Two Beautiful Books: Science... err... correction: Nature and Scripture (Part 1)

Last week I got the opportunity to speak on science and Christianity at Reformed University Fellowship's (RUF) Summer Conference (SuCo) in Panama City. At their SuCo, RUF offers a number seminars in the mornings that students can attend, and I led a two-day session that I did twice over the course of four days. I knew this was an issue that is on the minds of many Christians today (obviously), but with so many other great options for students to attend, I did not expect the attendance or response the seminar received. I am not complaining (quite the contrary), but after doing the seminar twice and talking with students informally throughout the week, I realized church leaders have not done enough education on this subject (and, of course, my vocation makes me one of those "leaders," so the indictment is on me just as much as it is on anyone else). Certainly good books have been written on this subject, and I have written some about it myself on this blog. Yet, of all that I have read by others and written myself, I still feel like more can be done in providing a concise guide for thinking biblically about science. So, I am going to take my talk (with some additions based on questions and feed back) and write a series here. Over the next few weeks we will talk about thinking biblically and consistently as a Christian about science.

Now, I know the students attending the seminar came for a number of reasons. For some of them, this may not just be an academic question brought on by some opinion piece they read or a challenge by their classmate but a deeply bothersome subject that makes them wonder if they are just fooling themselves with this Christianity stuff. For others, it might be that they wonder if they can live as a Christian in the science or engineering professions towards which they are headed. Some of you may also have similar questions that come from a deep, heartfelt need. Let me say, as someone who struggled with this while he was in science academia, I think I can understand to some degree where you are. Now, others probably came because they were hoping to find answers to questions like the age of the universe or is evolution heretical or how do they convince their roommate that creationism is true. Some of you out there may also have started reading this looking for answers to those questions. And, if that is the case, I might disappoint you with this series because we are not going to talk in detail about that those subjects.

The seminar I gave to RUF and this series is about the big-picture relationship between science and Christianity, and my goal for them and you is not to tell you what to think on particular subjects when it comes to the finer details like the age of the universe or Darwinian evolution. I have stances on those and many other subtopics of science and Christianity. But, for this series, my goal is to help you to think biblically about science and consistently as a Christian. I am going to use an analogy throughout these posts of building a house. What I want to do for you is to help you build a metaphorical house that gives you a place "to live" as a Christian in a culture that puts a great deal of weight on science. And, hopefully from that house, you will be able to read, study, and struggle with the apparent conflicts and land on a position that is faithful both to God's revelation of Himself in Scripture and God's revelation of Himself in nature. Now, let me say up front, this metaphorical house that I will endeavor to help you build is not going to be perfect. It will have some leaks in the roof and holes in the walls because we are imperfect beings who are not going to get everything right when it comes to our study of Scripture and our study of the physical world. But, it will, I pray, be enough for you to live confidently as a Christian in our world.

Before we get too far and into the topic at hand, because of the scope of the seminar and this blog series, there are some things I am going to have to assume as true and just cannot take the time to prove to you. I would argue these are orthodox, Christian presuppositions, though not all Christians agree with all of these, and so I need to be honest and upfront about them so you know why and how I am proceeding in the direction in which I am going:

