The Relation Between Christian Faith and the Natural Sciences

1
The Relation BetweenChristian Faith andthe
Natural Sciences

• Steve Badger and Mike Tenneson
• Evangel University

2
How do you know that you know something?
3
Your theory of knowing will largely determine
what you embrace as truth or as knowledge.
4
Propositions
Belief
Truth
Knowledge

• What is knowledge?
• How do we know?

5
Belief Knowledge

• You can believe something that is not true.
• You can fail to believe something that is true.
• People often try to find ways to justify their
  beliefs (prove them to be true, knowledge).

6
Justifying Beliefs

• Empiricism
• knowledge is a product of human experience
• Idealism
• what we refer to and perceive as the external
  world is in some way an artifice of the mind
• Common Sense Realism (naïve realism)
• there is a real world (external to us) and our
  perceptions are caused directly by that world

7
Justifying Beliefs

• Phenomenalism
• objects are not distinct substances that exist
  rather our perception of the object is all that
  really exists
• Pragmatism
• its knowledge if it solves our problems
• Rationalism
• there are ideas that are not derived from sense
  experience but these ideas may be justified by
  experience

8
Justifying Beliefs

• Skepticism
• philosophical skepticism you can never have
  sufficient justification in a belief to call it
  knowledge
• scientific skepticism you should accept claims
  only on the basis of solid evidence
• And others too

9
Foundational Questions

• Should the knowledge gained in the natural
  sciences inform our Christian doctrine?
• Should the knowledge gained in the natural
  sciences inform our Christian praxis?
• What do you think?

10
We believe

• That all truth should help us understand Bible
  truth and how we live out our faith.
• The General Revelation the Special
  Revelation both reveal Gods truth.

11
What do you know?

• Name something (not spiritual) that you know.
• Tell how you gained this knowledge.

12
(No Transcript)
13
Theories of Truth

• Major Theories of Truth
• From Geisler and Feinbergs
• Introduction to Philosophy A Christian
  Perspective

14
The Correspondence Theory of Truth

• Something is considered true if the proposition
  corresponds to the elements and a similar
  structure.
• This theory maintains that the truth of a
  statement is determined only by how it relates to
  the world, and whether it accurately describes
  (i.e., corresponds with) that world.

15
The Correspondence Theory of Truth

• It presupposes an objective world and is
  antagonistic to theories that reject objectivity
  (such as skepticism or relativism).
• So truth means correspondence with the facts.

16
The Coherence Theory of Truth

• A statement is true if and only if it coheres (is
  consistent) with all of the other statements of
  that system.
• Coherence theories of truth do not merely claim
  that coherence and consistency are important
  features of a theoretical systemthey claim that
  these properties are sufficient to its truth.

17
The Coherence Theory of Truth

• This has some meritwe tend to reject a statement
  that is self contradictory (or contradicts what
  we have already embraced as truth, or contradicts
  our experiences or observations)

18
The Coherence Theory of Truth

• Coherence is a necessary condition of truth, but
  not a sufficient condition.
• A statement may be coherent with one system and
  incoherent with another.
• A statement may be coherent with a system but not
  applicable to the real world.
• Two differentmutually exclusive, but
  coherentsystems are logically possible.

19
Other Truth Theories

• The Pragmatic Theory of Truth
• The Performative Theory of Truth
• The Identity Theory of Truth
• Now lets look at two important principles

20
Verification Principle

• For a statement to be meaningful (true) it must
  be either 1) purely definitional or else 2)
  verifiable by one or of more of the five senses.
  
• All other statements (theological, ethical, etc)
  are nonsense or meaningless
• A.J. Ayer (1910-1970)
• Self-refuting

21
Falsification Principle

• Anthony Flew Karl Popper
• Flew used it to challenge belief in God
• But Flew changed his mind (2004)

Karl Popper
Anthony Flew
22
Falsification Principle

• Any statement or proposition is meaningless
  unless it is subject to falsification (at least
  in principle)
• Self-refuting

23
Whats a Christian to think?

• Who should shape our convictions on these
  matters?
• Does the Bible have anything to say about
  knowledge and truth?
• The Bible has much to say about truth and about
  knowledge (Wisdom too!)
• Truth is a biblical value.

