“Thanksgiving: A Time to Feel; a Time to Heal”– CalvaryChapel.com
“The good news is that we don’t have to choose either/or. With the Bible as one’s authority and guide, we can acknowledge the ugliness, injustice and pain of the past—including present-day implications for countless natives—and yet, still redeem present-day Thanksgiving in the context of the Gospel.”

“A Glimpse at the Intersectional Left’s Political Endgame”– Intelligencer – New York Magazine
“Every now and again, it’s worth thinking about what the intersectional left’s ultimate endgame really is — They seem not to genuinely believe in liberalism, liberal democracy, or persuasion… Rather, the ultimate aim seems to be running the entire country by fiat to purge it of racism (and every other intersectional “-ism” and “phobia”, while they’re at it). And they demand “disciplinary tools” by unelected bodies to enforce “a radical reorientation of our consciousness.”

“That ‘Junk’ DNA… Is Full of Information!”– Advanced Science News!
“These regions of DNA may then be regarded as structurally important elements in forming the correct shape and separation of condensed coding sequences in the genome, regardless of any other possible function that those non-coding sequences have: in essence, this would be an “explanation” for the persistence in genomes of sequences to which no “function” (in terms of evolutionarily-selected activity), can be ascribed (or, at least, no substantial function).”

“Check Out All Available Podcasts!”– CalvaryChapel.com
“Did you know we have a collection of podcasts available on CalvaryChapel.com? Our vision is to cover topics in theology, culture, ministry etc. that pertain to the Christian faith and make these resources available to you! We pray that these resources will be a blessing and encouragement. Click the link below to learn more about each podcast!”

“Adam and Eve Are Possible: A Second Bite at the Genetic Apple”– BreakPoint
“An oft-repeated claim by skeptics is that geneticists have disproved the possibility of Adam and Eve. Because existing human genetic diversity is so great, there can be no original couple from whom all people are descended. Or, that’s what we’re told.”

“Jesus is King & Kanye West”– GoodLion Podcast Network
“For 27 minutes I watched as each barber, who usually only watches his language when children are in the shop, seemed to be locked in on every word. Their interest peaked with each bar (line in a song), to the verge of almost raising their hands to worship. When the album ended there wasn’t disdain or disgust, but they hit repeat and even turned the volume louder the second time through. Dialogue then broke out in the shop, and not the usual chatter about sports or conspiracy theories like who really shot TuPac; but these conversations were about church, faith and Jesus.”

“Get Ready for Spring 2020 Semester!”– CalvaryChapel.com
“Here you will find links to some of the best Calvary Chapel Affiliated Institutions involved in the field of Education. From earning an accredited Bachelor of Arts in Theology with Calvary Chapel Bible College of Europe to getting practical assistance in establishing a private Christian school, the ministries listed here provide broad avenues of training and education to help you fulfill God’s plan for your life and ministry.”

“The Gift of Prophecy”– Back to Basics
“Can those who are not in a teaching position receive this gift? Of course. As we have already stated, any believer can potentially manifest any one of the gifts of the Spirit. Prophecy can come through someone simply quoting a Scripture or by passing on a phrase or an idea that God has impressed on his or her mind.”

The Link is a collection of content from around the web, discussing topics in culture, theology, ministry and current events. CalvaryChapel.com does not necessarily endorse or agree with every message or perspective in the diverse pieces posted on The Link. By providing The Link, we hope to help you stay informed of important events and conversations taking place in the world that are relevant to the Christian faith.

“Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” – Albert Einstein

The Warfare Scenario

The world today seems to operate under the presumption that science and religion are both combatants in an apocalyptic struggle for survival. In this conflict, science is presented as the rational and objective underdog pitted against the irrational oversized forces of religion. Atheist professor Jerry Coyne’s recent book title, Faith vs. Fact: Why Science and Religion are Incompatible, is an example of this type of warfare scenario. Similarly, atheist Sam Harris charges that science is a completely factual enterprise, whereas “theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance.”¹

As ingrained as this narrative may be, it is simply false. In fact, the historical record is not one of hostility. Alistair McGrath, currently the Andreos Idreos Professor of Science and Religion at the University of Oxford, has said that this “warfare view” is now “seen as a hopelessly outmoded historical stereotype which scholarship has totally discredited.”² What has actually happened is that these scientists have hijacked the definition of science by insisting on a purely naturalistic (atheistic) understanding of the term. They are philosophically committed to naturalism. This philosophical commitment guides their means of scientific inquiry which gives rise to methodological naturalism, which in practical terms often amounts to nothing more than atheism masquerading as “science.” Inquiry should be free to follow the evidence wherever it leads, whether that is ultimately to a natural cause or an intelligent cause.

