Truth doesn’t contradict truth. Truth can contradict falsehood and falsehood can contradict falsehood, so when we contradict someone, one or both of us is in error. In controversial subjects there are so many possibilities and so many opinions, statistically the vast majority of opinions must be incorrect. It makes no sense for everyone to be confident of their correctness in disagreement when the vast majority of opinions must be incorrect, at least in part. In most disputes, I suspect both parties are wrong. We must always be aware of uncertainty.
Science examines nature in a very disciplined fashion to discover what’s really true about the material universe. That doesn’t mean science is always right, but when science contradicts understanding of scripture, science usually holds the evidential high ground. Christians should not rush to dispute solid scientific findings. It’s okay to question, holding scientists accountable to back up their claims rigorously, but when theology clashes with strong scientific evidence, theology usually loses.
I’ve seen this dramatically played out in the current battle between fundamentalist Christian theology and biological evolution. It’s okay for Christians to point out some of the weaknesses in evidence regarding evolution, but taking an absolute stand against it puts fundamentalists in a very weak position. The evidence supporting some level of biological evolution is strong enough that Christians need to examine their theology, questioning doctrines that contradict points of evolution that are based on strong evidence.
People also overstep the reach of science. Evolution tells us nothing about whether the universe was created, but many materialists claim evolution proves the universe was not created. This is a philosophical overreach. When examined rationally, far from proving the idea of a creator-God false, evolution adds strong evidence to the intelligent design argument.
Claiming that evolution proves the Bible to be a myth also comes from a presumptive overreach of the evidence. Evolution does not disprove the concept of a God who created the universe as stated in the first verse of the Bible, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,”[1] but it might change the way we view some Bible passages. For example, when Genesis 1:20-23 describes God creating a vast array of animals on the fifth day of creation, we should consider the possibility that we are reading a metaphorical allegory intended to communicate theology, not science and history.
Unfortunately, Christianity is currently engaged in a culture war with evolution lead by well-funded young-earth creationist organizations like Answers in Genesis. Answers in Genesis spends tens of millions of dollars every year[2] convincing Christians that the first 11 chapters of Genesis should be a foundation for truth that shapes all scientific and historical investigation. They claim this “biblical worldview” should be adopted by everyone to discover what’s really true. People who don’t share this presuppositional paradigm have grown increasingly hostile in their frustration with this vocal, politically active and powerful segment of American Christians.
Many people, Christian and non-Christian alike, live with a paradigm that science and Christianity are fundamentally in conflict, but this shouldn’t be. Both are dedicated to truth, so they should be in harmony. How did we end up in this state of conflict?
Exploration of nature thrived throughout most of Christian history as a way to understand the God who created nature. The Bible encourages the study of creation to understand our creator as Paul wrote in Romans 1:20.[3] Early Christians embraced philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, including Aristotle’s systematic approach to natural science.[4] Christian emphasis on natural science fed the establishment of science in early universities.[5] Missionaries spread science throughout the world.[6] During the Enlightenment, scientific evidence and reason began to rise in authority over church theology, but many leading scientists were still Christians.[7], [8]
The modern conflict between the church and science seems to have begun with heliocentrism. Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler, were devout Christians who believed the Bible was an authoritative message from the Creator,[9] but they also believed that the earth orbited the sun. This clashed with certain Bible passages like Psalm 104:5, “He set the earth on its foundations, it can never be moved.” [10]
Galileo argued that, “If the natural philosopher or mathematician could conclusively prove the heliocentric theory true … then both sides would agree that the literal remarks in the Bible that seemed to contradict it would need to be reinterpreted as figurative in order to maintain the unity of truth.” Galileo believed, “God is the common and always truthful author of both the book of special revelation (the Bible) and the book of nature (general revelation)” and he invoked Cardinal Cesare Baronio’s perspective that “the Bible tells us how to go to heaven, not how the heavens go.”[11]
Unfortunately, Roman Catholic church leaders rejected these ideas in favor of their traditional theology that everything in the universe orbited the earth. This geocentric concept had been popular since Aristotle proposed it many centuries earlier. The church embraced it because it seemed compatible with certain scripture passages. They convicted Galileo of strong suspicion of heresy in 1633. Many today see this as evidence that Christianity and science are fundamentally incompatible, but the problem is human error in the church. Eventually the church bowed to scientific evidence, conceded that Galileo was right, and revised their theology to accept that certain Bible passages were divine metaphor, not science.
The next and most enduring major conflict between the church and science came from Charles Darwin who published his work in 1859. Darwin’s theories of evolution transformed biology and paleontology in a way that contradicted accepted theology in the church. Instead of modifying his theology to incorporate his discoveries as Galileo did, Darwin slowly abandoned his belief in the Bible and adopted a philosophy that the intricate design of life came without a designer. This philosophical baggage unrelated to the science has spurred inappropriate use of biological evolution science ever since.