1. The God of the Bible exists, and He is the Creator of all things that are outside of Himself (e.g. this universe, angels, heaven, etc.). For some reading on this assumption I am making, check out this talk by Christian philosopher Kenneth Samples or the book The Reason for the Hope Within, ch. 2-3. There are, of course, a number of other great resources on this subject, but these will be enough to get you started. 
2. The inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture: Basically, by those I mean that Scripture is God's Word and is free from all falsehood or mistake and is entirely trustworthy in everything it says. For more reading on this, I would recommend Kenneth Samples' blog series on inerrancy (part 1 and part 2) as well as the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy. 
3. The authority of Scripture: Basically by this I mean that Scripture is God's inspired, inerrant Word, and therefore is the highest authority for the Christian faith and the life of the believer. We don't have time to prove this, but for further reading, check out this paper by J. P. Moreland (by the way, the title of the paper is provocative, to say the least, but it is orthodox and very helpful). 
4. God has spoken by His word and revealed (communicated) Himself in a way that we humans can perceive, contemplate, and interpret to get at the truth He wants us to know. This is the very first truth of the Bible--that God spoke the universe into existence--and He has been speaking ever since through His Word. 
5. There is truth and humans can study it. By truth I just mean all that which conforms to reality. I know postmodernism has brought the very idea of objective truth and reality into question, but we cannot deal with that here. Here we must assume that truth is real, accessible by man, and that there is a reality which truth can properly describe. For more information on the subject of postmoderism and truth, see Postmodern Times by Gene Veith or Is There a Meaning in This Text? by Kevin Vanhoozer

Those are the things we have to assume to move forward. If you do not agree with them all, I think this series can still be helpful, and hopefully the links above will give you more to consider on those subjects.

Now, in my seminar, I began with a question for the students: "What is wrong with the title of this seminar?" For RUF, I entitled the seminar "Two Beautiful Books: Science and Scripture," but from an epistemological or philosophical perspective, there is an error in that title (hence the "correction" in the title of this series). Here, of course, we do not have the luxury of dialogue, so I will just tell you what I told them because it helps introduce this topic: The title makes it sound like science is a source of knowledge--like it is a "book" that provides us with information--but it is not. This is a fundamental mistake made by many, many people today--both Christian and non. Nature--and by that I just mean the physical universe in which we live that is made up of energy and matter--is the source of knowledge. Science (which we will define in more detail later) is a tool or method by which we study nature--the physical world of energy and matter. On the other side, Scripture is a source of knowledge (i.e. revelation from God Himself) and the tool or method by which we study Scripture is exegesis--and that is basically studying the text to find its meaning. If the title were phrased properly, it would say, "Two Beautiful Books: Nature and Scripture" (again, hence the "correction" in the title of this series). Those two "books" and their relationship will be the main subject of this series, and they will help us to think biblically about science.

If we are going to talk about a biblical view of science, we need to start with God's revelation of Himself. Now, "revelation" is simply God's communication of Himself--His attributes, His knowledge, and His truth--to mankind. (Remember, one of the assumptions of this seminar is that God has spoken to mankind.) So, when it comes to science, its truthfulness, and the Christian's use of it, we need to start with God's revelation. We need to understand that revelation biblically.

The first thing we need to establish when thinking about God's revelation, or thinking biblically about science, is the source of all truth. What is the source of truth? What is the source of all that which conforms to reality--"the way things are"? From a biblical perspective, the answer has to be "God." If God is the creator of all things, then whether the truth comes from Scripture or from some other source in nature, all truth is God's truth--He is its ultimate source. This is why Jesus can say in Jn. 17:17 while praying for the Church--for all Christians throughout space and time--"Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth." This is why the David can say in Ps. 119:160, "The sum of your word is truth." God is not just true but is the source of truth itself.

There are some Christians who take issue with this statement because they think it either contradicts the doctrine of sola Scriptura or because it is "not a Reformed understanding of truth." I think those concerns are understandable, but ultimately I want to argue that they are unwarranted.