The Real Story

The reality is that science and Christianity have shared a long and fruitful relationship with each other. Nowhere is this more beautifully illustrated than on the grounds of Cambridge University. The prestigious Cavendish laboratory, where such discoveries as the DNA double helix and the Neutron and Electron were made. A place which has produced over 29 Nobel Laureates. To enter, you pass through two large heavy wooden doors. On top of these doors sits a beautiful ornate carving that reads Magna opera Domini exquisite in omnes voluntates eius. This is a Bible verse from the Latin Vulgate³ and it is a quote from Psalm 111:2.

“Great are the works of the Lord; they are studied by all who delight in them.”

Why would one of the most prestigious scientific laboratories have such a quotation at its entrance if, as we are told, science and religion are incompatible? Even more amusing is the fact that it would have been these doors that atheist scientists Francis Crick and Jim Watson rushed through in 1953, after discovering the working of DNA; they were keen to get to the pub across the street, “to tell everyone within hearing that we had found the secret of life.”⁴

As it is, this inscription stands as a testimony to the Christian heritage that was so important in the rise of modern science. The original inscription was put there at the behest of the Cavendish Laboratory’s first professor James Clerk Maxwell. The four mathematical equations of electricity and magnetism that Maxwell produced and his work in areas such as electromagnetic theory and thermodynamics are widely believed to have paved the way for other great discoveries of 20th-century physics. Maxwell was a believer who had extensive knowledge of the Bible and had served as an elder in the Church he helped plant in Scotland. He strongly believed that scientific research was to be conducted in light of the Bible and that such endeavors were a way to study the works of God. His biographers record a prayer, very reminiscent of Psalm 111:2, which they found amongst his papers after his death:

“Almighty God, who created man in Thine own image, and made him a living soul that he might seek after Thee and have dominion over Thy creatures, teach us to study the works of Thy hands, that we may subdue the earth to our use and strengthen the reason for Thy service; and so to receive Thy blessed Word, that we may believe on Him Whom Thou hast sent, to give us the knowledge of salvation and the remission of our sins. All of which we ask in the name of the same Jesus Christ, our Lord.”⁵

Such a view gave rise to modern physics and is very different from the usual narrative that you hear from people today when they insist that religious believers are ignorant, keeping the world in a backward state and opposing the advancements of science at every turn.

Einstein’s Heroes

Perhaps another example will finally lay to rest this idea that science is opposed to the Bible. Most people will know the name of scientist Albert Einstein. His Theories of Relativity are fundamental to modern Physics. Of course, even the great Einstein would have had his own scientific heroes. You can learn a lot about a person by spending some time looking around their study! Einstein’s study had three pictures of his scientific heroes. They were Isaac Newton (1642–1727), perhaps the greatest scientist who ever lived, who among other things developed the theory of universal gravitation and the three laws of motion. Then there was Michael Faraday (1791–1867), who was known for his skill at experimentation. He discovered benzene, invented the transformer, and his work also involved demonstrating that magnetism could produce electricity. The third picture was of James Clerk Maxwell who we have already mentioned. Now there is one thing that all these great scientific minds had in common – a firm belief in the God of the Bible. All these men saw their scientific work as a way to further understand the God who created the universe. They expected the natural world to be orderly and discoverable, precisely because God is a God of order. They were all active in church life and even produced theological volumes along with their scientific works.

