3-19-2019

Science, the Bible, and Me

In my thoughts, study, and writings I just came upon something that really bothered me.  As a Christian do I need to defend the Bible?  Probably just as important, can I?

Science disputes the Bible in relationship to the Bible’s truth about creation, history, and the existence of a divine entity.  How can I believe in the Bible and maintain a sense of reasonableness for science?

I read too much to not be aware of the intellectual and scholarly battle science and religion wage.  I feel, and sort of know, where I am in this immense and historical war of the minds.  I am a naive and undereducated outsider.  That is true, but I still have my opinions and have spent a lot of my 75 years thinking and writing my thoughts.  Those opinions have always been to myself and unshared, except for more recent attempts to type and utilize the internet to record my ideas.  Strangely, I now write to be read.

I just read an article (3-19-2019) “Can Christians add the Big Bang to the Bible?”.  It exposed the apparent discrepancies of Genesis’s timeline of God’s 6 day creation to the Big Bang Theory.  From a personal side, the article exposed my shortsightedness in the Bible and science.  I pulled the article today because I just happened to be writing and thinking about the “singularity” of the Big Bang Theory.  I have always felt open to criticize science theories but the bothering question was do I critique the Bible?  I have an answer, of sorts, that I need to clarify for myself.  This is scary because I have easily said, “I will trust God to help me discern the truths in the Bible”.  I also readily acknowledge to myself that there is much I don’t understand in the Bible or about God.  Am I really rationalizing and am afraid to criticize the Bible?  My prevailing bale out is I will leave the things I question in the Bible for God to enlighten me about, or, I just won’t know.  This is not very acceptable because I never go against the Bible, even when I don’t understand it, but will vigorously dispute science’s claim on truth.  

So let me try to be honest, at least to myself.  If you take a claim that Genesis says the Sun and moon were created after the Earth, and compare it to all the cosmological data of formations of solar systems, Genesis seems very wrong.  I really don’t think science is wrong about the way planets are formed, so is the Bible wrong in my eyes?  My normal “I don’t know” is a good answer.  To be more honest, I must admit that the way creation is described on day 4 makes no sense.  I will examine what the phrase “makes no sense” means to me in relationship to the Bible.

I need to follow up with a clarification.  I don’t think the Bible disputes science much.  I have a strong tendency to feel that science needs to defend science much more than a Christian needs to defend the Bible.  The history of theories for science is not good.  Science’s defense of theories seems so desperate and, at times, contrived.  I defend the Bible as my means for the revelation of God’s plan of salvation from sin by my belief in Jesus as the Son of God. The scientist defends their theories for the sake of their own sense of rightness.  My belief serves and glorifies God.  Science’s theories glorify human intellect.  

The man of science supposes that human intelligence can eventually expose the truth and the fallacy of false beliefs.  The Christian searches for confirmation of his beliefs and finds that the Bible (his source of truth) says that God will assist his understanding. Resolution lies in conviction and the ability of the individual to assert his view of the truth.  I have certainly found that resolve strong for both sides.

Also for some reason science seems drawn to condemn the Christian as foolish and mislead.  I have never seen science try to prove God.  Instead, science actively pursues it's naturalistic theory of creation and mocks the Word of God.  As a Christian I strongly oppose the aggressive, dogmatic criticism  that Christians have among themselves and others.  It is not scriptural.  As for the scientist who actively attack belief in God, I wonder why?  Can they be so sure they are right as to lead people to a position of disbelief that offers little in the way of purpose and hope.  Is their intellect and reason so superior?  This is why I can't steer clear of this topic.

The arrogance of Humanity is to feel that they are the great wonder of the universe.  They take the greatest, most complex design of nature and proclaim that their intellect can unlock the mysteries of existence.  They throw into high gear the so called "God spot(s)" coupled with their superior ability of free-will (or to choose) and decide their is no God.  For some reason they don't need proof of this like they seem to require of all else to establish credibility and reasonableness.  After all, it isn't a theory.  Now they can teach their children that the highest purpose of Humanity is to serve Humanity.  That survival only encompasses our brief, finite life ("dust to dust"), so make the most out of it.  There is a truth in the Bible that says "eat, drink and make merry for tomorrow you may die".  They can relish the fact that they have truth and life can be fun. They can tell their innocent, vulnerable child about the foolishness to have Faith and the Hope of a life after death.  Tell them the brain of Man is the source of higher abstract ideas and moral purpose.  If their higher purpose is reality and facts, they should not forget to tell them Humanity isn't all that great.  Tell them how Man is in the process of killing off most other species of animals (Anthropocene extinction?), and hopefully are smart enough to not kill ourselves off in the process (the suggestion is to find another home). Tell them how we use our intellect to create tools to dominate, conquer and destroy everything, even ourselves.  How we use our greed, vanity, and competitive nature, call it ambition, to get fame and fortune.  How we use our ability to be cruel and malicious to punish and kill our enemies.  How we manipulate natural selection and intellectually create technology to select our own interest over all others.  How we have a short, but great time, without God.  We may have been formed by the  process of Naturalism, but what we humans have done seems far from natural.