1. First, it has been argued that sola Scriptura means all "real truth" is only found in the Bible, and anything else from any other source is, at best, secondary and unreliable. But, sola Scriptura does not mean that all reliable truth is found only in the Bible. It does not mean genuine truth cannot come from somewhere other than Scripture. Sola Scriptura means the Bible is our highest authority in all it addresses and is our sole source for normative, infallible truth for all things concerning the Christian faith and its practice--things like worship, salvation, how to live in general as a follower of Christ. This is why the WLC says in the third question, "The holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the Word of God, the only rule of faith and obedience," i.e. Christian doctrine and Christian life. This doesn't mean, however, that truth does not come from other sources like the sciences--e.g. the orbitals of electrons in atoms or how to treat diseases like cancer. There is genuine truth there, but it does not come from the Bible and it is not necessary for faith and obedience. The Bible does address some things about this world like the origins of our universe, but sola Scriptura does not mean that it is the only source of genuine truth about this world. Again, J. P. Moreland's article (mentioned and linked above) on this subject is quite helpful. 
2. Second, "all truth is God's truth" is a thoroughly reformed doctrine held by the great theologians of the our tradition and the Westminster Confession itself. 
• John Calvin wrote in the second book of his Institutes: "Therefore, in reading secular 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 remember 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. In despising the gifts, we insult the Giver." (Emphasis mine) So, to say that the statement "all truth is God's truth" is not a reformed statement is tantamount to saying that John Calvin is not reformed, which would be quite an ironic thing to say.
• Herman Bavinck (a Dutch Reformed theologian and major force in the Dutch Reformed Church) wrote in his Reformed Dogmatics, "God is the truth in its absolute fullness. He, therefore, is the primary, the original truth, the source of all truth, the truth in all truth." (Emphasis mine)
• The WCF itself says in the first chapter, "The authority of the Holy Scripture, for which it ought to be believed, and obeyed, depends not upon the testimony of any man, or Church; but wholly upon God (who is truth itself)…" (Emphasis mine)

So, saying "all truth is God's truth" is consistent, biblical theology for if something is true, it is because it has been revealed by God, because it has been decreed by God, or because it is an accurate understanding of the nature of something God created. Whatever way, the truth is God's truth. He is the ultimate author of everything, even what we think of as reality itself, and He cannot lie or deceive (as we learn in places like He. 6:18), so therefore if we find truth in this universe, it is from God. All truth is God's truth is the first piece of information that we need to build our house, and this statement is like the concrete that we will use to lay the foundation for a biblical view of science.

Now, a corollary to this statement is that all truth, in some fashion or another, reveals something about God. If He is the ultimate source of all truth, then when we learn a truth, we can trace it back and learn something about its source. Now, this is obviously the case when it comes to Scripture, for there we learn detailed truths directly about God. Yet, this is also the case with truths learned from nature; we just do not get the detail about God from nature that we get from Scripture. But, we do get something, for as Paul says in Ro. 1:20, "For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made." Paul tells us that we learn about God from nature. This is the source of all religions in the world--they perceive from the world around them that there is some kind of God behind it. Now, because they do not look to Scripture as the sole source for details about that God and His plan of redemption (i.e. sola Scriptura), other religions are false religions, but they still perceive what Paul says here in Ro. 1:20--"God's power and divine nature… in the things that have been made." So, to say "all truth is God's truth" is also to say that when we encounter truth, we get a glimpse of God's divine nature and power. It may be a specific and detailed glimpse like the doctrine of the trinity that Scripture shows us, or it may be a general glimpse from nature like God's omnipotence, which is just an attribute of God's ultimate power over everything in existence.

But, that leads us into the question of "How does God reveal--communicate--His truth or how do we discover His truth?" And, we will cover that in the next post, for this one is already too long. Until then, remember that the concrete for the foundation of our metaphorical house is this: all truth is God's truth.

By His Grace,
Taylor

Science vs. Religion: Thoughts on Handling Apparent Conflicts

"While many Christians and non-Christians see the two [love of science and a desire to serve God] as in perpetual conflict, I find they integrate well. They operate by the same principles and are committed to discovering foundational truths. My passion... is helping Christians see how powerful a tool science is to declare God's glory and helping scientists understand how the established scientific discoveries demonstrate the legitimacy and rationality of the Christian faith." ~ Dr. Jeffrey Zweerink, UCLA Assistant Researcher and RTB Scholar

When people find out that my educational background is in physics and that I just graduated from seminary, I am often asked about the alleged conflict between science and religion/faith. When the questions come from a fellow Christian, they generally ask how I can merge the two without giving up my commitment to the inspiration, authority, inerrancy, and infallibility of Scripture (all things to which I am completely committed). This is a very important question and usually I find it comes from people hungry to hear something besides "God said it, I believe it, that settles it" or "religion simply causes fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and suffering." I enjoy being asked the question because it gives me a chance to try to help others realize there is no inherent conflict between science and the Christian faith, and that the alleged conflict is simply played up by many of the so-called "new atheists" and media hype.

