Can God and science work together?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ivonia

Zodiac Fleet Commander
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
169
Reaction score
12
Location
Milwaukee, WI
I'm sure this has been debated before, but I was wondering, with all our advances in science and technology, is there room for God anymore?

Humans used to explain things they couldn't understand as a supernatural force acting upon them, such as a thunderstorm. Some things also got pretty scary at times, such as the plagues of Egypt in the Old Testament. Today however, using scientific tools and observation, we know that thunderstorms are caused by freak low pressure systems in the atmosphere, and we know why natural disasters happen, and can sometimes even predict when they will occur, and where they may hit (such as Hurricane Katrina).

It was once believed that the Earth was the center of the universe (I don't think the Bible says this, just that God created everything). Observations made by people back then made this seem logical. Anything claiming otherwise was considered heretical (just look at poor Galileo). However, once again, science steps in and says that the Earth is in fact just another planet orbiting the sun, and later on, our sun isn't even that great, it's just "average" on the scale of stars.

What I'm trying to say here is, as science comes and explains these sorts of things, it seems like the "magical explanation" of "God did it" seems to be less and less acceptable. So, do you think that science is gradually trying to replace God? Or, do you think that God is in fact revealing to us how His universe works, on a slow and gradual basis?

For me, I believe it's the latter. I grew up learning the former, but then, having read the Bible after receiving "secular training" (I suppose what you'd call a public school education hehe), I have come to believe that science is really God's way of explaining to us how the universe works.

There are still some things that science can't fully explain however, such as how old the universe is exactly. While we have a good estimate, it's not exactly precise (if you believe the "13 billion years old" thing, and that our sun is 5 billion years old, doesn't it make you wonder what happened in the first 8 billion years before the earth even existed?). I don't think the Bible ever mentions the age of the universe either, and the closest thing we have is the line "To God, a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years is like a day" (sorry, I forget where it's located in the Bible, but I believe it's in the New Testament), and this is where the "Earth is 6,000 years old" claim that some Bible people say, taking that quote literally (the six days in the beginning of the Old Testament, although I wonder why they don't count the 7th day when God rested hehe).

However, I myself have trouble believing that. I don't think that God meant for us to literally take that the Earth is only 6,000 years old. To me, that "thousand years" quote was meant to be easy to comprehend to someone living in that day in age. For all we know, a billion years is like a day to God, and the Earth is probably much older than we think, just that we didn't need to know about all that other stuff that occurred back then (yeah, I'm probably going to start falling apart here if I start talking about dinosaurs and cavemen lol). I believe this is one of those things where you either believe God created everything, or you don't. Faith can't be measured the way you can measure water in a cup, which is why science has a hard time observing "acts of God" in this way (and no doubt this stuff gets confusing after a while).

I think I can understand why God spoke in such a way in the Bible, because He wants it to have a timeless feel to it (and it does for the most part. Many of the messages spoken by Jesus over two thousand years ago still ring true today, such as money corrupting people). To someone living in that day, they'd have no way of comprehending how germs invade their bodies and make them sick, or that the nearest star to us takes light 4.3 years to arrive to their eyes and for their brain to process it. And even today, you'd be hard pressed to explain where all the matter in the universe came from (science says you can't create something from nothing. But the Bible says with God, all things are possible).

The laws of science have always been around (such as, water will freeze or ice will melt at 32 degrees fahrenheit, or 0 degrees celsius), and there are no doubt new laws that await our discovery (which God will give to us through some hard working person at an appropiate time. I don't think we're ready for interstellar travel yet, but I believe it's possible, just like people used to think we could never fly, or even go into space, yet we've done both within the last hundred years).

Also, consider the Tower of Babel story in the Old Testament People tried to build a tower to reach into the Heavens, but God knew they weren't ready, and therefore split everyone up and spread them throughout the world. Gradually, although I admit that it's been a terrible path (what with the prejudices and mass killings), we've come to contact other people and in many parts of the world, have begun living together as these people back then once lived, and God hasn't really impeded our progress too much (I wish He'd let us kickstart the space program again though, I'd love to travel in space someday hehe).

