Theological Basis of Science

“I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It’s like expecting that the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.” ~ C. S. Lewis, God in the Dock

I have pointed this out in a few previous posts, but when I ran across such a poignant quote I decided to share it and reiterate a very important philosophical point when it comes to a naturalistic world view. According to this view, the world is a product of blind, purposeless processes. We, our logic, and our reason are then the final result of an accident. If this is true how then do we account for such things as the scientific method, universal laws of physics, or abstract reasoning and the laws of logic? If our minds are the product of an accident how do we expect that they should be able to accurately comprehend the accident? How can we have any sort of confidence in our reasoning processes if the mind is a mere accident of nature?

There has been a lot of argument about the basis of science in the modern era. The naturalistic scientist would like to assume that theology has nothing to do with science, but as authors like Alister McGrath and Michael Bumbulls show, science was birthed in a theological world view. As evolutionist Paul Davies points out, "the most atheistic scientist accepts as an act of faith that the universe is not absurd... So science can proceed only if the scientist adopts an essentially theological worldview."

By His Grace,
Taylor

Covenant of Grace

"[A covenant is] a gratuitous pact between God offended and man the offender, entered into in Christ, in which God promises to man freely on account Christ remission of sins and salvation, and man relying on the same grace promises faith and obedience." ~ Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology 2:175

I really like this definition of the covenant of grace between God and man. It points out that it is a relationship under sanction between God and man. It also makes it clear that the author of this covenant is God, man is a participant because of his state, and Christ is the fulfillment of the covenant. Finally, I like how Turretin states man's position in the covenant, "man relying on the same grace promises faith and obedience." Those are key words, "relying on the same grace," for they show that even our faith is because of grace. As Paul says, "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast." (Ephesians 2:8-9, emphasis mine)

What a beautiful thought, the covenant of grace--the thought that God "the offended" would offer a means of redemption to "the offender" and even provide to the offender what is necessary to complete the covenant. How majestic is a God that would not only make a covenant of grace with His creatures (an immanence which in itself is incredible) but also, knowing the inability of His creatures, unconditionally and effectually assures faith for His chosen through the same grace! Immanence, provision, and assurance in one grace. It is this grace that prompted Paul to herald, "Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God... To him be the glory forever! Amen." (Romans 11:33-36)

By His Grace,
Taylor

All Truth, God's Truth

"Therefore, in reading profane authors, the admirable light of truth displayed in them should remind us, that the human mind, however much fallen and perverted from its original integrity, is still adorned and invested with admirable gifts from its Creator. If we reflect that the Spirit of God is the only fountain of truth, we will be careful, as we would avoid offering insult to him, not to reject or condemn truth wherever it appears... Shall we deny the possession of intellect to those who drew up rules for discourse, and taught us to speak in accordance with reason? Shall we say that those who, by the cultivation of the medical art, expended their industry in our behalf were only raving?... But shall we deem anything to be noble and praiseworthy, without tracing it to the hand of God? Far from us be such ingratitude..." John Calvin, The Institutes of Christian Religion, Book II, Chapter II

I have heard it said that truth can only come from the Bible. There is a great misconception that sola scriptura means that the Bible is the only source of truth. This is a very dangerous misconception. Sola scriptura holds that the Bible is the ultimate source of truth, but God's image is not so marred in mankind that it cannot discover some truth through general revelation or common grace. (Certainly redemptive truths must come from special revelation, which in most Protestant traditions amounts to the Bible.) Indeed, we should not accept everything without discrimination that men "discover" through general revelation, but to deny that any truth can be discovered this way is to, as Calvin says, "insult the Giver" by "despising the gifts."

As Christians we should be the first to herald truth wherever we find it, but we should also "test everything" (I Thessalonians 5:21) as Paul says. When we find truth we should also be the first to turn praise back to God because it is from Him.

By His Grace,
Taylor