One of the hardest issues for Christians right now is how to interact with science. In fact, this is nothing new. The church has a rather long and tense history with science and the results have not always been excellent. Now, in many ways I believe that the church has gotten an unfair rap. It is rarely acknowledged, for example, that for centuries the church WAS the scientific community and therefore many of our most significant scientific findings were discovered by monks and other ministers. Discovery about creation was viewed as one of the best ways to honor the Creator. A beautiful sentiment!
Two happy odontochelys swimming merrily 592 billion years ago, or something like that.
But then there’s the other side. Namely that if scientific findings don’t fit within the framework of church understanding, they are ignored, attacked or covered up. This was certainly the case with ideas about astronomy and the earth revolving around the sun. Embarrassing stuff. Growing up, this was always presented to me (in my conservative protestant private school) as a Catholic problem, as if once the Protestants got on the scene they were advocating for scientific fact at all costs to current paradigms. Not so! Check out this quote from everyone’s favorite Protestant, Martin Luther: “People gave ear to an upstart astrologer [Copernicus] who strove to show that the earth revolves, not the heavens or the firmament, the sun and the moon . . . This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy; but sacred scripture tells us that Joshua [Joshua 10:13] commanded the sun to stand still, and not the earth.” – “Table Talks” in 1539
Oops. Bad call, Mr. Luther. But is it really his fault? Isn’t he just interpreting scripture directly, literally, like so many do, like so many believe we must? Is that (now don’t freak out on me) basically what many conservative Christians are doing right now with issues of the age of the earth and even global warming? I don’t know! I’m just asking.
Now, the global warming one is weird because, honestly, there is nothing in the Bible that even mildly refutes the possibility of us royally screwing up the earth. Yet many Christians refuse to believe it and I believe this is largely because we have been trained to distrust the scientific community. I’ve even heard folks allude to vaguely biblical notions of “man’s wisdom vs. God’s wisdom” as if they weren’t depending on human ingenuity in virtually every aspect of their lives.
The old earth thing is harder. I was definitely raised to believe scientists had lost their minds and sold their souls to believe that the earth was hundreds of millions of years old. Being not particularly scientifically minded, I’ve never really nailed down how I feel about this. I was taught to just sort of filter out those numbers when they were stated in the various secular science classes I’ve taken over the years. And honestly, it’s not that hard to do. Those are some crazy numbers and they seem to say the wildest guesses as if they’re absolute fact, “Well, we all know that 483 billion years ago the paleomegasoringon hippogifigus was happily trouncing about the countryside with his four tails, largely dining on protazinthozidus.” Uhh, no we don’t. It sounds ridiculous. Nevertheless, I now I’m sitting here wondering, does God really want me to always assume that if I don’t understand something, it must not be understandable? If I don’t get it, then He just did it in some magical way that scientists couldn’t understand either. Is that what He wants from me? The problem with this way of thinking is that it can only go bad for God’s team. If we make everything we don’t understand into a miracle, then as scientific understanding catches up they are essentially forced to kill a miracle. But WE did it, not them!
I definitely don’t know how the earth was made exactly (neither do you) and I would appreciate it if no one used this blog to convince me one way or the other (this means you, global warming conspiracy decriers! You know who you are!). Instead, I’d just like to hear if anyone else struggles with this. Not that the Bible isn’t true, but that it doesn’t fare super well as a literal science book. Or maybe it does! But our interpretations have been terrible. Or maybe they haven’t!
Nevertheless, if the church is viewed as a force opposed to scientific learning, how do we as individuals or christian groups propagate that or refute that? Should we?
This is a contentious issue in our society but I don’t think it’s necessarily a well thought out one. What I do like about it, is that it forces me to come to Jesus in my usual way and say, “I don’t get it, Lord!” He’s totally used to that. It’s kind of our thing.
Chrissi- I’m so proud of you for thinking outside of the “conservative” box. Who knows how old the earth is or what took place when it was formed? If it occurred with a “big bang” and man evolved over time, so be it. God certainly could have set these events in motion. The bible doesn’t have to be literal to inspire, encourage and direct us to discipleship with Jesus Christ.
