(remember, these are unedited/draft show notes, not a transcript — listening is always better — and if you listen AND follow along below, you’ll see why)
Focus Question:
What to say to “I believe in science”
Intro:
In the Ancient Near East, the various myths of the cultures surrounding Job (like Ugarit, Akkad, and Babylon) had, as other cultures do perhaps even now, stories that explained things like storms and wind and rain. We, of course, know the natural explanations for these things.
So what do you say if someone says to you, “See, there’s an example of things that science now explains. I don’t need a God, because I believe in science, and someday we’ll be able to explain the other stuff we can’t explain today”?
In our Bottom Line segment I’m going to attempt to give you an answer — a way to respond that might be useful.
NEW TESTAMENT SEGMENT:
Turning our attention first, however, to our NT segment, we’re at the point in the story where Luke illuminates responses to the Gospel, and in particular by those who were often thought of as “less than” — Gentiles who weren’t born Jews, women who weren’t valued as much as men, and most importantly, those who were known to be sinners versus those who thought themselves rightesous.
Passage: Luke 7
Translation: CSB (Christian Standard Bible)
Verses: 50
Words: ~1069
ORIGINAL TESTAMENT SEGMENT:
In our OT segment today we’re moving toward the climax of the book which — crazy idea — is when God speaks. That’ll start tomorrow. Today, however, the young dude Elihu who was silent up ‘til our reading yesterday continues to try to set the old dudes straight.
Passage: Job 36-37
Translation: CSB (Christian Standard Bible)
Verses: 57
Words: ~938
THE BOTTOM LINE:
So what do you say if someone says to you, “See, there’s an example of things that science now explains. I don’t need a God, because I believe in science, and someday we’ll be able to explain the other stuff we can’t explain today”?
Apologists call this the “God of the gaps” theory — that what we don’t know how to explain with science is why we fill that in with “god.” But there’s a problem with this line of reasoning — namely, that it’s based on the assumption that God is derivative.
Let me give you a short explanation and a useful illustration.
The thing you’re looking for is the underlying assumption — what’s often called an “a priori” commitment. If matter is all there is, was, or ever will be, then God is just something that’s part of the universe. Put another way, if some primal, primary mass energy is all there is, the assumption is people like you and me are here by means of time + matter + chance, and God is made up, derivative. Mind is derivative from matter.
But in Christian theism, matter is derivative from mind, Logos, in the beginning was the Word.
So credit here to a favorite apologist of mine, John Lennox, who’s a professor of mathematics at Oxford University. But he puts it this way:
“Newton's law of gravitation no more competes with God as an explanation of the universe then the law of internal combustion competes with Henry Ford as an explanation of the motorcar.”
To paraphrase another illustration he uses, how do you explain boiling water? Well, the stove produces heat, raising the temperature of the kettle the water is in, which in turn conducts that heat, exciting the molecules of the water, and so on.
Or you could explain it as, “I wanted a cup of tea.”
The point is this: there are different kinds of explanations. Science isn’t at odds with them, but it’s not the only one.
<NOTE: The very final bit here is only on the audio >
ForTheHope is a daily audio Bible + apologetics podcast and blog. We’ve got a passion for just keepin’ it real, having conversations like normal people, and living out the love of Jesus better every single day.
Roger Courville, CSP is a globally-recognized expert in digitally-extended communication and connection, an award-winning speaker, award-winning author, and a passionately bad guitarist. Follow him on Twitter -- @RogerCourville and @JoinForTheHope – or his blog: www.forthehope.org.
Sources and resources: