Limitations without God
Christian Comment by Doug Gander
Science is supposed to be "systematic and formulated knowledge". But when scientific observations are formulated into a general explanation, is it not possible that "non-scientific" results are implied? To be honest with itself, true science must allow for some conclusions which are beyond the reach of science alone.
A scientist might say that because a man cannot also be God, he cannot walk on water, or heal the sick, or feed thousands with a few loaves and fishes, or rise from the dead. But after observing these things beyond reasonable doubt, the same scientist might revise his first assumption and admit, with so many others, that Jesus Christ was indeed the Son of God.
This doesn't invalidate science; it merely suggests its limitations. The scientist could conclude that there may be very real phenomena outside the competence of science. Even the laws of nature, which usually follow scientific principles, may be changed by the One who created all of nature and its governing principles.
British evolutionists Sir Arthur Keith and D.M.S. Watson have remarked, "Evolution is unproved and unprovable. It is accepted by zoologists, not because it it has been observed to occur or can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is incredible, unthinkable." Henry Morris observed, "The main reason most educated people believe in evolution is simply because they have been told that most educated people believe in evolution".
The "missing links" between man and some ancestor common with the ape were once thought to be Neanderthal Man, Piltdown Man, Java Man, etc., most of which have been shown to be mistakes or hoaxes. Similar links are missing among plants and animals, and this lack of "transitional species" has been a major weakness in the theory of evolution.
The school board of Abbotsford, BC was recently forced to discontinue examining scientific Creation alongside the theory of evolution. The new provincial minister of education "seemed to be saying that any hypothesis which smacked of religion... was non-scientific and unacceptable in a science classroom", according to school board chairman John Sutherland. "As far as I was concerned, the hypotheses underlying the standard evolution theories are non-scientific as well," he said. The two approaches to science share many undisputed facts. But as Dr. Douglas Shantz at nearby Trinity Western University says, "Could there not also be natural or reasonable evidence of design and order that we see around us, such as Stephen Hawkings and others suggest?"
When nature and biology are regarded as self-fulfilling instead of Divinely directed, error flourishes. Men and women are sometimes thought identical except for "plumbing", without gender-specific strengths at work or home. Sexual lawlessness is deemed OK because it is supposedly determined by biology, in an unfallen natural world. Nazi racism or that of modern day Philip Rushton results from evolution gone wild. Selective abortion and sterilization become acceptable tools of eugenics. Some new-age and ancient religions celebrate creatures and nature-spirits more than the Creator.
If "the Truth sets us free", such falsehood imprisons us. Science offers useful facts and analysis. But science or nature without God is limited to death. Creation, with re-Creation in Christ, leads to life everlasting.
Science is supposed to be "systematic and formulated knowledge". But when scientific observations are formulated into a general explanation, is it not possible that "non-scientific" results are implied? To be honest with itself, true science must allow for some conclusions which are beyond the reach of science alone.
A scientist might say that because a man cannot also be God, he cannot walk on water, or heal the sick, or feed thousands with a few loaves and fishes, or rise from the dead. But after observing these things beyond reasonable doubt, the same scientist might revise his first assumption and admit, with so many others, that Jesus Christ was indeed the Son of God.
This doesn't invalidate science; it merely suggests its limitations. The scientist could conclude that there may be very real phenomena outside the competence of science. Even the laws of nature, which usually follow scientific principles, may be changed by the One who created all of nature and its governing principles.
British evolutionists Sir Arthur Keith and D.M.S. Watson have remarked, "Evolution is unproved and unprovable. It is accepted by zoologists, not because it it has been observed to occur or can be proven by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative, special creation, is incredible, unthinkable." Henry Morris observed, "The main reason most educated people believe in evolution is simply because they have been told that most educated people believe in evolution".
The "missing links" between man and some ancestor common with the ape were once thought to be Neanderthal Man, Piltdown Man, Java Man, etc., most of which have been shown to be mistakes or hoaxes. Similar links are missing among plants and animals, and this lack of "transitional species" has been a major weakness in the theory of evolution.
The school board of Abbotsford, BC was recently forced to discontinue examining scientific Creation alongside the theory of evolution. The new provincial minister of education "seemed to be saying that any hypothesis which smacked of religion... was non-scientific and unacceptable in a science classroom", according to school board chairman John Sutherland. "As far as I was concerned, the hypotheses underlying the standard evolution theories are non-scientific as well," he said. The two approaches to science share many undisputed facts. But as Dr. Douglas Shantz at nearby Trinity Western University says, "Could there not also be natural or reasonable evidence of design and order that we see around us, such as Stephen Hawkings and others suggest?"
When nature and biology are regarded as self-fulfilling instead of Divinely directed, error flourishes. Men and women are sometimes thought identical except for "plumbing", without gender-specific strengths at work or home. Sexual lawlessness is deemed OK because it is supposedly determined by biology, in an unfallen natural world. Nazi racism or that of modern day Philip Rushton results from evolution gone wild. Selective abortion and sterilization become acceptable tools of eugenics. Some new-age and ancient religions celebrate creatures and nature-spirits more than the Creator.
If "the Truth sets us free", such falsehood imprisons us. Science offers useful facts and analysis. But science or nature without God is limited to death. Creation, with re-Creation in Christ, leads to life everlasting.