First, I think that it is easy to get off on the tangent that if you believe in evolution then you don’t believe in the Bible (which i think is hogwash). Can one believe in both? I think so. Is God’s most amazing feat creating Humans, or loving them?
Second, Can we use the Bible as a science book? Our early chuch leaders tried, and it has made them look like fools. Should we take everything that the Bible says as scientific truth until it is proven otherwise…and then try to justify how we were right all along?
Interpretations change. Meanings change. And our own versions of Truth change. Can we rely on any of these? I don’t think so. I have been asked what I base my Faith on, and the only answer that I see fit for myself is logic. I believe that God is a god of both fluidity and purpose at the same time. I believe that man has replaced Faith with religion. And that is where Christianity (and “Biblical science…?”) has really made some big mistakes. The Bible is not a rule book or a science book, it is a collection of works that all have a bit of truth to them in some way or another. They make sense in their original form, and today we are trying to make sense of them in a very different world. The Bible is a partial picture of God…. it is not God and it is not the whole representation of God…
I believe that it was relevant as a science text as well in it’s first edition. The “truths” that were spoken of in the Bible were true and unreutable in those times. As we have gained more knowledge and better data, it appears that those “truths” may have been a bit over stated in it’s day. That doesn’t mean that they were not relevant or “true” in that day, just not today.
my opinions
Science should be searching for truth but unfortunately science just like Christianity is lived out and sought out by man kind. This means that in the same way Christendom has mistakenly claimed certain things to be scientific truth so have scientists, why? Because both come from a place of bias. How many false theories were passed off as truth by scientists through the years. Lets see, blood letting which if anyone had cared to look in the Bible would have known that life is in the blood, which means it is essential to our life and therefore pouring it out would in essence take life out of you.
Blacks being apes, this lead to pygmies being put in the NY zoo with other chimps. Again the Bible clearly states that all of man came from one pair Adam and Eve. Even the earth being flat was “scientific” and guess what the church adopted that view much to the dismay of Galileo, despite Isaiah’s book which stated the earth was round. There have been many missing links, that years later were not only proven to be false but were deliberate lies.
I would argue the church gets in most trouble not when it objects to scientific theory but when it swallows it whole as Gospel truth. In each of the above examples the Church believed those so called truths for a time and the consequences were disastrous.
Yes we do know who we are! My view of global warming has nothing to do with the Bible or Christendom, despite what you might think we do “educate” ourselves. The belief that Global warming is not man made is based purely on science not the Bible.
Lastly i would say this, at least many Christians, like Luther, made an honest mistake unlike so many scientists who have lied and cheated truth just to get the results they and their constituents desire…but hey universities and institutions don’t give grants to disprove the stuff they have been teaching as truth.
I’m sure this comes as a shocker but i will stick to the “bits of truth” from Gods word over man’s genius any day. I would bet Science has come up with way way more truth-less science than all Christians in the history of the world, which i might add they ardently defend as absolute truth. Logic would lead one to trust completely in the Bible.
“I’d just like to hear if anyone else struggles with this. Not that the Bible isn’t true, but that it doesn’t fare super well as a literal science book. Or maybe it does! But our interpretations have been terrible. Or maybe they haven’t!”
yes. i still have so many funny residual ideas i come up against almost instinctively whenever i am dealing with science- esp time scales, animal behavior, and evolutionary trends.
some of my most vivid memories/ lessons learned from my kindergarten-3rd grade christian school experience are absurd. i can instantly unearth the fear they instilled in me personally- of anyone trying to sell me any mumbo jumbo global warming or evolution bs. I was sure scientists were deceivers, evil, mean, and out to lead people astray. later in life, i thought for the most part they themselves were deceived, and only in the upper echelons of academia were the wicked deceivers- playing for satan’s side- out to trick the world into believing a lie to keep them from believing in god. (please note the EXTREME embarrassment i am feeling as i actually put this all in writing!!!)
in all honesty, it wasn’t until i took an interest in science, took some fantastic college courses, lived some life, acquired some logical reasoning, and took the time to get to know some real life scientists, that i realized these were not evil deceivers, these were awesome people, thinkers, brilliant educators, kind and loving souls, real life people who were not out to deceive anyone. many of them could care less about disproving any biblical theory, they are focused on all the intricacies of the creation- they are using science to explore and discover and try to make the world a better place in their own ways. these are beautiful people with wonderful minds.
anyways, all that to say, even still i have to think through all sorts of layers of what i have held to be true every time i deal with science/biblical interpretation. interesting stuff.