What is a Christian to do when they come across "scientific fact" that seems to conflict with Scripture? Below are several things that I keep in mind when I see headlines or read the latest "new atheist" rant. Not all these things will be possible all the time, but they are things to look for and keep in mind that will help us sort these issues out (this is by no means an exhaustive list and I or others may modify or add to it later):

• Remember the world in which we live... and do not be surprised: I sometimes find myself astonished that someone would treat me with contempt or patronize me like a child when they find out I am a Christian and a scientist, and then, when I come to my senses, I remember that I should expect nothing less. This is exactly what Jesus told us to expect. Christians are a people whose highest allegiance is God Himself and His written Word is the highest authority in our lives. We, however, live in a world whose highest allegiance is any number of idols, particularly human reason. These ultimate allegiances are going to come into contact and, as the man used to sing, "something's gotta give." But, neither side is willing to give up their allegiance. The world looks to reason as the only self-authenticating authority and will not tolerate Christians who look to the Bible as the only self-authenticating authority (of course, Christianity does not deny the value of reason but places it in its rightful place: under God). So, do not be surprised when the alleged conflict is amplified or someone claims your belief is "unwarranted." This is part of the world in which we live.
• Check the source and wait: Sometimes discoveries made by scientists are either reported by the media too early (and incorrectly) or later debunked by further testing and experimentation. In the first case, take note of what you are reading in media articles and from where the information came. Did it come from a published, peer-reviewed article or from a presentation at a scientific conference? There can be a big difference in the reliability of the data. At conferences, researches share raw, infant ideas that can range from Nobel prize concepts to junk and dead ends. Sometimes unpublished, un-peer-reviewed claims are portray as scientific fact when even the researchers would not say that. If you have the knowledge and ability to check the claims, do it. If not, wait and see if further information on the subject comes up after the research has made it through the peer-review system (make use of Google Alerts). If the media story does come from a reputable journal, try to check the reporting and claims by doing your own research or asking a friend who might have expertise in the area. If that is not possible, I would recommend asking my friends at Reasons to Believe, but, as a distant second, I offer my assistance (at times I talk about scientific discoveries from a biblical perspective, some examples are here, here, here, here, and here). When all else fails, wait and follow the story (again, make use of Google Alerts)  Sometimes mistakes can happen, like the recent neutrino debacle (read the before and after) or claims can be over blown, like the Ida circus stunt. When so many people are trying to make a name for themselves, this is the nature of the beast and eventually bogus claims are exposed. 
• Try to separate the data from the interpretation of the data: This can be a huge help when trying to deal with scientific claims that apparently contradict Scripture. There is a difference between scientific data and interpretation of that data. The data is the raw information brought to light by a study or a discovery and that data has to be interpreted with a model or paradigm to figure out what it means and where it fits. Everyone interprets data within a model or paradigm (whether we know it or not) based on our beliefs and worldview. A scientific model refers to the schematic description of a system (or set of data) that accounts for observations and inferences as well as origin and history. It is a paradigm that attempts to offer reasonable explanations for the entire scope or history of a particular system in nature, as well as for its relationship to other phenomena. Particle physics has the Standard Model, for example. There are other models, like naturalistic evolution. Data taken in by various fields of science is generally interpreted within the accepted model. What you are likely reading in a media article (even a journal article) is not the data itself (for that would not sell advertising) but an interpretation of that data. Christians need to separate the data from its interpretation and interpret it within a biblical model. If we really believe God created the universe and wrote Scripture, then we know the data will fit within a biblical model, we just have to do the work of separation and interpretation. Sometimes the interpretations will be almost identical; other times there will be significant differences. For example, see my articles on the historicity of Adam and Eve. Now, again, this can be a very difficult thing to do for someone who does not have access to journal articles (to get the data) or the necessary training to understand and interpret the data. As mentioned above, try to check the claims by doing your own research or asking a friend who might have expertise in the area. If that is not possible, again I would recommend asking my friends at Reasons to Believe, but, again as a distant second, I offer my assistance.
