The Bible and Science
Introduction
Is science the true god of the Bible? Many Christians seem to think so. Please note that in this lesson we’ll be talking about cosmology and evolution, not empirical (testable) science and engineering.
What is empirical science?
True science is the pursuit of understanding our world, but when it comes to claiming something is a scientific fact, certain procedures are required, called the scientific method:
- Abduction:
- Observe a natural phenomenon
- Form a hypothesis about what could cause it
- Deduction:
- Experiment to test the hypothesis
- Independent variable (cause)
- Dependent variable (effect)
- Controlled variable (constant)
- Experiment to test the null hypothesis (attempt to falsify)
- Analyze the results
- Repeat
- Experiment to test the hypothesis
- Induction: only deals in probabilities
If something is not a naturally-occurring phenomenon and cannot be tested via the scientific method, then no theory about it can be called scientific.
What is pseudoscience?
A past event, such as the Big Bang or abiogenesis, cannot meet the standard required to call itself a scientific theory, much less a fact. So such theories are mere philosophical assumptions and guesses. Investigating the past is in the realm of probability and is highly subjective. In fact, science prides itself on its instability, since what it theorizes today may be abandoned tomorrow. So pseudoscience is the only thing that really evolves, since interpretation of data is according to the philosophical bias of the interpreters. And by the way, since it’s always changing, its defenders shouldn’t get upset when people disagree with current theory.
Is cosmology really a science?
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines cosmology as:
- 1a: a branch of metaphysics that deals with the nature of the universe
- 1b: a theory or doctrine describing the natural order of the universe
- 2: a branch of astronomy that deals with the origin, structure, and space-time relationships of the universe
(emphasis mine; also note that cosmogony deals only with the origin of the universe)
Given the definitions of empirical science and pseudoscience, which should cosmology be classified as? Metaphysics is not physics; doctrine is not observation; relationships among entities in a hypotheical realm (space-time) is not observation of the natural realm. In fact, so-called space-time is conceptually impossible, since nonphysical entities cannot be bent or considered a physical dimension— and if not physical, then not scientific. The scientific method is bound entirely by naturalism, which by definition must exclude the nonphysical or supernatural. Since space-time is nonphysical, then it cannot even be a scientific theory.
The standard of truth/fact
If we accept that the Bible is inspired by God, then it must follow that the Bible is not false and does not teach (rather than merely report) inaccuracies. So let’s take a look at the cosmology presented by the Bible, in Genesis 1, Job 38 and 40, and Joshua 10:12-14. Context is everything, and these contexts, while sometimes poetically expressed, never paint a picture of the universe that matches modern cosmology.
Without getting into the details of a debate over the size of the universe or shape of the earth, consider these questions in light of how scripture presents them:
- Should Gen. 1 bow to a theory that doesn’t even meet the requirement of being called scientific?
- If the Bible wanted to present the six days of creation as literal 24-hour days, how much more clearly would it need to have been expressed than “evening and morning, the __th day”?
- Since the order of creation in Gen. 1 does not match evolutionary theory, should we dismiss the Bible or evolutionary theory? Can we ignore the sequence given in scripture? (see previous point)
- Was the earth orbiting the sun in the days before the sun was created?
- On the long day of Joshua, did the earth stop spinning or did the sun and moon stop moving?
- What effects should have been reported in at least some parts of the world if earth had been spinning and then stopped for about 24 hours?
- Even in the most poetic passages, is earth ever described as a spinning ball, or that it moves through space?
- The Bible only describes the luminaries as the sun, moon, and stars, with some stars “wandering” (the meaning of planet). On what Biblical basis do we believe that “planets” are not stars?
Conclusion
Should the Bible bow to an unstable patchwork of guesses and philosophy? Do we trust God or man? The Bible has passed every test of its claims about history, so why do we not trust its claims about nature, which God created? Instead, we try to force-fit scripture into the latest philosophical framework, or dismiss it as allegory or “theological messaging”. Who is really our God? Who is the the most trustworthy source of truth and fact? Scripture must be read in context, so if the context is historical narrative rather than moral lessons or wisdom literature, we must take it as factual. And if current claims of scientific fact don’t match, we can only hope that someday those claims catch up to reality.