Science as Shifting Sand I. Introduction A. Over the past 150 years there has been a great conflict between positions of faith and positions of science 1. Various theories have been postulated by science that conflict with claims of faith 2. The battle has waxed and waned over the years, with both sides spending considerable energy on this conflict 3. As many of the disputes in the modern arena suggest, the conflict is still going on, is very heated, and has been rather polarized B. There are many people who have deep questions and concerns on the basis of these competing views 1. People want to know: should we trust faith or religion? 2. On the one hand, how are we to explain the evidence that has been provided by science? 3. On the other hand, can it be that we are the highest creature in the universe? Why is it that mankind has a yearning for a superior spiritual being? C. This conflict is very real and is being played out in classrooms, courtrooms, churches, and in the minds of people throughout the country and the world D. Let us spend some time, then, examining the issue of faith and science 1. What does the Bible teach us and what does the Bible leave alone in regards to the natural world? 2. What are the limitations of science, and have scientists gone beyond the proper limits of what science can prove? 3. How are we to put science and scientific claims into a proper perspective and context? 4. Upon what can we fully rely? II. The Bible and Science A. One of the major battlegrounds in this debate is the role of the Bible and its claims in regards to science B. This provides some difficulty, because the Bible has been both properly used but also abused in regards to science C. The Bible does make some claims regarding certain events that impact the world we live in 1. Genesis 1-2:3: the Bible claims that God made the heavens and earth in six days and rested on the seventh 2. Psalm 33:6-9: this creation was done through the speaking of God 3. Job 38-41: God alone created the world and only He understands its intricacies 4. Romans 1:20: God can be perceived in His creation D. As we will see, the Bible as an authority from the Creator of the universe is to be accepted in these claims E. On the other hand, however, many claims have been made in the past, and parts of the Bible have been quoted, to try to establish scientific claims that are in error 1. Verses like Psalm 104:2 would be cited to try to show that the Earth is flat 2. Some have considered Leviticus 11:13-19 to be a difficulty, since the text would claim that bats are birds when they are properly mammals 3. Likewise, verses mentioning the sunrise and sunset (e.g., Numbers 34:15, Joshua 8:29), were perceived to show that the sun rotates around the earth F. The difficulty present is not with the Bible but in how the Bible is being used G. In reality, on the whole, the Bible is not a science textbook 1. The Bible is focused on man's relationship with God, and the things man must do to have that relationship with God (Ephesians 3:11, John 20:30-31, 1 John 1:1-4) 2. The Bible is complete to equip man for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17) 3. This does not mean, however, that the Bible has every answer to every question imaginable! 4. It is not within the purview of the Bible to provide all truths regarding every subject, including all human languages, history, biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, and every other subject 5. It is true that we can learn some general principles about the creation from the Bible, but on the whole, its purpose is to aid man's soul! H. When we realize such things, we do not need to be so bothered with certain statements that bother some people 1. It was not the intent of God or David to make some declaration regarding the scientific nature of the universe when the heavens were described in terms of a tent; the author is simply expressing his marvel at the creation he sees 2. It was not the intent of God or Moses to make strict animal classifications in Leviticus 11, but to provide a list of unclean foods based on certain characteristics, and including all animals in those characteristics even if we delineate them differently 3. It was not the intent of God or Moses or Joshua to make some scientific declaration that the sun rotates around the earth by speaking of sunrises and sunsets, but declaring events that occurred and locations based on what we see; after all, do not we still call it sunrise and sunset even though we "know better"? I. In the end, the things of the Bible are the things of God, and God is higher than man (Isaiah 55:8-9) 1. This is why one cannot prove God according to the scientific method 2. God transcends the scientific method! 3. We can see from 2 Kings 6:15-17 how there is a spiritual reality in our very midst that we cannot perceive with our physical senses-- they cannot be proven, for we cannot perceive them, but that does not mean that they do not exist! 4. Matters of spirituality and the faith, then, transcend the physical plane, and therefore comparing science to faith is as comparing the earthly with the heavenly! III. The Limitations and Nature of Science A. Having seen, then, the claims the Bible does and does not make in regards to the physical world, and the transcendence of spiritual matters, let us now consider the nature of science and its limitations B. Science is the knowledge gained based on observation of the physical universe and the successful testing of empirical data 1. Science is an entirely human pursuit that is always limited by human perception 2. We may be able to perceive better on the basis of our technology, but it's still limited C. Science does very well and has benefited mankind in many ways when it is kept in its proper perspective 1. When science follows the scientific method and discovery after discovery is made, great things can happen 2. Time would fail us if we were to go through the great advances that science has made in the past 300 years 3. The actual developments that are of great assistance to mankind are the ones that involved pure science and not the speculative nature concerning which we will speak shortly D. When science is practiced within the confines of the scientific method and works with empirical, testable data, realizing that fallible men using fallible methods are trying to learn more about the world, all is good E. The difficulty is when science goes beyond this realm, as it has done over the past 150 years IV. The Exaggeration and Arrogance of Modern Science A. The difficulty that has led to the conflict between faith and science is entirely based in science's departure from its proper role and entrance into arenas that it cannot properly understand B. The main problem is in the theory of macroevolution 1. This theory posits the gradual development of life from sludge to the modern diversity seen 2. The theory posits that it was entirely random 3. The evidence provided for the theory is fossil evidence C. The theory does have major problems 1. Of greatest consequence is the fact that macroevolution cannot be tested according to the scientific method and is therefore unprovable 2. The evidence for it is based in fossils and has some significant gaps D. Beyond the difficulties on the physical and technical level, moreover, the real problem is that science has developed a religion based on these theories 1. Now, scientists would kick and scream if what they advocated was called a religion, but that's basically what it is: a system of belief 2. They have no proof of macroevolution-- they can point to various forms of evidence and try to claim that it is reasonable to accept the theory, but since it cannot be tested and replicated in a laboratory, it remains a belief 3. After all, we as Christians definitely have a belief, and yet we can point to various forms of evidence and claim that it is reasonable to accept the truth of Christianity! 