The church no longer held power to suppress Darwin’s ideas as it did with Galileo, so Christians launched a campaign of denial that continues today. Evolution opponents try to magnify every unanswered question related to evolution while ignoring the overwhelming evidence supporting it. Young-earth creationists have dug themselves in with the same approach to the Big Bang singularity, plate tectonics, time-of-travel for light to reach earth from distant stars, the formation of geological layers in earth’s crust, and dozens of other well-supported concepts of science that indicate the earth and universe are billions of years old. They also push the idea a world-wide flood in spite of overwhelming physical evidence contradicting that idea. I know many former Christians who gave up their childhood belief in the Bible over this very issue. I’m sure there are hundreds of millions of souls who’ve left the Christian faith because those first chapters of Genesis contradict overwhelming scientific evidence.
This centuries old battle between Christians who insist the earth must be less than 10,000 years old and the rest of the educated world has fed a paradigm that the Bible is incompatible with science. Nearly all atheists, and many Christians seem to hold this view. As a Christian who loves science and worked professionally in science, this misconception grieves me. If we’d simply acknowledge that the first 11 chapters of Genesis appear to be metaphorical allegory, the conflict would lose its fuel.
Such a position actually strengthens the idea that the Bible contains a message from God. Expert Christian cosmologist, Hugh Ross, uses modern science to build a powerful natural theology case for a creator.[12] Physics gives us the improbabilities of fine tuning at the creation singularity, and cosmology gives us the improbabilities of extreme suitability of our planet for life. Evolution depends on the astronomically improbable spontaneous creation of self-replicating molecules and the seemingly impossible transition from those independent molecules to the molecular mechanics in cells.
The allegorical story of Genesis 1 even provides evidence of divine guidance in the Bible. Here we find events of cosmological history in remarkable fashion. We can distinguish ten creation events that correspond with events of cosmological history known to modern science. Nine points appear in an order that matches conditions of cosmological history.
1. Genesis 1:2, formless and empty (nothing before time)
2. Genesis 1:3, sudden appearance of light (the singularity event, big bang)
3. Genesis 1:4, darkness separates from light (shadow casting bodies form)
4. Genesis 1:5, day and night (rotating earth)
5. Genesis 1:7, separation of waters (clouds and ocean)
6. Genesis 1:9, formation of land mass
7. Genesis 1:11, appearance of plants
8. Genesis 1: 20-25, appearance of animals
9. Genesis 1: 26-27, appearance of humans
The tenth event, Genesis 1:14-18, sun, moon and stars, should come earlier to match cosmological chronology, but one event appearing out of sequence does not discredit the remarkable correlation.
Throughout this discussion I’ve identified 3 historical myths related to science and Christianity.
Myth #1. Science and Christianity have always been in conflict. Christianity not only existed in harmony with science for most of its history, but Christianity actually encouraged scientific discovery. Conflict between Christianity and science, when it has occurred, has always been inflamed by political and philosophical complications.
Myth #2. Genesis 1-11 must be taken as literal science and history. This misconception came from fundamentalism and continues strong in evangelical Christianity today. Atheists love to push this concept because it helps them to discredit the entire Bible. It’s more sensible to view Genesis 1-11 as metaphorical allegory. Some Bible scholars assess it as a unique theological genre that shouldn’t be taken as scientific or historical. [13]
Myth #3. Science proves the Bible false. This misconception comes mostly from taking poetic and allegorical metaphor literally. The main focus has been around the creation and flood stories, but there are others scattered throughout the Bible, along with simple misunderstandings of science from the time the Bible was written that should be understood as the author’s context, not errors in God’s message.
We, Christians, need to accept that science has proven effective in discovering hidden truth in the natural universe. We need to embrace this powerful tool of discovery. Science makes mistakes so it does need questioning and accountability, but we cannot confine it to a presupposed worldview. Science must be free to explore, and when it uncovers evidence of truth that withstands scrutiny, we must consider how our theology fits with scientific understanding. Theology and science both come with uncertainty. We cannot hold either one entirely superior to the other.
[1] Holy Bible, New International Version, (Biblica Inc., 2011, Original work published 1973), https://www.biblegateway.com/, Genesis 1:1.
[2] Charity Navigator. Answers in Genesis. Total Revenue and Expenses. https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/330596423. (2022).
[3] Holy Bible, Genesis 1:31, Romans 1:20.
[4] Ian Shaw, Christianity: The Biography, (Zondervan, 2016), page 20, 62, 127, 138-139.
[5] Shaw, Christianity: The Biography, 135-136.
[6] Shaw, 181-182.
[7] Shaw, 199-200.
[8] Joseph Holden, The Comprehensive Guide to Apologetics, (Harvest House, 2018), Chapter 44.
[9] P. Copan, et al. Dictionary of Christianity and Science: The Definitive Reference for the Intersection of Christian Faith and Contemporary Science. (Zondervan, 2017). pages 111, 298-299, 400.
[10] Holy Bible, Psalm 104:5.
[11] Gary B. Ferngren. Science & Religion: A Historical Introduction (2nd Edition). (Johns Hopkins University Press, 2017), page 102.
[12] Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos: How the Latest Scientific Discoveries Reveal God, 4th Edition (RTB Press, 2018).
[13] Longman, Trempter, III. (2012). Introducing the Old Testament, Zondervan, 11.