I suppose to sum up what I'm saying here is, people sometimes try to hard to find God, or prove that he either exists or doesn't exist. Sometimes people come up with many reasons to prove that God exists, or that God exists in some form, or that God isn't around at all, and never really did exist (the Trinity stuff confuses the heck out of me. I still don't fully understand that concept, but I believe God sent Jesus to save us, which is still a much easier to understand message). God can be found pretty simply, and He shows us how to find him in the Bible, but many people don't seem to want to believe that, thinking that it's gotta be more complex than that, and come up with some pretty interesting ideas on how God works.

But like Jesus said, we should have child-like understanding of these things if we truly want to know God. That's why scholars and prophets have searched high and low and never found God, yet simple people have discovered Him quite easily (I also like how Jesus chose simple folk to spread the Word of God around. Imagine if Jesus explained to them how God worked as if it were a complex mathematical formula. I think it'd be over a lot of people's heads). By loving Him with all our strength (people nowadays really take what they have for granted sadly. Didn't Jesus say "we have nothing, except that which God has given us?"), and loving our fellow humans as we would love ourselves, we can learn about the nature of God (Jesus summed it up pretty nicely I believe).

Sorry if this post seems to go several places. It's something I was debating as I was writing my stories, as I try to take on these sorts of issues. As you can see, it's can be quite complicated, and I wanted to see what you all think about this stuff. At first, it seemed like learning about God was going to be something that you'd need a degree in, but as I read the Bible, I found out that the messages contained in it are pretty simplistic in nature, and really easy to read and follow. I'm hoping that in my own stories, I can reflect those kinds of messages too, easy to read and understand.
 

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
I have worked with research scientists who were very devout Christians, one a deacon of his church, although I am not one, myself. They saw science as a way of understanding God and his creation in deeper and more profound ways.

But in the end faith and science are different things. Science may show us more and more about what is but it will never reveal why or tell us what should be.
 

Puddle Jumper

Since God created science I should think the answer would be obvious.
 

Inspired

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
457
Reaction score
33
Location
Minnesota
I teach science in a Christian school, and to be completely honest, science supports the concept of a Grand Designer more that it proves Evolution. I'm certainly not going to debate it here. Others have done that. Ultimately, it takes faith in what we have not seen to believe either concept of how the Earth began. But, I have not seen any science that goes contrary to the Word of God. (only the theories, not real, concrete scientific proof.)
 

silentpoet

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
180
Reaction score
12
You can have fanatics on either hand. There was a good short story making this point in the last issue of the big fantasy magazine(the name escapes me, but harry potter was on the cover). Both methods are ways of interpreting reality. I am fairly familiar with both methods and relying on one alone will leave you with an incomplete understanding. However with the human limitations, I don't think a complete understanding of a given aspect of reality is possible.
 

veinglory

volitare nequeo
Self-Ban
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
28,750
Reaction score
2,933
Location
right here
Website
www.veinglory.com
I would say the same thing slightly differently. Science is a way of collecting data. It also suggests that the simplest available explanation of that data should be used.

Deciding what that explanation is and adding ethical and spiritual content occurs at a separate level and any complete understanding will have this level, be it Christian or another tradition (Buddhist, secular humanist etc)
 

Ralyks

Untold stories inside
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,002
Reaction score
100
Location
VA
Website
www.editorskylar.com
Science is nothing more than a way of understanding what God has already done in creation, and that is why, until the 20th century, so many of the great scientific breakthroughs were accomplished by devout Christians--they wanted to understand what God had done; how He worked. Many scientist still do; others are indifferent to the concept of God; and still others are dead set on disbeliving God, and that prejudice can influence scientific objectivity.
 

silentpoet

practical experience, FTW
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
180
Reaction score
12
veinglory said:
I would say the same thing slightly differently. Science is a way of collecting data. It also suggests that the simplest available explanation of that data should be used.

Deciding what that explanation is and adding ethical and spiritual content occurs at a separate level and any complete understanding will have this level, be it Christian or another tradition (Buddhist, secular humanist etc)

IE one tells the how(science), the other tells the why(religion of whatever stripe). The important thing in science is to be aware of your bias and influences. That is just aside from bad science designed to show what you want, which is fairly easy(stuff like guided writing for autistics being a good example). I know how to design bad science experiments, and I know how to think bad theology.

