Science, Christianity and Reality
Does science and Christianity clash? Is science hostile to Christianity? Is Christianity anti-science?

The answer to all these questions is yes, and no. I'll explain that later, but first I think it is important to understand the real question that underpins these questions.

The very idea that something (science) can clash with something else (Christianity) is based on the concept of non-contradiction (Something cannot be both 'A' and not 'A' at the same time). So if science says something that contradicts with something Christianity says, both cannot be right. To be able to contradict, both positions have to be speaking to the same subject. (As a simple example, I say John is 15 years old, and you say Tim is 20 years old, there can be no contradiction between our statements as we are talking about different subjects. If we both make a comment about John's age, then there is the possibility of contradiction).

So then, what is the common subject that both science and Christianity are speaking about? I would say it is reality. Science attempts to describe the way reality is (and is not), as does Christianity. Clearly, there are places where there is great opposition between science and Christianity and I think we should explore the concepts of reality each position holds.

Christianity holds to a universe based on laws, which contains both natural and supernatural causes. It holds that the supernatural causes are rare.

Science holds to a universe based on laws, which it restricts to natural causes (methological naturalism).

Clearly, if an event is regular and repeatable, then both Christianity and science can agree about a natural cause. The conflict arises however, when unique, historical events are investigated, as Christianity does not assume a naturalistic cause (or assume a supernatural cause for that matter).

Christianity claims quite a few significant supernaturally caused events based on testimony from witnesses. Science rules out the possibility of ANY event it is investigating being supernaturally caused.

This means that the problem is not one of evidence, but assumption. If science cannot allow a supernatural cause because of its assumptions, then it will never conclude that something was supernaturally caused, even if it is! This means that science in these cases is no longer attempting to describe reality, it is merely undertaking an intellectual 'what if naturalism were true' type exercise. This is an important point to remember because if anyone claims that science has proven that (the Christian) God does not exist they are wrong. Science cannot prove God does not exist because it assumes he does not exist. It is begging the question. Which in logic, is a big no-no.

Of course, Christianity has also, in the past, done a few logical no-no's. One example is the claim that 'God put the fossil's there to test us'. This is an argument from ignorance, and a science stopper. As Christians, just because we find something in the natural world that we cannot explain according to our understanding of God's creation, it NOT mean we should explain it with an Ad Hoc supernatural explanation.

IF Christianity is true, then we should have confidence that every observation, when properly interpreted, will fit within the Christian belief system. Unless we have cause to believe an event is supernaturally caused (other than merely explaining away a difficult observation), then we should refrain from making such ad hoc judgements.

Note: This post is being submited to All things to all and their Showcase on Science and Christianity.
- posted by Alan Grey @ Friday, March 11, 2005