Some Christians live in fear and suspicion of science as if scientific discovery and theological truth are natural and mortal enemies. This is especially true of Christians whose intellectual formation is primarily based in the 20th century conflict between modernism and fundamentalism. Most fundamentalists require a literal reading of Genesis 1 that insists on a six day creation and a young earth. Any other interpretation is considered heretical. As I wrote in my previous blog, a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 is not only unnecessary, but it also defies the original context of the creation narrative. To my mind, for Christians to reject scientific discovery is to reduce faith to mere superstition.
In fact, the Apostle Paul declared that cosmology (the science of origins) could reveal the glory of God. In other words, the study of quantum physics, biology, geology and other scientific disciplines can be windows through which the divine glory may be discovered.
…that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse (Romans 1:19-20).
Paul was perfectly comfortable reasoning with the scientists of his day at the Areopagus (Acts 17). Likewise, Christians in the 21st century must be well informed so that we may not be ashamed of the Gospel as we proclaim the message of Christ in the public square (Romans 1:16).
Some Christians are ambivalent about science. If a scientific or archeological discovery supports the Faith we rejoice; however, if such a discovery challenges our reading of the Biblical text we object. There was a time when all Christians believed the Earth was the center of the universe. When Copernicus demonstrated that the sun is the center of the universe, many theologians challenged his work based on their reading of the Bible and tradition. Often, the conflict between science and faith is not in what the Bible says, but how we choose to interpret the Bible. A literal reading of Joshua 10:12-13 requires both sun and moon to orbit the Earth, but a phenomenological reading allows a heliocentric universe.
The Big Bang Theory may challenge a literal reading of the creation narrative in Genesis 1; but it does not challenge a theological reading of the text. When read theologically, the creation narrative animates the Big Bang with the Divine presence and purpose.
Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light” (Genesis 1:3).
The Big Bang Theory and other scientific discoveries may require us to take another look at the traditional readings of the text, but it should not require us to forsake the inspired Scripture. The purpose of theology is to know and glorify God. Scientific discovery cannot demystify the cosmos. The foolishness of humanity is not in seeking scientific truth; it is the failure to glorify the Creator.
For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks… Professing to be wise, they became fools… (Romans 1:21-22).
The late Anthony Flew recanted a lifetime of atheism. What provoked such a conversion? The study of science. When Flew was confronted with the intricacy of DNA coding, the laws of physics, and quantum theory, he came to the reasonable conclusion that “the universe was brought into existence by an infinite Intelligence” (There is a God, 87).
Just as it is foolish for scientists to refuse to honor God, it is also foolish for Christians to refuse to acknowledge scientific discovery. Science can reveal to us the attributes of the divine nature, but science cannot reveal to us the divine person. That is the challenge of theology.