I think one point you brought up can stand a little expansion. Simplicity. Good science is simple, look at E=mc squared. All matter boiled down to 4-5 characters. Look at the teaching of Jesus, the two greatest commandments. It is in the application and thoughts where it gets complex. Nuclear weapons and what is showing love. Now those debates can get complex, but at the base there is a simplicity that is truly elegant.
 

loquax

I verb nouns adverbly
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
1,064
Reaction score
165
God's omnipotence is the be-all and end-all of arguments. Religion will forever fall back on it, no matter what science discovers.
 

SeanDSchaffer

Well, let's see....

I think if science is objective and allows for God to be in the picture, then yes, the two can work together. Many scientists in the past have used the Bible as a basis for their beliefs. The idea, for instance, that the Earth is round, came out of the Old Testament. As did the idea that washing one's hands before and after an operation (speaking of doctors, here) can save a patient's life.

Using the Bible as a guide, some scientists have made the argument that the Earth is very young, and that the dinosaurs lived on the Earth at the same time as Humanity, not millions of years before. Some have even come right out and stated that dragon legends came from dinosaurs that lived while mankind was on this Earth.

To me, it's a matter of refusing to be led by popular opinion. As I was taught in General Science back in High School, even a Scientific Law is not set in stone. There is always a chance, no matter how slim, that what was accepted as scientific fact at one time, can someday become complete myth.

So yeah, if Science can be objective, of course God and Science can go hand-in-hand in the world we live in.
 

Peggy

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Messages
1,456
Reaction score
175
Location
Basking in the sun.
Website
thoughtsontheroad.blogspot.com
SeanDSchaffer said:
I think if science is objective and allows for God to be in the picture, then yes, the two can work together.
Science involves making observations and then providing an explanation of those observations. The trick is that science cannot determine whether God or any other supernatural force is involved in natural processes. In other words, science can neither prove nor disprove the involvement of an omnipotent God. It seems that some people assume that because science cannot determine God's involvement in the natural world that it necessarily means that God is not involved (and this is an argument made by both some religious people who want "Godless science" out of the classroom, as well as some atheist scientists). Perhaps God moves each and every electron in my computer. Perhaps God simply created the universe such that electrons move in a predictable manner. Perhaps there is no God at all. Science cannot distinguish these possibilities.

And really, science should NOT try to reconcile itself with religious beliefs. Trying to fit more and more accumulated data into a particular religious framework would be a losing battle, resulting in pretty useless hypotheses. Instead, science tries to make the best interpretation independent of religion. That is why there isn't Hindu geology and Baptist geology and Catholic geology and Mormon geology and Buddhist geology and Muslim geology etc. - there is just geology.
 

Flapdoodle

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
707
Reaction score
55
Location
Coventry, UK
Website
www.livejournal.com
Inspired said:
I teach science in a Christian school, and to be completely honest, science supports the concept of a Grand Designer more that it proves Evolution. I'm certainly not going to debate it here. Others have done that. Ultimately, it takes faith in what we have not seen to believe either concept of how the Earth began. But, I have not seen any science that goes contrary to the Word of God. (only the theories, not real, concrete scientific proof.)

No it doesn't. Science proves evolution. There is not a single published scientific paper that demonstrates there is a "Grand Designer". The typical argument used by Intelligent Design apologists is that "there are gaps in the theory, therefore that proves there is a designer." This is a nonsense argument.
 

Inspired

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
457
Reaction score
33
Location
Minnesota
Sorry. I don't agree. I haven't seen anything that proves evolution, just changes WITHIN species over time. Nothing indicates a change in species.

You have to have faith in evolution to believe that. Just as I have faith in Creation to believe all the connections. How did the human eye evolve anyway? I don't believe it can work without the parts.

Never mind. I don't want to argue. But, I won't agree.
 

Flapdoodle

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
707
Reaction score
55
Location
Coventry, UK
Website
www.livejournal.com
Inspired said:
Sorry. I don't agree. I haven't seen anything that proves evolution, just changes WITHIN species over time. Nothing indicates a change in species.

