Science and Faith at Odds?

by Alister McGrath

This concern had been expressed recently in the writings of Philip Johnson, an academic lawyer at the University of California. Johnson focuses his argument on “methodological naturalism” — in other words, a naturalistic philosophy that excludes from the outset any explanation of reality that makes reference to supernatural causes. Johnson argues that a “methodological naturalist” is someone who deliberately assumes there is no god when he or she does science. One of Johnson’s core arguments is that the application of this method leads to an atheist account of reality. Darwinism in particular, and the sciences in general, thus have an inherent tendency toward eliminating the divine from any account of reality. Johnson’s argument that Darwinism is inherently atheistic thus shifts the debate from “creationism versus evolution” to “Christianity versus atheism.” Other evangelicals, however, have challenged such a viewpoint. Fuller Seminary’s Nancey Murphy, for example, argues that non-reductive strategies could easily be developed, allowing evangelicals to affirm naturalist scientific explanations without in any way implying the non-existence or inactivity of God.

IN CONCLUSION

Many evangelicals are suspicious of the natural sciences, seeing them as calling into question traditional Christian readings of the Bible and offering reductionist accounts of reality that exclude the supernatural. These are understandable concerns, as there is no doubt that some aggressively atheistic writers are using science as a weapon in their wars against religion –Dawkins and Dennett are prime examples. Yet these are misrepresentations and exaggerations of the true nature of the scientific method and would be contested by most scientists. In this short article, I have suggested that the situation is much more complicated than the “new atheism” suggests. For example, the belief that the only legitimate Christian interpretation of Genesis 1 is to read it literally is quite recent. Older Christian views, developed 1500 years before Darwin’s Origin of Species was published, have real potential to help us as we seek to interpret the Bible faithfully and with integrity. They remind us of the existence and undoubted merits of other approaches to biblical interpretation at these points.

So what can Christian leaders do to engage these issues as they seek to engage a culture that often sees science and faith at odds? Let me make a few suggestions in closing.

Reassure people. Point out that the “new atheism” espouses a dogmatic anti-theistic approach to science, which is not typical of science as a whole. Point them to recent works by leading scientists who are people of faith — such as Owen Gingerich and Francis Collins. Perhaps even start a reading group to discuss one of these books.
Be proactive. Encourage members of your church community who are scientists to witness to their faith and to help other people to think through the relationship of science and faith.
Draw up a reading list of accessible works that will help people think through these issues. In addition to the recent books by Gingerich and Collins, consider these helpful writings:
- Denis Alexander, Rebuilding the Matrix: Science and Faith in the 21st Century. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002.
- Alister E. McGrath, A Fine-Tuned Universe: The Quest for God in Science and Theology . Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, 2009.
- John C. Polkinghorne, Faith, Science and Understanding. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2000.

You are also strongly recommended to visit the website of the Faraday Institute, Cambridge University.¹³ It provides a rich range of resources, including audio files of leading scientists speaking on the relationship of science and faith and “Faraday Papers” on related themes.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

1. What role did scientific inquiry play in your educational background? How does your experience shape your perspective on this topic?

2. In what areas have you sensed the most tension or conflict between science and your faith? Have how you resolved that tension in the past?

3. In your opinion, why have the writings of Richard Dawkins and other “new atheists” been so popular in mainstream culture?

4. Which evangelical concerns toward science, and specifically evolutionary theory, do you think are valid? Which ones are invalid? Why?

5. How does it challenge you that theologians like B.B. Warfield and Augustine did not seem threatened by the idea that natural processes, such as evolution, may be the means by which God created and governs the world?

6. How can people of faith explore these issues well without getting drawn into a broader culture war?

END NOTES

1 Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2006).

2 Ibid., 5.

3 Peter B. Medawar, The Limits of Science (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), 64-7.

4 Owen Gingerich, God’s Universe (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006).

5 Francis S. Collins, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief (New York: Basic Books, 2006).

6 C.S. Lewis, “Is theology poetry?” in Essay Collection and Other Short Pieces (London: HarperCollins, 2000), 21.

7 B.B. Warfield, Evolution, Science and Scripture, Selected Writings, edited by Mark A. Noll and David N. Livingstone (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000), 115-16, 163-4.

8 Ibid., 208-9.

9 Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis, V.xx.41.

10 Ibid., V.iv.11.

11 Ibid., VI.xi.19.

12 Ibid., VI.xiii.23.

13 Http://www.st-edmunds.cam.ac.uk/faraday/

Previous 1 2 3 4 5

Comments

Stanley McKeown

Do you belive that ' the dead believers will be recurrected' and with the 'believers' will fly up into the sky to meet Jesus/Immanuel/Son of God/Son of Man/Saviour etc. (or whatever title you confer) and that the 'unbelievers' will be left behind.

Yes or no.

Simple scientific question.

Simple christian question.

Simple religious question.

Comments are now closed

ALSO BY ALISTER MCGRATH

ALSO IN SCIENCE + TECH