I don’t think I ever approached the Bible as a scientifically accurate book really. I remember being very young (3rd or 4th grade?) when someone pointed out to me that the Bible says Joshua made the sun stand still, but in reality the sun is standing still already and we’re moving, and if the earth were to suddenly stop moving, we’d all fly off. The science made perfect sense, of course, but since I was a child, I had no need to throw the Bible out as falsehood. (Childlike faith and all…) Thus I have always believed I need to find a way to try and assimilate them both.
I prefer to believe in a literal 7-day creation, but only because it seems so much more fantastic and brilliant to me than an age-day creation, but I had a really great Christian Evolutionist Prof in college who was so likeable and teddy-bearish and funny and kind, you had to at least consider his take on things. So I have. And I just like 7 days better. No one can prove either one to my satisfaction, so I think my biased preference is as good as the next guy’s.
I think Noah had a really good point that scientists have made as many wrong and “embarrassing” claims and interpretations about their own art as the Bible has, so it doesn’t really embarass me to know that some of the things we were taught based on the Bible were wrong. I was taught by my secular teachers that Pluto was a planet and my kids are being taught that claim was false. Oh well.
I still haven’t figured out the whole Joshua’s sun thing, but I bet one day we will come across something in science or nature that will explain how that could have happened…or seemed to have happened, and that’ll be cool. Until then I just keep trying to take in both my scientific reality and my Biblical faith and let them live in my heart together with all their agreements and dissensions. I think it makes me more interesting to let them live together there like that!
when one views the sun it seems to rise and set. as Jenn sated that is in fact false the earth rotates. However even meteorologists every morning on local news programs all around the world give us the time of the sunrise and sunset for that day. Are they ignorant? i would guess not but rather they are using the very logical tool of description, which accurately explains what time the earth will be rotating our particular region back into the suns view. In exactly the same manner the Bible in Joshua declares the sun stood still, which it did, instead of seeing the sun in the sky move to where it sets it stood there. So it was very accurate. there is also evidence to suggest the earth could stop rotating fairly fast without anybody even feeling a jolt. Probably the most convincing evidence that this phenomenon did take place as described in Joshua are the ancient records of many other people groups throughout the earth that testify to a long day.(or night depending on where they were located) Just because a scientific theory cannot explain something only means that man has yet to discover the way in which it happened. After all lets not forget that Bees cannot fly in theory, but yet they do.Scientists don’t know how bees fly, it can’t be explained, but that does not matter to God or his little bees. The Bible is correct in every single facet, science included! We often give in because we don’t want to look dumb, we love the praises of men,but we should stand strong not in our own view but rather in the ability of our God whom formed the universe to deliver to us a book of His message, such a book would have the Genius of God in it not just bits of truth. That Message of genius is the Bible. It seems to me that doing anything but standing firm on God’s word would look real dumb.
Noah: I have heard that before about the evidence the the earth actually stood still for a period and it was recorded elsewhere. I never did the research, but it appears you have. what were the sources that you drew from?…just curious as I have never educated myself on that one…
Lyle! Thanks for commenting. It is an honor to know you read my blog!
Bennett here is a link to some of the ancient writings that concure with Joshuas long day
http://www.mbowden.surf3.net/joshld.htm
[...] But candidates (even Mike Huckabee) routinely diminished the importance of belief in a literal 6 day creation story. “Knowing exactly how long it took God to create the world, would not make me a better or [...]
Chrissi,
I don’t know if you remember me from bible college. Daniel and Joelene Wiggins told me about your blog. Interesting read.
Hugh Ross, an astronomer and christian, wrote a book called “A Matter of Days” that has been helpful for me to reconcile faith and science. He believes in the Old Earth, progressive creation theory, which seems to make the most sense to me without having to compromise on neither the biblical nor scientific side. It’s worth a read.
Anyway, good to see that you and Kevin are doing well.
Annaliese Fulmer-Foote