What Are Some Major Conflicts Between Science and Christianity?
Over the years, I’ve heard people say that science is not in the business of debating, disparaging and disproving the beliefs of Christianity. There is absolutely nothing useful that both can offer to each other. In fact, according to several scientists, it’s high time for Christians to stop trying to ride piggyback on science; they should either accept scientific findings or keep burying their heads in the sand without interfering with the results of scientific research. In other words, science’s relationship with Christianity smacks of pure imagination.
Well, here’s how I see it: The realm of science is to explain the world through natural causes. It attempts to understand and explain life and the world around us by using the evident knowledge of truth and ignoring completely all “supernatural” or “divine” truths. Isn’t this definition somehow sparking a flame between science and Christianity, which is based on the belief in a divine being?
Personally, I think that science has always disproved everything about Christianity. The Bible said that God is the creator of the cosmos (Genesis 1) and science disproved it. The Bible also said that God is the sustainer of the cosmos (Colossians 1) and science again proved it wrong. The scientific community even refused to believe that way before some significant scientific discoveries were made (such as the water cycle, the round earth, paths of the sea), they were already mentioned in the Bible. Don’t believe me? Have a look here!
Back to the topic, even if there is no “war” between science and Christianity, there have been many times at which science seemed to conflict and disagree with Christianity. Let’s find out!
Faith vs. Skepticism
Everyone knows that the very basis of Christianity is faith. I’ve heard many Christians define faith as believing without any evidence. This is blatantly wrong. According to biblical scriptures (Hebrews 11:1), faith is defined as “the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of thingsnot seen.” This can be taken as both a definition and an example of faith. Now, let me suggest another perception –truth!
Many these days are trying to tell me to place “truth” above “faith.” I think when people use the word “truth” and try to compare it with “faith”, they are merely obfuscating the notion of faith. Personally, I have faith in God and for me, that’s the truth. Within all the things He did, does and will do by His great power is confined an undeniable truth. You see, in Christianity, there is no uncertainty about Jesus Christ’s birth, His death on the cross or His resurrection. Believers see this as the absolute truth. However, faith is not a word that belongs to the scientific world.
There’s nothing magical or supernatural about science. Science is not supposed to “believe” in anything; it only concerns knowledge that can be tested and verified. It is simply a systematic way to thoroughly and carefully observe and analyze nature and use consistent logic to evaluate the results. Eventually, scientists trust in the likelihood of their research, constants and equations, but they don’t have “faith” in them. In fact, uncertainty is a very popular word in the scientific community.
At times, science does include assumptions. For instance, since the laws of nature are the same everywhere, deductions scientists make about light in the solar system are just as accurate as those they make about light from other solar systems. There’s no proof that the laws of nature are the same everywhere, but as evidence continues to accumulate, so the scientific community continues to use that perception. This accumulation of evidence is called inductive logic. They can’t prove that the sun will rise tomorrow, but the evidence so strongly suggests it will that it would be foolish to assume otherwise.