Faith and Science Vs. Faith in Science

by Dr Robert W. Ogilvie, Ph.D. (Charleston SC, USA)

Does it matter what you believe about science and theology? What are the issues? Why bother being concerned with the fields of science and theology? What can you do about it anyway? Let’s begin with a short story about the human body.

Once upon a time, a mechanism came into existence that keeps our lungs and their 300 million tiny air sacs clear of dust, fungi, bacteria and other foreign substances that may be inhaled as we breathe. Any tiny foreign substance that enters your lungs will land on the equivalent of an escalator that is constantly moving from deep in your lungs to your mouth at a speed of 6 feet each hour. This movement is attributed to the constant work of nearly 50 billion tiny hair-like structures that move in a coordinated fashion similar to the manner in which waves can be seen in a field of grain propelled by the wind. Each tiny hair-like structure is only 1/125,000 of an inch (0.0002 cm) wide and 1/5000 of inch (0.001 cm) long. Just how the rows upon rows of these tiny structures are coordinated to create the escalator that moves a coating of a correct thickness along the airways to the mouth is unknown. This is just one of many examples of microscopic architecture and function of the human body, not to mention that of animals, plants and insects. You might ask how this arrangement of highly coordinated action of billions of microscopic structures came into existence. Your answer to that question will reveal your world view.

Do your thoughts turn immediately to scriptures such as, “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.” Psalm 139:13-14. Or, do you seek a materialistic explanation for these amazing phenomena? What is your view of the world? Does it include or exclude a Creator God?

I began my journey through life in a Christian home that valued going to church, where I eventually embraced a Christian world view consisting of belief that God created all that there is, that humans were capable of both good and evil, and that there was always hope for change. Our family believed in a Creator God, the fall of humans, and the hope of redemption. As I continued my journey and completed a doctorate in human anatomy, I became an experimental scientist in a laboratory, where I set forth hypotheses, designed and performed experiments, made observations, collected data and finally, after analysis of the observations and data, I came to conclusions. After several experiments, I had enough findings and conclusions to develop a theory that was supported by the findings.   This is the scientific method, one of experiment and analysis.

During my forty years as a Professor of cell biology and anatomy, my explorations mainly were at the microscopic and submicroscopic level where I was privileged to view the microscopic architecture of the human body. Throughout my career, I have considered myself fortunate to have viewed this structure that I believe was created by God. That is how my world view has made a difference in my career. I have been able to worship God in the laboratory as well as in a church sanctuary. I share the sentiment of Ralph Waldo Emerson who wrote, “When science is learned in Love, and its powers are wielded by Love, they will appear the supplements and continuations of the material creation (Essay XII, Art by Ralph Waldo Emerson). Or, as Elizabeth Michael Boyle states in her book, Science as Sacred Metaphor, An Evolving Revelation, “…..personal faith experience (or the lack of it) predisposes some to reduce God to a mythic metaphor for science, while others celebrate science as a cosmic metaphor for God. For the former, eventually ‘nothing is sacred’; for the latter everything is”. (Ref 1 p. xii)

Some scientists do not approach their work with a Christian world view. Their observations and discoveries are reward enough for them. A materialistic and naturalistic view of the world does not lead to the same experience as one who holds a Christian world view. You may be asking the question, “Are there scientists who have made major discoveries who have a Christian world view?” The answer is a resounding YES! A common thread in the thinking of these scientists is that they, unlike the ancient Greeks who did not have a concept of order and reliability in created matter, believed that what God created was not only good, but that it had order and that what they discovered would be repeatable or reliable. Modern science arose in Christianized Europe, a thought well documented in Nancy Pearcey’s book, The Soul of Science.(Ref 6) William Whewell (1794 – 1866) an English scientist, Anglican priest, philosopher, theologian, and historian of science, coined the word ‘scientist’ in 1833. Before that, scientists were termed natural philosophers or men of science. Natural philosophers in the Middle Ages contributed significantly to the foundations of modern science according to Edward Grant, a science historian who relied heavily on the work of Pierre Duhem, a famous French physicist turned historian. (Ref 3 p. xi) Duhem placed the Middle Ages in the mainstream of scientific development filling the hiatus that had existed between Greek and Arabic science and early modern science in seventeenth-century Europe. From these early times in the development of modern science until today, I found a continuous thread of scientists who have made some of the most significant discoveries and have a Christian world view. Recently, I have studied 49 scientists, from the 13th century until the present time, who had a religious conviction that included a creator God. I have identified a small sampling of scientists who were not only profoundly inspired, but have, in turn, profoundly inspired me.