The Christian Roots of Science

So much for the “warfare scenario!” In fact, the opposite appears to be true: The scientific revolution was birthed from within a Judeo-Christian framework. Why was this? Well in order to operate, science has to work with a number of assumptions about the world. These assumptions are best explained by the Christian worldview. It is the God described in the Bible that can account for the existence of a rational and orderly cosmos. The concepts required by the scientific method, such as testable and repeatable experimentation, all assume that there is uniformity to the universe. God upholds the universe in such a consistent way, we can fully expect the universe to function according to specific laws that we can study. The great philosopher of science Alfred North Whitehead credited the origin of science to Christianity’s “insistence on the rationality of God”.⁶

If the secular view is true, that the universe originated from nothing by random chance processes, on what basis do we expect it to operate in a predictable and uniform manner? It is almost taken for granted today by those studying science that the universe operates according to laws that are comprehensible to humans. New atheist and physicist Steven Weinberg writes that “all my experience as a physicist leads me to believe that there is order to the universe … there is a simplicity, a beauty, that we are finding in the rules that govern matter that mirrors something that is built into the logical structure of the universe at a very deep level.”⁷ Many are struck by how strange this is and admit there is no real rational explanation for it within their atheistic worldview. Such a view is better understood as stemming from Christianity, which believes in a God who is rational, powerful and separate from His creation. This is why science blossomed in the fertile soil of the Christian west where God was envisioned as both the Creator and the Lawgiver. Christianity was long seen as the worldview that could logically account for the universe.

^Notes:

^{1 _{Sam Harris, The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the End of Reason. London: Simon & Schuster UK. 2006. 173.}
2 _{Alister McGrath, The Dawkins Delusion: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine. London: SPCK. 2007. 24.}
3 _{The aforementioned doors are those to the Old laboratory. The Bible verse is also seen on the new doors.}
4 _{J.D. Watson, The Double Helix, London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson (1968), 197.}
5 _{L. Campbell & W. Garnett, The Life of James Clerk Maxwell, London: Macmillan (1882), 160.}
6 _{Alvin. J. Schmidt, How Christianity Changed the World. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. 2004. 219.}
7 _{Steven Weinberg, Facing Up: Science and Its Cultural Adversaries. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001. 24-25.}}

Our culture loves to pigeonhole, label and “straw-man” nearly everything it disagrees with. Which means, if you’re a miracle-believing Christian, then in the eyes of a growing demographic, you are branded a “science denier.” And in 21st century western culture, because of the high value placed upon “science,” that’s among the worst things you could be accused of. But foundational Christian teachings such as the incarnation, death, burial and resurrection of Christ, will earn you the badge faster than just about any transgression.

Acceptance of the Biblical narrative causes many non-theists to view Christians as “irrational.” They conclude that the Christian’s faith “does not align with clearly established science.” The Bible speaks of miraculous events, and miracles are difficult (at best) to support scientifically. Therefore, Christian, you’re a “science denier.” For some Christians, the moniker is (strangely) worn as a badge. But for the larger majority, once labeled, many will back quietly away from the conversation. Why engage when you’re going to be branded and stigmatized?

Science is the new faith and doctrine of many naturalists. For them, Christians (i.e., “science deniers”) probably believe the Earth is flat, and that we didn’t go to the Moon too. In fact, if you listen to some skeptics, in their perspective, Christianity is the greatest of all conspiracy theories to be foisted upon us throughout history. But as you probe a bit deeper, one must ask, do not many naturalistic atheists also deny (certain) science? Do not many that hold to strong “left-of-center” political and social views, and often pride themselves as having progressed beyond “belief,” do this as well?

Non-theist naturalists deny (certain) science too.

Perhaps deny is too strong a word. “Selective,” where science is concerned is probably more appropriate.

Take as a first example a TED talk I watched some time ago called * “The History of the World in 18 Minutes.” In the opening minute of the well-produced talk, presenter David Christian (ironic last name) grips the viewer’s attention with a video of scrambling an egg. But the mind quickly registers an inconsistency. The egg, which at first appeared to be scrambled was actually reconstituting, from scrambled, to a whole egg. As it does, Christian narrates:

“…We all know in our heart of hearts that this is not the way the universe works. A scrambled egg is mush—tasty mush—but it’s mush. An egg is a beautiful, sophisticated thing that can create even more sophisticated things, such as chickens. And we know in our heart of hearts that the universe does not travel from mush to complexity. In fact, this gut instinct is reflected in one of the most fundamental laws of physics, the second law of thermodynamics, or the law of entropy. What that says basically is that the general tendency of the universe is to move from order and structure to lack of order, lack of structure—in fact, to mush. And that’s why that video feels a bit strange.”