4. Furthermore, the scientist, in accepting macroevolution and all its claims, puts his faith in the accuracy of carbon-14 dating, the dating of various layers of sediment, and that what is present in the rocks accurately represents the reality of what occurred millions of years ago 5. It is faith because there is no means by which it can be proven-- there is a trust factor in everything mentioned above 6. Quite honestly, it takes more faith to believe that everything just randomly developed to get to this point than it does to believe in a Creator! E. Why is all of this so contested and disputed and leading to all kinds of problems? 1. The problem is that scientists have become puffed up in their knowledge and presume to have certainty in areas where that certainty simply does not exist 2. They have become so confident in their perceptions that they believe that they can fully explain reality 3. Yet is this really the case? F. Let us consider, for a moment, the history of science 1. Let us go back to ancient Greece, and in particular the philosopher-scientist Aristotle 2. Aristotle had, in our view, some odd ideas 3. For instance, Aristotle believed that colds were caused when the body's humors were out of balance and you had too much phlegm 4. To Aristotle and the rest, there were four elements: air, fire, water, and earth 5. We could go on and on about the various oddities of his science 6. Likewise, we could look at the scientist Ptolemy and his theories regarding how the earth was the center of the universe G. How could these people believe such things? 1. Well, we must consider what they had at their disposal 2. They could only work with what they could perceive with their senses 3. Without a microscope, how would you know that microbes prompt greater phlegm and other signs of illness? 4. The conclusions of the ancients, then, were based on what they could perceive 5. Now, if you were to go back in time and try to explain to Aristotle the nature of microbes, what do you think he would say to you? 6. He would more likely than not be incredulous! H. Furthermore, what is paraded as the grand conflict between faith and science-- Galileo versus the Roman Catholic church-- is really a conflict between ancient and modern science! 1. The difficulty was caused because the Roman Catholic church still advocated the accepted scientific realities of the ancient world and therefore rejected what Galileo had to offer 2. The error of Catholicism, then, was that they had accepted a scientific viewpoint as a matter of faith when the Bible demanded no such thing! I. Where does this leave modern science? 1. Modern science has progressed greatly because we have the ability to see far greater distances and to much smaller levels thanks to telescopes and microscopes 2. Our technology allows us to peer to even greater levels 3. On the other hand, there is still much to see and perceive beyond our abilities! 4. Really, if mankind will last another two millennia, how will science today be seen? Will it be any different from how we perceive Aristotle, Ptolemy, and the other Greeks, doing what they can but still rather primitive? 5. Just as the difficulty with the Greeks was that things that they perceived did not represent the entire reality, so it very likely is with science today! 6. Consider the possible tragedy of 4006: a church being lambasted by science for holding to the theory of macroevolution as a matter of faith when the evidence clearly points in a different direction! 7. Ironically, the very thing science would have people of faith to do today is what they condemn in people of faith in the past! J. Science, therefore, is really shifting sand (cf. Matthew 7:24-27) 1. Science is a poor religion because it constantly changes and one cannot build upon it! 2. For example, the scientific belief regarding the evolution of humans has significantly changed since I was in high school-- and that has not been that long ago! 3. Science cannot provide any real principles by which you can direct your life-- it was never designed to be a philosophy! 4. All that you can be sure of is that much of what we consider scientific fact will be rewritten when other factors are better understood and perceived K. What, then, shall we do? 1. We must not build upon the shifting sand of science, but cling to our Rock, God the Father and His Son Jesus Christ 2. While scientific reality has changed significantly in two millennia, the truth of God in the Scriptures have not changed 3. In the end, Christians get in more trouble when they try to conform their religious beliefs to whatever the science of the day says is true than if they remain separate and simply cling to what the Bible says! V. Conclusion A. We have spent some time looking into the conflicts between science and faith B. We have seen that both do well when kept in their proper context 1. Faith does well when people accept the explicit statements regarding the physical world in the Bible as truth but resist trying to turn the Bible into a science textbook 2. Science does well when it keeps to what it can observe and prove and test and maintains the humility of being a fallible enterprise on account of fallible human perception C. We have seen, however, that the two come into conflict when they leave these boundaries 1. When faith begins to conform to whatever the "modern" science says is true, and holds to that dogmatically without Biblical evidence, such persons are rightly considered backward, as seen with Galileo and the Roman Catholic church 2. When science leaves the empirical, testable realm, and begin making claims that are more religious than scientific, it finds itself in competition with faith and a poor substitute for faith D. We have seen the limitations of science, and that much of what is scientific reality today will be considerably rewritten in the future 1. Science, therefore, is as shifting sand, and no substantive basis upon which to try to construct one's life and belief system 2. God, on the other hand, as revealed in the Scriptures, is the same (Hebrews 13:8), and a suitable foundation for your life E. Let us build, then, on the rock of faith, and not on the shifting sand of science F. Invitation/songbook G. Have you built upon the Rock? 1. If you are here and your life is not founded on Jesus Christ, you will be swept away! 2. Come in obedient faith today H. Have you previously built upon the Rock, but require encouragement for some reason? I. However we can help you today, please allow us to do so; please come to the front as we stand and sing