Doubts & Questions
“Science has disproven Christianity.”
This claim misunderstands both science and Christianity. Science and faith answer different questions: science explains how things work, while Christianity addresses why they exist. Science studies natural processes but does not delve into ultimate purpose, morality, or meaning. This is why fields like engineering, medicine, and technology thrive under scientific inquiry, whereas questions of ethics, love, justice, and purpose fall outside its scope.
Science Points Toward a Creator
Far from disproving God, scientific discoveries often point toward the necessity of a Creator:
The Universe Had a Beginning: The Big Bang theory suggests the universe came into existence at a specific point in time, aligning with the biblical assertion in Genesis 1:1: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
The Laws of Nature Are Precise and Ordered: Gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces are finely balanced. These mathematical laws behave with predictable precision. Why? We wouldn’t expect this kind of order in a random, unguided universe.
The Fine-Tuning of the Universe: The cosmic constants that allow life to exist (like the force of gravity or the ratio of protons to neutrons) are so precise that if they were altered by even the smallest fraction, life would be impossible. This level of precision is not what we’d expect from blind chance.
The Origin of Life: Despite extensive research, scientists have yet to demonstrate how life can arise from non-living matter through natural processes alone. This gap raises questions about the sufficiency of materialistic explanations for the emergence of life.
The Mystery of Consciousness: Human consciousness, characterized by self-awareness and abstract thinking, remains unexplained by purely physical processes. The qualitative experience of consciousness suggests there is more to reality than material components.
The Unscientific Assumptions of Atheism
Atheism rests on several assumptions that lack empirical support:
Physicalism: The belief that physical reality is all that exists has not been conclusively proven.
Abiogenesis: The assumption that life can arise from non-life through purely natural processes remains unverified.
Materialistic Origin of Consciousness: The idea that consciousness emerges solely from physical processes lacks comprehensive scientific explanation.
Random Emergence of Order: The belief that the universe's precise order and the laws of nature arose by chance is statistically improbable.
Some atheists counter these gaps by asserting that "science will find a way" to explain them in the future. However, this stance is a statement of faith rather than a conclusion based on current evidence, as it relies on the hope that future discoveries will validate their worldview.
The Myth of Conflict Between Science and Faith
The perceived conflict between science and Christianity is largely a product of Enlightenment-era propaganda aimed at reducing the power of the Catholic Church. Enlightenment thinkers often portrayed the Church as opposed to reason and progress, fostering a narrative of inherent conflict between faith and science.
Belief Among Scientists
Contrary to the assumption that scientists are predominantly atheistic, studies indicate a significant proportion hold religious beliefs:
A 2009 Pew Research Center survey found that 51% of scientists believe in some form of deity or higher power, with 33% professing belief in God and 18% in a universal spirit or higher power.
Elaine Howard Ecklund's research revealed that a substantial number of scientists identify with a religious tradition, challenging the stereotype of the irreligious scientist.
These findings suggest that the relationship between science and faith is more nuanced than the "conflict thesis" suggests.
Conclusion
Science, by its nature, is limited to studying the natural world and cannot adjudicate metaphysical questions about God's existence. The assumptions underlying atheism often extend beyond empirical evidence, relying on a form of faith in future scientific explanations. Recognizing the distinct domains of science and faith allows for a more comprehensive understanding of reality, where both empirical inquiry and spiritual insight have their respective places.