Roger Bacon (1214 – 1294), who publicised the concept of ‘laws of nature’, fully accepted Christ, had a strong faith and a profound reverence for the Scriptures with a deep conviction of the close connection between religion and science. (Ref 4 p. 225)

Nicholas Copernicus (1473 – 1543) presented a fully predictive mathematical model of a heliocentric system, that the planets revolved around the Sun rather than around the Earth, maintained a strong Christian faith that was not shaken by his scientific discoveries. He stated “I am aware that a philosopher’s ideas are not subject to the judgment of ordinary persons, because it is his endeavour to seek the truth in all things, to the extent permitted to human reason by God.” (Ref 4 p. 226)

Johannes Kepler (1550 – 1617) (image:right), the founder of modern astronomy, believed that the goal of science is to bring man to God. He regarded science and religion as different aspects of an integrated world.   In the conclusion of one of his favourite works, ‘Harmonices’, he states ‘O Thou, who by the light of nature increases in us the desire for the light of Thy mercy in order to be led by this to Thy glory, to Thee I offer thanks, Creator, God, because Thou hast given me pleasure in what Thou hast created and I rejoice in thy handiwork.’ His dying words were: ‘Only the merits of our saviour Jesus Christ. It is in Him, as I steadfastly testify, that there rest all my retreat, all my consolation, all my hope’.

Galileo Galilei (1564 – 1642), in 1613 wrote in a letter to Father Benedetto Castelli, ‘I believe that the intention of Holy Writ was to persuade men of the truths necessary to salvation; such as neither science no other means could render credible, but only the voice of the Holy Spirit. But I do not think it necessary to believe that the same God who gave us our senses, our speech, our intellect, would have us put aside the use of these, to teach us instead such things as with their help we could find out for ourselves, particularly in the case of those sciences of which there is not the smallest mention in Scripture’.   (Ref 4 p. 352 )

Blaise Pascal (1623 – 1662) (image: left), a French mathematician, physicist and religious philosopher, wrote, ‘Those who seek for God out of Christ, and rest in the evidences which nature furnishes, either find no solution of their inquiries or settle down in a knowledge and service of God apart from a Mediator: thence they fall into either atheism or deism – two things which the Christian religion almost equally abhors. Without Jesus Christ the world could not subsist; for it would infallibly either be destroyed, or become like hell.”(Ref 4 p. 354)

Michael Faraday (1791 – 1867), an English chemist and physicist who contributed significantly to the fields of electromagnetism and electrochemistry, is quoted In “The Life and Letters of Michael Faraday”, by Henry Bence Jones, Longmans, Geen & Co., Ltd., p. 432: “The Christian religion is a revelation, and that revelation is in the Word of God. According to the promise of God, that Word is sent into the entire world. Every call and every promise is made freely to every man to whom that word cometh. Therefore our philosophy, while it shows us these things, should lead us to think of Him who wrought them, for it is said by authority even far above that which these works present that the invisible things of Him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made.”(Ref 4 p. 361)

Louis Pasteur (1822 -1895) (image: left), the famous French chemist and microbiologist, was quoted in Makers of Modern Medicine, by J. J. Walsh, p. 318: “Posterity will one day laugh at the sublime foolishness of the modern materialistic philosophers. The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. I pray while I am engaged at my work in the laboratory.”

James Clerk Maxwell (1831 – 1879) a Scottish mathematician and theoretical physicist said: “I think men of science as well as other men need to learn from Christ, and I think Christians whose minds are scientific are bound to study science, that their view of the glory of God may be as extensive as their being is capable of.” (Ref 4 p. 363) Einstein admired Maxwell so much that he equated him to Isaac Newton.

Max Planck (1858-1947), best known for quantum theory which revolutionized our understanding of the atomic and sub-atomic worlds, expressed the view that God is everywhere present, and held that "the holiness of the unintelligible Godhead is conveyed by the holiness of symbols." Atheists, he thought, attach too much importance to what are merely symbols. Planck was a churchwarden from 1920 until his death, and believed in an almighty, all-knowing, beneficent God. Both science and religion wage a "tireless battle against scepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition" with the goal "toward God!"

