data CAN be interpreted differently.

When a person says he will listen to science, what exactly does that mean? Let us not forget the facts of “science” have often changed. Consider this tiny list of examples:

  • The coming ice age
  • The earth is flat
  • Piltdown Man
  • The benefits of smoking
  • Bloodletting

So, it’s certainly forgivable and understandable for the President to question certain scientists and listen to others. What proof does Biden have that his scientific advisors are infallible?

The More Serious Question

But what really scares me is that Joe Biden says that yes, he WILL listen to science. And based on what I’ve already heard and read, if current science (or should I say, “scientists”) believe it or promote it, then that’s all ol’ Joe needs. Listening means acquiescing.

Therefore, even if the “science” proves valid, what of the ethics? What of the morality? That’s the serious question.

Already it’s been announced that – because of science – Biden will make all sports and restrooms accessible to transgender and gender-fluid students. Because of science, abortion will be allowed far beyond any previous limitations. And based on the scientific advisors around him, Biden will more than likely impose a national mask mandate and mandatory shutdowns.

Disturbing? Yes! Because if all it takes to enact public policy is the consensus of politically motivated scientists, then what is out of the question? What moral or ethical line is out of bounds?

What freedoms are on the chopping block?

2 Comments

Filed under America, community, Culture Wars, politics, the future