You have to have faith in evolution to believe that. Just as I have faith in Creation to believe all the connections. How did the human eye evolve anyway? I don't believe it can work without the parts.

Never mind. I don't want to argue. But, I won't agree.

If you haven't seen it, then read it - the evidence is out there, in over 150 years worth of work in this field. Your ignorance is utterly staggering for someone who claims to be a teacher - there _are_ examples of species diverging, including humans! Have you never wondered why species are divided into families?

Many species have different types of eyes - human eyes are actually quite badly "designed" and are prone to being damaged quite easily due to the positioning of the blood vessels. Other species have better eyes than ours, but we have not evolved in the same way due to our environment.

How did eyes evolve? Evolution takes places over a long period of time with small changes. It's quite possible that a species of creature with a light sensitive cell may have been given an advantage over those without. From here on... Well, you get the picture. The thing is, there is _evidence_ in nature of an evolutionary chain from this point up to the development of human like eyes. It's been, ahem, seen. Try [Nilsson and Pelger, 1994, Proc Biol Sci)] for a start.

Your notion of "it won't work without the parts" is based on Behe's highly dubious theory of "irreducible complexity" which is a flawed argument from a microbiologist - not an evolutionary scientist.

The fact is that a simple light sensitive cell cluster can act as a primitive eye. A cell cluster in a pitt with a small hole in front is better, etc. That it has improved over time is an example of evolution and survival of the fittest.

You don't need "faith" to believe the evidence in front of your - ah, eyes.
 

Peggy

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Messages
1,456
Reaction score
175
Location
Basking in the sun.
Website
thoughtsontheroad.blogspot.com
Inspired said:
Sorry. I don't agree. I haven't seen anything that proves evolution, just changes WITHIN species over time. Nothing indicates a change in species.
Formation of new species has indeed been observed. The simple explanation is that if there enough changes within a population of a particular species, given enough time they will eventually diverge enough from the original population to form a separate species. Over millions and millions of years, it is not surprising that life is very diverse. (If you don't "believe" that the earth is millions of years old, I could understand your skepticism, but that is a different issue.) Evolution isn't a matter of "faith" or "belief". There is absolutely no scientific controversy on whether evolution takes place or not.

If you are interested in discussing it, we could resurrect the old evolution/creationism/intelligent design thread.

http://absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19412
 

Inspired

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
457
Reaction score
33
Location
Minnesota
Of course I don't believe the Earth is millions or billions of years old. Sorry, I didn't mention that before.

I don't believe that Evolution happened.

I never joined in the original discussion, because I knew it would become a Creation-bashing party.

I figured there would be a little protection from that here in the Christian forum.

I could've been wrong about that.

We can disagree without degrading one another, can't we?
 

reph

Fig of authority
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
5,160
Reaction score
971
Location
On a fig tree, presumably
Inspired said:
I never joined in the original discussion, because I knew it would become a Creation-bashing party.

I figured there would be a little protection from that here in the Christian forum.
That's probably an unrealistic expectation, if you mean you thought people would suppress their opinions. Many Christians believe the earth is old and life forms appeared gradually. It isn't un-Christian to believe in evolution.
 

Unique

Agent of Doom
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
8,861
Reaction score
3,230
Location
Outer Limits
Inspired said:
Of course I don't believe the Earth is millions or billions of years old. Sorry, I didn't mention that before.
I don't believe that Evolution happened.
I never joined in the original discussion, because I knew it would become a Creation-bashing party.
I figured there would be a little protection from that here in the Christian forum.
I could've been wrong about that.

We can disagree without degrading one another, can't we?

We can most certainly agree to disagree.

Evolution - my take is that evolution happens in that things change over time but I don't believe we crawled up out of the slime.

Whether creation took place in 6 twenty-four hour days or 6 ten thousand year days just. doesn't. matter. to. me. I can't change it and I can't prove it and I have to live with the world as it is now. There are so many other more important things - things I can change - who cares ????