Francis Collins (1950 - ), Director of National Human Genome Research Institute who led a team of international scientists in cracking the hereditary code of life, wrote in an article, Faith and the Human Genome, the importance of “the literal and historical Resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, which is the cornerstone of what I believe.” In his latest book, The Language of God, he refers to our DNA as God’s instruction book or God’s Language. Dr. Collins gives four options or ways of viewing the interaction of science and faith. Option one is when science trumps faith, (Atheism and Agnosticism). Option two is when faith trumps science (Creationism). Option three is when science needs divine help, (Intelligent Design). Option four is when Science and Faith are in harmony (BioLogos). He says “The God of the Bible is also the God of the genome. He can be worshipped in the cathedral or in the laboratory. His creation is majestic, awesome, intricate, and beautiful – and it cannot be at war with itself. Only we humans can start such battles. And only we can end them”. (Ref 2 pp. 210, 211)

In conclusion, I would like to address certainty because the search for certainty seems to be what produces conflict. Can we now be certain as to who and how all that exists in the universe was created?   Can we be certain as to just how humans were created? The answer is maybe and, maybe not. What really matters?   I would like to suggest that it is meaning that matters. In The Myth of Certainty, Daniel Taylor quotes Blaise Pascal: “This is our true state; this is what makes us incapable of certain knowledge and of absolute ignorance. We sail within a vast sphere, ever drifting in uncertainty, driven from end to end. When we think to attach ourselves to any point … it wavers and leaves us…Nothing stays for us. This is our natural condition, and yet most contrary to our inclination; we burn with desire to find solid ground and an ultimate sure foundation whereon to build a tower reaching to the Infinite. But our whole groundwork cracks, and the earth opens to abysses. Let us therefore not look for certainty and stability. Our reason is always deceived by fickle shadows…..” (Ref 7 p. 94) Dr. Taylor suggests “…..While certainty is beyond our reach, meaning – something far more valuable – is not. Meaning derives from a right relationship with God, based not on certainty and conformity, but on risk and commitment.” Dare we risk and commit to a Christian Worldview that will bring us to a relationship with our Creator who indeed has an internal relationship in the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

It is said no better than C. S. Lewis when he stated his belief in Christianity in an essay titled “Is Theology Poetry?” in The Oxford Socratic Club, 1944, (pp. 154-165), “I believe in Christianity as I believe that the Sun has risen not only because I see it but because by it I see everything else”(Ref 5 p. 140) If we, who are Christians, become firmly grounded in the Christian Worldview, we will be more likely to go to the edge and dialogue with others who have a different Worldview. Our dialogue can be more constructive if we understand that modern science took root in a Christianized Europe in the Middle Ages. Perhaps, we may find ways to go deeper in our understanding of what it means to be a Christian in our view of Science and to build bridges of understanding between those who do not see things as we do. Perhaps we may find meaning in the way we relate to others. We need to work to create a space where science and theology are not out to prove or disprove, but instead, to allow both modes of knowing to enrich each other in the search for Truth.

Dr Ogilvie, Professor Emeritus, Department of Cell Biology and Anatomy, now Professor in the Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, at the Medical University of South Carolina, has taught in three medical schools during the past forty years. His career has included research, teaching, lectureships, as writer of study manuals, speaking engagements in the United States, Europe and Asia and two year-long sabbaticals in Bern and Zurich, Switzerland.

References

1. Boyle, Elizabeth M. “Science as Sacred Metaphor: An Evolving Revelation”, Liturgical Press, Collegeville, Minnesota, 2006.

2. Collins, Francis S. “The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief”, Free Press, New York, 2006.

3. Grant, Edward. “The Foundations of Modern Science in the Middle Ages”, Cambridge University Press, 1996.

4. Leete, Frederick D. “Christianity In Science”, The Abingdon Press, New York, Cincinnati, Nashville, 1928.

5. Lewis, C. S. "Is Theology Poetry?" The Weight of Glory and other Addresses, Harper Collins, New York, 1980.

6. Pearcey, Nancy R. and Charles B. Thaxton. “The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy”, Crossway Books, Illinois, 1994.

7. Taylor, Daniel. “The Myth of Certainty: The Reflective Christian and the Risk of Commitment”, Jarrell, Word Books, Texas, 1986.