Science vs. Faith?: Investigating the Mystery and Beauty of the World God Made

This week the New York Times reported about a controversy at Bryan College over a requirement that all faculty affirm that Adam and Eve were, in fact, historical people. This is significant because Bryan College is named for William Jennings Bryan, who successfully prosecuted a teacher for teaching evolution in the (in)famous Scopes Trial of 1925.

The questions surrounding creation and evolution aren’t new in the U.S., but, in some sense, are unique to this country. In an interview with the BioLogos Foundation, N. T. Wright observes that in the U.K. Evangelical Christians have largely embraced the basic scientific paradigm of evolution while continuing to affirm faith, to use the words of the Nicene Creed, in “God, the Father Almighty, creator of heaven and earth.”

[caption id="attachment_1292" align="alignright" width="300"] The center third of “Education” (1890), a stained glass window by Louis Comfort Tiffany and Tiffany Studios, located in Linsly-Chittenden Hall at Yale University. It depicts Science (personified by Devotion, Labor, Truth, Research and Intuition) and Religion (personified by Purity, Faith, Hope, Reverence and Inspiration). Public domain. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tiffany_Education_(center).JPG[/caption]

What is different in the U.S.? The Scopes Trial was a flashpoint of the so-called “Fundamentalist-Modernist” controversy of the early 20th century. Basically, “modernists” were calling into question the historicity of Old Testament narratives and many of the gospels’ accounts of Jesus’ ministry. These moves called into question the reliability of Scripture, and the fundamentalists reacted by affirming the literal truth of the Bible. This included taking Genesis 1 and 2 literally, which made the evolutionary account of human origins incompatible with the fundamentalists’ hermeneutic (the method of interpreting Scripture). Thus evolution became a threat to biblical faith, just like doubting the existence of the Amalekites or questioning the miraculous multiplication of loaves and fishes.

Conservative American Christians have had an uneasy relationship with science ever since, which the controversy at Bryan College illustrates. In a recent Washington Post article, Michael Gerson writes, “Many conservative Christians equate modern science with materialism — a view conditioned by early 20th-century debates over evolution and human origins. Science is often viewed as an alternative theology, with a competing creation story.”

I see two dangers in this mindset. First, it is possible that viewing modern science in opposition to biblical faith will discourage Christians from scientific pursuits. This would be tragic, and ironic, because the modern scientific enterprise was started by Christians who felt a call to investigate the mystery and beauty of the world God made. Second, as Gerson points out, “Some religious communities define themselves by resisting this rival faith — and filter evidence to reinforce their identity.” From this perspective, Christian engagement with science is reduced to gathering data to support a particular interpretation of Genesis 1-11.

Unfortunately, Christian history contains examples of Christians resisting advances in science on doctrinal grounds, the most famous of which is the transition from the Ptolemaic to the Copernican models of the solar system. Remember that Galileo was imprisoned for suggesting that the earth wasn’t the center of the solar system, and that, when asked about the earth revolving around the sun, Martin Luther famously said, “I believe the Holy Scriptures, for Joshua commanded the sun to stand still, not the earth.” I fear that eventually the kind of arguments used by Ken Hamm in his recent debate with Bill Nye will be looked at in the same way that we look at Luther’s “biblical” argument against Copernicus.

I’m neither a scientist nor a theologian, but as a pastor I have a deep concern about how we engage with science and Scripture. I have seen many high school students go off to college — including mainstream Evangelical Christian colleges — having been equipped with arguments against evolution (and, in some cases, even against the big bang and a 4.6 billion year old earth), only to see these arguments crumble after a semester of biology or astronomy. This often provokes a crisis of faith leading to a deep disillusion with everything their church taught them.

This is also true when it comes to reading the Bible. If children and teens are taught to read the Bible literally in every instance, not only will science classes potentially damage their faith, but classes in literature, history, and anthropology can also result in deep confusion.

Thus, as a pastor, I feel compelled to make sure that my parishioners are taught to read Scripture in the way it was intended to be read — giving careful attention to literary genre, and also engaging with how Scripture has been read throughout history, and is being read throughout the world. Evangelicals have been making progress along these lines with resources like the Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (reading through the comments on Genesis 1-11 is very enlightening), books like Misreading the Bible with Western Eyes and Death Before the Fall, and the scientists, theologians, and biblical scholars working with the BioLogos Foundation. We should all encourage engagement along these lines, even when we may disagree with certain of their conclusions.

Finally, I would hope that I could teach my people in such a way that, being grounded in the historical truth of the gospel, faithfully preserved in Scripture, we can engage both the natural and the social sciences without fear — remembering that modern science was founded by Christians who felt a call to understand God’s world, just as many Christians in social sciences are motivated to understand the complexities of the human person, as well as human cultures, languages, and history.

Discussions about how to read Scripture in light of scientific discoveries will no doubt continue. My hope and prayer is that, while we should be slow to revise doctrine to accommodate new scientific findings, pastors, theologians, and scientists might develop close relationships, sharing wisdom as we seek better to understand, and then bear witness to, the glory of God the Creator, who became God the Redeemer, in whom “the treasures and wisdom and knowledge” are hid (Colossians 2:3) — whether in the natural world, the human person, or, most of all, in the cross and resurrection of Jesus.