I believe God exists; I believe He has the power to have made the world in 6 twenty-four hour days - if He wanted to - but He didn't ask for my opinion then and He isn't asking now. I think there are other things He'd rather I focus my attention on. (And a bunch of other folks, too) If He'd been asking, I'd have told Him, 'God, you have a good thing going on here. When you get finished with the animals - stop. Just stop. You'll save Yourself a whole lot of trouble if You do.'

But like I said, He wasn't asking.....;)
 

Inspired

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
457
Reaction score
33
Location
Minnesota
reph said:
That's probably an unrealistic expectation, if you mean you thought people would suppress their opinions. Many Christians believe the earth is old and life forms appeared gradually. It isn't un-Christian to believe in evolution.

No, I meant that in a Christian forum one would think that others would realize that many Christians do not support the evolutionary theory. I would expect that it would be more accepted here than in a "secular" forum.
 

Inspired

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
457
Reaction score
33
Location
Minnesota
I know I can't change others' opinions and that many people refuse to believe you can be interested or schooled in science and still be a strong Christian who believes in a 6 day Creation just 1000s of years ago by a Triune God.

That is my position. I'm not going to argue it. (Defend it a little, yes, but not get into a gritty debate.)

I just got a heavy writing assignment, so I should let this subject drop. Better to use my words and energy on something I get paid for!
 

Unique

Agent of Doom
Kind Benefactor
Super Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 23, 2005
Messages
8,861
Reaction score
3,230
Location
Outer Limits
Inspired said:
I just got a heavy writing assignment, so I should let this subject drop. Better to use my words and energy on something I get paid for!

Good luck and congratulations. Come back when you're finished and we can agree to disagree some more. :D I like hearing other people's opinions whether I agree with them or not. As long as they don't tell me I'm an ignorant poopiehead for believing as I do, I promise not to do the same.
 

Peggy

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Messages
1,456
Reaction score
175
Location
Basking in the sun.
Website
thoughtsontheroad.blogspot.com
Inspired said:
I never joined in the original discussion, because I knew it would become a Creation-bashing party.

I figured there would be a little protection from that here in the Christian forum.

I could've been wrong about that.
As reph has pointed out, being Christian doesn't mean you don't accept evolutionary theory. I am obviously biased, but I don't think the original discussion was at all a "Creation-bashing party". It might be reasonable to call it a "twist science until it says what I already believe-bashing" party though.

I have no problem with people believing in a literal interpretation of Genesis and a 6000 year old earth, as long as they don't take the next step and say "and science proves it". Unfotunately, there are some charismatic and convincing people out there who make scientific-sounding arguments along the lines that science fully supports their interpretation of the Bible. Most Americans know little about science (a recent poll had something like a third of Americans not knowing that the earth goes around the sun), so the arguments are never questioned. This unfortunately results people who become even more ignorant about science, something that makes me rather upset. I've seen the argument that "evolution breaks the second law of thermodynamics" a number of times, for example. If you know any physics that is just bizarre.

The truth is that a huge body of evidence points to an earth that is millions of years old and evolutionary processes that created all current species, including Homo sapiens. Whether you believe that that is what really happened, or whether God simply made it look as if that is what happened is up to you.
Inspired said:
I just got a heavy writing assignment, so I should let this subject drop. Better to use my words and energy on something I get paid for!
Congrats! I'm sorry I didn't have a chance to come back and discuss before you got caught up in doing something productive.:)
 

Flapdoodle

Super Member
Registered
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
707
Reaction score
55
Location
Coventry, UK
Website
www.livejournal.com
Peggy said:
Americans know little about science (a recent poll had something like a third of Americans not knowing that the earth goes around the sun),


Sadly, it's not only the US.

The biggest fraud is the "evolution is only a theory" argument. For a scientist, fact and theory go hand in had. A scientific theory itself is based on factual evidence and observations. There's nothing "only" about a scientific theory. It's a clever attempt to somehow put some doubt into evolution for those who weren't listening in science.

As Richard Dawkins says - no other branch of science has the "yapping terriers of faith" constantly at its heels. Evolution poses a big problem for some religions. As you say, there's a huge body of evidence and it is a FACT that species diverge (This has been studied and _seen_ to happen.). The sooner religion gets used to the idea, the better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.