24
Integrating Science and Faith
25
Our Goals

• We hope to help you
• Understand how different people relate knowledge
  gained in different ways
• Choose the best method for relating knowledge
  gained in different ways

26
Interrelated Factors

• Worldview
• Presuppositions
• Epistemology

27
These patterns were adapted from Richard Bubes
Putting It All Together Seven Patterns for
Relating Science and the Christian Faith.Univ.
Press of America, 1995.
28
In this presentation, science refers to the
natural sciences, and theology refers to
conservative, Evangelical, biblical theology.
29
NO COMMON GROUNDCOMPARTMENTALISM

• Science and theology tell us different kinds of
  things about different things.

1
30
NO COMMON GROUNDCOMPARTMENTALISM

• Conflict is impossible by definition because
  natural science and biblical theology have no
  common ground.

1
31
NO COMMON GROUNDCOMPARTMENTALISM

• Each discipline should address only those issues
  in its own domain.

1
32
NO COMMON GROUNDCOMPARTMENTALISM

• This pattern is also known as The Two Worlds
  View or as Non-Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA).

1
33
Compartmentalism Two Worlds View or NOMA
Natural Science
Biblical Theology
1
34
BOTH ARE RIGHTCOMPLEMENTARISM

• Science and theology tell us different kinds of
  things about the same things.

2
35
BOTH ARE RIGHTCOMPLEMENTARISM

• When true to its capabilities and limitations,
  each discipline provides valid insights into the
  nature of reality, but from different
  perspectives.

2
36
BOTH ARE RIGHTCOMPLEMENTARISM

• An adequate and coherent view of reality can be
  obtained only if people (and professional
  communities) integrate these two disciplines.

2
37
Complementarism
2
38
Complementarism
BiblicalTheology
Natural Science
2
39
BOTH ARE WRONGCONCORDISM

• Science and theology should tell us the same
  kinds of things about the same things.

3
40
BOTH ARE WRONGCONCORDISM

• The inability of natural science and contemporary
  biblical theology to agree is due to human
  imperfection in both disciplines.

3
41
BOTH ARE WRONGCONCORDISM

• Both science and theology need to find new
  approaches to achieve an integrated understanding
  of reality.

3
42
Concordism
Natural Science

Biblical Theology
3
43
Concordism
Natural Science
NaturalScience

BiblicalTheology
Biblical Theology
3
44
SCIENCE FAITH IN CONFLICT

• Religion and science will always clash.
• Time, Nov. 2, 2006
• God vs. Science
• David Van Biema

Dr Paul Bloom Psychologist Yale University
45
SCIENTISTS KNOW BESTCONFLICTISM 1

• Science and theology tell us the same kinds of
  things about the same things. When they conflict,
  both cannot be right.

4A
46
SCIENTISTS KNOW BESTCONFLICTISM 1

• In any conflict, science is always right.

4A
47
Conflictism Natural Science over Biblical Theology
Biblical Theology
Natural Science
4A
48
SCIENTISTS KNOW BESTCONFLICTISM 1

• Contemporary biblical theology must be redefined
  and rewritten in order to be consistent with the
  developments and discoveries of modern science.

4A
49
THEOLOGIANS KNOW BESTCONFLICTISM 2

• Science and theology tell us the same kinds of
  things about the same things. When they conflict,
  both cannot be right.

4B
50
THEOLOGIANS KNOW BESTCONFLICTISM 2

• In any conflict, theology is always right.

4B
51
Conflictism Biblical Theology over Natural Science
Natural Science
Biblical Theology
4B
52
THEOLOGIANS KNOW BESTCONFLICTISM 2

• An understanding of the scientific description of
  the world provides us with such overwhelming
  evidence of the truth of the Bible and biblical
  theology, that we have no logically defensible
  choice but to believe them.

4B
53
Do you identify with one of these patterns more
than another? Do you think Christians should
prefer one of them?
54
THE END