Introduction
We hear it all the time. We should be ‘rational’. We should ‘reason’. We should throw away the Bible and use our brains to solve problems. You’ve heard it and so have I, but as Christians we must ask What is the truth?
This post will be written from a secular viewpoint. We will not rely on the Bible, but we will show what not relying on the Bible leads to.
Everyone is a sinner, and everyone can be tempted. The worldly temptations are just as common in the scientific arena as anywhere else. Science, which should alleviate suffering, has proven itself the handmaiden of suffering and oppression. Whenever ‘science’ steps out of the lab into the political or moral arena, it should be viewed, given its past misuse, with deep suspicion.
Two Kinds of Problems
If you think about it, logically the world contains into two kinds of problems: ill-posed and well-posed. We will define these as follows:
A well-posed problem is one that has a solution. 1+1=2. A characteristic of well-posed problems is that everyone agrees with the solution. If you add 1+1 is always equals 2.
An ill-posed problem does not have a solution. These are far more numerous than well-posed problems. Mathematically, an ill-posed problem can never be solved uniquely because it has multiple solutions.
STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) are becoming more valued because they deal mostly with well-posed problems. Generally speaking, a problem involving engineering design only becomes well-posed if there is some outside criterion, such as lowest cost, to guide design selection. Most engineering design problems can be solved with multiple designs. Sometimes there are an infinite number of them. The engineer picks the lowest-cost design that solves his problem.
Science works the same way. In a new field, not everything is known so a variety of conclusions and explanations are possible, i.e. it is ill-posed. If everything else is equal, the scientist concludes based on honesty and integrity. Money, political power and media propaganda can tilt the field to whatever conclusion the powerful people want. Most scientists will go along because that is in their best interest, and that is what most people are interested in. If he has an ill-posed problem, he can plausibly do it and claim objectivity.
The major use of the theory of evolution in the 19th and early 20th centuries was racism. The biologists ‘proved’ that non-white races were ‘inferior’. The proofs were bogus, but the suffering was real. Neither the scientists nor the theory were ever called to account for the suffering they caused.
What Science is
Science is organized observations. That is all that it is. Sometimes, as in the example above, the observations cannot by themselves tell us what we want to know. As with the example of the seismic data, sometimes we have an ill-posed problem.
Science is never universal. Any claim to a kind of theology of science is bogus, including a so-called belief in ‘science’. In textbooks, ‘laws’ are given, and equations are written down. The reader should understand that all of the ‘laws’ and equations are limited in scope. They are better described as curve fits. Some data is taken, and a line is drawn through the data. The line is the curve fit. The mathematical equation for the line is the equation.
There is not and can never be any assurance that the line so drawn is true everywhere. Scientists can take date and confirm that the line is a good approximation to the data, but experiments always have errors, so the experiment is uncertain. Moreover, there are an infinite number of functions that will match the data as well as the line. Trying to find a universal law is an ill posed problem for that reason. We can never truly decide which line is the correct one, since they all match the data within its uncertainty band. We can use a rule like Occam’s razor (named for Christian thinker William of Occam), which states that one should use the simplest line, or you can use statistical analysis to come up with a refinement to that approach. Neither of these yields universal results.
Moreover, as in the example above, all scientists are restrained by economics. If a scientist cannot afford an experiment, then he cannot run it. If he cannot instrument it, he cannot run it. You cannot probe the sun because the probe will melt before it reaches the sun. For all scientists, the data set is limited, and it does not always lead to a well-posed problem.
Therefore, belief in science is the wrong approach, because belief is a religious term. Saying ‘I believe in science’ is always wrong unless you are very gullible. It is correct to say, ‘I use science’, or ‘I think science is useful’. Usefulness connotes practicality. Science has usefulness, but it has no spiritual side to it, no matter what scientists say.
Bait-and-Switch
One of the most common kinds of fraud is bait-and-switch. A seller promises something enticing (bait) and delivers something else (switch), of lesser value. Belief in ‘science’ is the ultimate bait-and-switch. Advocates for a belief in ‘science’ tell us that science, which has made great progress in well-posed problems, such as physics, can also show us the way in ill-posed problems, such as law and philosophy. It cannot solve these problems because they both have multiple solutions and different members of society do not agree on how to choose a solution, assuming that one exists. You cannot empirically determine a choice of action without outside assumptions.
However well-meaning, the advocate of ‘science’ must make extra assumptions about the problem or the data. He claims these assumptions are ‘scientific’, but they are actually arbitrary. They comport with his feelings and emotions.
Hate
The emotion most likely to affect the ‘scientific’ thinker is hate. Hate is a nasty emotion and the wellspring of bigotry. The ‘scientific’ thinker claims he is objective, but he is really just puffing himself up.
Jesus told us to “love your neighbor as yourself”, but the most people do not like that advice. They wish to have high self-esteem, which is synonym for pride and vanity.
Christianity preaches humility, whereas the world preaches pride. Humility doesn’t mean thinking less of yourself. Instead it means thinking more of others. One cannot love someone else without humility. Humility leads to love and peace, whereas pride leads to hate and bigotry. The proud egoist thinks he can solve the world’s problems by thinking about them. He believes that he is ‘scientific’ and does not let emotion and tradition cloud his judgement. He is a blind guide, because the problems he is tackling cannot be solved through thinking. You cannot solve problems of justice and mercy using science.
“When a man ceases to worship God, he does worship nothing but worships everything.” This quote from Christian apologist G. K. Chesterton, aptly sums up the atheist. What the atheist is most likely to worship, of course, is himself. He will claim he is ‘scientific’, but without God all roads lead back to the self. Belief in science is really just worshipping yourself, because your corrupt thought processes will always lead to the same place: self-glorification.
Science is useful, but it is no substitute for belief in Lord Jesus. Christians should remember it, practice it and preach it.
Theory of Evolution
The theory of evolution should hold a special place for Humanist dishonesty. It’s a false attack on Christianity from two angles.
- From 1859 to 1945, biologists, especially evolutionary biologists, were advocating genocide and the destruction of all non-white races. This extreme racism, pushed in universities, was said to be ‘proven’ by the theory of evolution. The first thing any Christian should say to any Humanist who asks about evolution is to cite this fact and ask whether Humanists intend to bring back race genocide, eugenics and the other 20th century horrors we are still trying to fix. Is that why they cling to evolution?
- Every word that is written, is written for a readership. God’s intention in writing the Bible was to encourage His worship and instruct His followers on how to live correctly and treat their fellow humans. Genesis was written in 1200 BC. In 1200 BC, no one would have understood the theory of evolution. I can’t imagine what the creation story would look like if God had written it scientifically. The 1st few pages of Genesis would balloon into 1000 pages of incomprehensible symbols. Evolution is an anachronism, something of the future that did not belong in 1200 BC and would not have been understood.
Evolution led to the most sickening excesses of the 20th century: The Holocaust, Eugenics and the KKK. All were supported by evolutionary biologists. Christians opposed this new view of man as a collection of genes to be culled from the gene pool. Christians, before they even talk about evolution, should ask Humanists if they have given up their insane desire to remold the world. If they have not, then you know why they cling to evolution.
We are called as Christians: first to worship Him, and then to help the poor and suffering. A blind belief in ‘science’ can easily mislead, causing suffering and injustice. For this reason, the proper attitude of anyone toward science should be skepticism, not belief.
