In most cases we are so focused on the differences and incompatibilities between the Bible and science, that we feel as if we have to choose sides. But here we will explore many areas where the Bible is validated by scientific fact and science makes more sense when explained within the framework of Scripture.
I do not attempt to use science to corroborate the Bible, or to try to use the Bible to validate science. Instead I think they are compatible, but separate. What I see my role as being, is to espouse a Biblical view that provides a framework large enough to include scientific discovery. Science itself is ambivalent to faith. It goes on facts. It is only when scientists depart from their true scientific methodology that it comes into conflict with the Bible.
The same is true for faith-based thinking. Over the centuries, the church has held to certain dogmas and punished men who announced new discoveries not in vogue with current religious beliefs. The most famous was Galileo, for writing that the earth revolved around the sun and not the other way around. Later it was found that the church could adjust its dogma without being untrue to the Scripture itself, and include the reality that scientific discovery brought us. One of the mistakes made by both sides has been to equate the Bible with religious dogma. It is NOT the same thing.
By realizing that the Bible is a faith-based platform and that science is an observational platform, we can define the limits of each one in putting them together so that they are not at odds in the end.
We begin with the premise that God’s Word is true and complete. What it does NOT do is give us the science of creation-just the events of creation. We also know that science is an evolving discipline. Throughout the centuries, scientific theories-or even conclusions-have not always been right. Science has had to be updated, discarded, refined, and rewritten to fit new facts discovered. It will continue to be so as our tools for observation are improved and the former and existing theories are either rejected or strengthened.
God does not speak as a scientist. He has no need to. He has no need to explain Himself or compare Himself with man’s natural abilities. He declares what was, what is, and what will be. He does not declare the time frames and methods for them. He is not required to submit His work for peer review, because He has no peers. He has no need for experiments because He is the one who put all things together.
On the other hand, science cannot say definitively how things got started or how they will end up because we are ‘reverse-engineering’ everything. It is a little bit like a forensic cop at the largest traffic accident in history. We have trillions of pieces of matter flying around the universe for billions of years and we are still trying to figure what happened in the beginning by observing the state they are in now.
However, there is nothing that has been discovered that has proven the Bible wrong. In fact, just the opposite is true.
One of the criticisms that atheistic scientists make about Christians is that their God is the ‘god of the gaps.’ That is, when we get to something in the universe we can’t explain scientifically, we just say; “Well that’s where God steps in.” Sir Isaac Newton as well as others, have been known to make such blase statements. As science has grown in its understanding and explanation of natural events, those areas defying explanation have shrunk. Therefore, according to this line, the God of Christians has shrunk, because He is only invoked when we can’t explain something.
My contention is 2-fold. First of all, we don’t need science in order to relegate God’s scope or size. Being able to explain a process does not remove the need for someone to be able to carry out that process. Cellular and
molecular biological technologies are growing exponentially, but they still cannot create either cells or organic molecules.
The second part of my point is that they cannot even continue the processes already in place. Life is still a mystery to science. Even in an area where science has conquered-say, for example flight-our version of flying in no way resembles the flight patterns or abilities of the simplest bird or insect. Just because we understand the laws of aerodynamics, that does not give us the ability to jump off of the ground and personally fly. We can produce artificial flight in amazing ways-but we have never been able to reproduce a living entity. Not even the smallest, simplest one. Even if we ever did, it still doesn’t mean that there is no God. In fact the scripture says, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…” In this regard as well as many others, we have shown our origins. Man is creative, curious, and capable of learning amazingly complex things.
The ‘god-of-the-gaps’ designation does not actually describe the God of the Bible. He is not some mythical creature who pulls the sun with his chariot or sprang out of another god’s head fully grown. He will not go away or become irrelevant as man gets smarter. Instead of trying to disprove the need for God or denying scientific findings, we should increase our understanding of the Bible and look for places where true science fits.