To that point, the theist is tracking perfectly with Christian. But he continues:

“So here’s a great puzzle: In a universe ruled by the second law of thermodynamics, how is it possible to generate the sort of complexity I’ve described, the sort of complexity represented by you and me and the convention center? Well, the answer seems to be, the universe can create complexity, but with great difficulty.”

Entropy. It’s “one of the most fundamental laws of physics.” Miracle. “A surprising and welcome event that is not explicable by natural or scientific laws.” David Christian’s presentation doesn’t jive with one of the most fundamental laws of physics. It doesn’t align with “science.” It sounds a lot like a miracle. But that doesn’t change his naturalistic conviction. Is he a science denier?

A second example. The science is becoming clearer every day. Life begins at conception. Call it a fetus all you want. It is not—as was wrongly assumed 50 years ago—just a “clump of tissue.” As ultrasound technology has refined, and the ability to study in utero child development has advanced, it has become increasingly difficult to conclude that a fetus is not a human life.

To this reality, many non-theist naturalists have chosen to call the fetus a “potential human being.” But they refuse to ascribe “personhood” to the unborn child. Some sociologists even argue for extending non-personhood beyond birth! Apparently, it’s legitimate to deny clear medical and biological science when it fits with a social position. This seems like scientific malpractice for the sake of strongly held personal or political convictions. Or perhaps social science is higher on the hierarchy of value than biological or medical science? It appears that grant dollars and media space think so.

Consider a third example. Gender studies departments, in the humanities sector (again, within the social sciences) of the modern western “church”—the university—have promulgated theories that are in outright, and even hostile opposition, to extensively researched and peer-reviewed biological science regarding sex. What becomes very clear when you begin reading the publications from these institutions is that they love to attach the word “science,” or better yet “established science” to anything that has received grant dollars and has been researched according to a scientific method. Then, if anyone speaks up with counterfactuals, even scientifically researched ones, they are lambasted and labeled “junk science.”

For most people, ideology and political persuasion trumps science.

Let’s be very clear, politics is the new religion of the West. In the United States there are two state denominations (i.e.parties), and within those denominations, many factions and networks. And although a large segment of theistically minded individuals (who often lean right politically) are accused of science denial as a result of their beliefs, those that adhere to the religion of Leftism, fight ardently for worldview positions that, also, do not align with many of the sciences. They too do so because of ideology. Generally, this ideology has been birthed and has grown through the evangelical and discipleship efforts of higher education. Especially the humanities. So why the pejorative labeling?

Agreeing to disagree, agreeably.

I suggest that neither the theistically minded Christian or the atheistically minded naturalist are necessarily science deniers. Science isn’t a worldview to deny. It’s a methodology of hypothesis, observation and experimentation, to discover the legitimacy of our worldview. But such scientific endeavor is always biased by preliminary assumptions. In other words, you can use “science” to “prove” a lot of different things. Just like wrongly interpreted, or out-of-context Biblical study can be used to approve all kinds of abhorrent positions.

To my leftist and non-believing friends—and I do have them—let’s dispense with the nonsensical ad-hominem attacks, labeling people “science deniers.” As if that somehow ends the debate. Let’s agree that in the hierarchy of values you (and we) have elevated, or the convictions (be they religious, ideological or political) we maintain, that they are more ideological and religious than scientific. Which means that we need to return to a rigorous debate of ideas, evidenced by logic and science-based rationale. Let’s acknowledge that conversations that descend toward character assault and bluster rarely produce anything worthwhile and are typically employed when one has no further winning argument.

^{* CalvaryChapel.com does not necessarily endorse or agree with every outside source attached amongst these diverse pieces of content. By providing these sources, we hope to help you stay informed of important events, conversations and ideas taking place in the world that are relevant to the Christian faith.}