Science vs Christianity?

And the reigning champion slides sideways in the ring, leaving his opponent looking flat footed. And then with some short jabs to the head the champ forces the challenger to lift his fists and so expose his body. Again the champ pivots in, even more gracefully, and lands deep body blows that leave the challenger hurt and struggling. But the challenger is unable to leave the ring. This is mortal combat and the gloves are off.

Am I describing the Australian Labor Party (or even the Liberals)? Well I could be... but I’m not. Rather, I’m describing a myth. The deep and pervasive myth, that science and religion, especially Christianity, are in a fight to the death. They are in the ring, there are no rules and only one can step out alive.

But as fun as this idea is, it just isn’t true. This is what one chap who knows a thing or two says:

"The idea that science and religion are in perpetual conflict is no longer taken seriously by any major historian of science despite its popularity in the late 19th century. One of the last remaining bastions of atheism survives only at the popular level - namely, the myth that an atheistic, fact based science is permanently at war with a faith based religion."

Twilight of Atheism by Alister McGrath

In short, the idea that Christianity and science are locked in mortal combat was false in the past and is false now. Though you will keep hearing this trumpeted in the popular but unthinking media.

So why did the idea of a conflict arise and why did it gain such prominence in the Western psyche? There was a power struggle (when is there not). The new and rising breed, the professional scientists, resented the power and prestige held by the amateur scientists of Victorian England, the clergy. One of the best ways to undermine their role and place, was to attack Christianity as being opposed to science. Never mind that much of the early science and scientific method was shaped by Christian thinkers.

The Christian understanding that God made the world independent from him but contingent on him significantly contributed to the rise of scientific philosophy. Since the world is independent of God it can be examined on it's own terms. A crucial aspect of scientific theory. By independent I mean that the world and God are separate entities. However, the world is contingent on God means it depends on his power to up hold it.

Since the world is contingent on God it reflects his character. Since God is a God of order early scientists (who were very often Christian or at least Christianised by culture) expected an ordered universe which would have a coherent logic which was testable.

Johannes Kepler, working in 16th Century and overturning Aristotelian metaphysics I think is a very good example of this kind of thinking.

Here is quote from him:

"It is a right, yes a duty, to search in cautious manner for the numbers, sizes, and weights, the norms for everything [God] has created. For He himself has let man take part in the knowledge of these things ... For these secrets are not of the kind whose research should be forbidden; rather they are set before our eyes like a mirror so that by examining them we observe to some extent the goodness and wisdom of the Creator." (See source and other quotes here.)

You can see more on an exploration of the idea of the world being independent and contingent on God on an earlier post.

Several good books have been written that explore science and Christianity:

• John Lennox - God's Undertaker, Has Science buried God? - Scientific
• David Bentley Hart - Atheist Delusions (see pages 56-74) - Historical
• Kirsty Birkett - Unnatural Enemies - Philosophical and historical

Another author worth reading is Rodney Stark. He works as a sociologist and in one book compares Chinese culture, which was much more technologically advanced, with European culture at the time when science rose. He explores the issue of why science rose in Europe and not in China despite China being more advanced.

Part of his explanation for why science arose in Europe and not China, despite the more advanced technology, is that animism and other religious / philosophical beliefs left no room for an idea that the universe could be examined on its own terms and was ordered. They just had practises that worked better but had no foundation on which to build a scientific methodology.

... Oh well, so much for our juicy story of mortal conflict. It is just another power struggle. But at least we can lay to rest the myth that scientists are purely objective and only concerned about the truth.

This article republished with extra commentary.

Do you like to grapple with the science vs faith debate? Don't miss international debater and author on the interface of science, philosophy and Christianity Prof John Lennox's Recorded talk Cosmic Chemistry