• Remember that everyone is biased... everyone: If there is one good thing that postmodernism has done for society, it is to shown that everyone is biased and no one has the ability to lay aside completely their personal presuppositions. We interpret every piece of data not only in a model (see above) but according to our own presuppositions. As stated above, one of the common modern presuppositions is that human reason is a self-authenticating authority. Another might be that evolution is a scientific fact. We need to look for the hidden presuppositions in bold statements and ask how they might be affecting a person's interpretation of the data. We should not berate others because they have biases (for we all have them), but we should try to help them see how their biases are affecting their interpretation and how other interpretations from other presuppositions are equally valid.
• Remember that God is the God of general and special revelation: Article 2 of the Belgic Confession states: "We know Him [God] by two means: First, by the creation, preservation, and government of the universe, since that universe is before our eyes like a beautiful book in which all creatures, great and small, are as letters to make us ponder the invisible things of God: His eternal power and his divinity, as the apostle Paul says in Romans 1:20. All these things are enough to convict men and to leave them without excuse. Second, He makes Himself known to us more openly by His holy and divine Word, as much as we need in this life, for His glory and for the salvation of His own." What the authors of this great confession were pointing out is that God is the God of all truth, whether it comes from nature or Scripture. This means that science and Scripture will perfectly harmonize when we are interpreting both correctly. The apparent contradictions crop up when we or others are misinterpreting one or both "books." All apparent contradictions are just that, apparent, and not real. Sometimes it takes a lot of hard work and time to figure out where we or someone else has gone wrong in interpretation, but we must never forget that any contradictions are a manifestation of human fallibility, not inherent to God's Word or world. 
• Be humble: Remember, you and I are just as fallible, biased, and sinful as the most hardened, virulent "new atheist." The only difference between us and them is that we have God's grace, forgiveness, salvation, and Holy Spirit (not from anything in us but as a gift so no man can boast, Eph. 2:8-9). The only reason that you and I understand and believe the Scriptures is the Spirit's illumination (1 Co. 2:9-12), therefore be humble when responding to critics, evaluating someone's work, or discussing apparent contradictions with others.
• Pray: When Nehemiah stood before the King Artaxerxes to request permission to go to Jerusalem and rebuild the walls around the new Temple, he was in a tenuous spot. He could have been killed for his request. In 2:4 the king asks the question "What are you requesting?" and before Nehemiah responded Scripture tells us that he prayed. In that moment, few seconds, he prayed for wisdom and God gave it to him. We need to pray for wisdom when trying to figure these things out. Sometimes they are very difficult (if they were not, there would not be all the controversies we find ourselves in today). We need to pray that God will help us sort out the truth from interpretation, the facts from presuppositional errors; and we need to pray that He will help us come to a proper understanding of both His Word and His world. 
• Remember that God is still God, even if you cannot figure it out: Friends, let us be honest, we are not going to figure everything out. Even the best scholars sometimes have to say, "I don't know." We must remember that even if something seems contradictory and after all our research we still cannot figure it out, God is still God and Jesus is still coming back. I hate not being able to figure something out as much as the next guy, but sometimes (rarely but sometimes) we need to admit it is too much for us, trust God, and go get a milkshake. 

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