Christianity: Belief & ScienceRevision

AREA 1:METHODS OF ARRIVING AT HUMAN UNDERSTANDING

Revelation of God’s Nature: God showing who he is by what he does through:Scripture

General Revelation

Special Revelation

Traditions of the Church

Religious Experience

Order & Design

Revelation of God through Scripture (Bible, Old & New Testaments)

Divinely inspired or guidedLiteral, symbolic or a mixture of both

Can be read by anyone and if taken literally you don’t have to guess at what God wants

Is a complicated text and has been written by human hands that may have influenced meanings

General Revelation

Can be seen through:CreationDeliverance from suffering e.g. Exodus of JewsAwareness of his presence, conscience?

Only have to look around at beauty & order and the power that must have created it

Doesn’t have had to have been ‘God’There is a lot of violence in existence

Special Revelation

God becoming human in form of JesusVisions, dreams, appearances, miracles etc.

Jesus was ultimate revelation with God’s messageMiracles etc. point to power over laws of physicsWhat other explanation can there be?

Jesus was simply a good man – there is no proof he was God; maybe he only thought he wasMiracles etc. are just exaggerated stories or things that were misunderstood at the time due to lack of scientific knowledgePeople hear voices all the time – it doesn’t have to point to God

Revelation through the Traditions of the Church

Beliefs and practices of a particular branch of Christianity

The Church has kept its traditions for 2000 yearsThe people in the Church have been ‘called’ to represent God

The Church has changed over time and leadership has never been stable; it is mixed up with politics & culture of historyThe people in Church are only ‘human’

Revelation through Religious Experience

People have claimed to experience numinous; either sudden flash or slow realisationPeople have found meaning in major life eventsClaims of seeing visions, angels or having messages delivered in dreams; or just the feeling of an awareness

The experiences are life-changingPeople describe them as very realHappen unexpectedlyThere is a history of them happening

Peoples lives change all the time, doesn’t mean its due to GodSome experiences have led to negative things e.g. cultsWhy are they random and relatively few?Illness, drugs or a heightened state of emotion alters the chemistry of the brain producing strange reactions

Revelation through Order and Design

Universe is just right for its purposeUniverse is ordered and has regularity

The vastness and complexity of the world points to a designer – GodThe beauty & order points to a loving God

Why does the universe need a creator and if so why did it have to be God? Who created him if this is the case?Nature is full of violence and suffering e.g. natural disasters & animals having to kill to survive

Why is Revelation Important in Christianity?

We cannot understand our purpose in life if we don’t understand God’s messageThis not only affects us now but also in the afterlife

God doesn’t need to reveal himself but we are obviously important to himHe always has and always will reveal himself

All arguments are open to debate & interpretationThe ‘evidence’ is not very strong – why isn’t he more direct?How much is true and how much has been edited by human hands?

Sources of Human Understanding: Scientific Method

ExperimentObservationHypothesisResearchVerification or falsificationGeneralisationPredictionTheory or lawParadigm

All should allow replication

Uses inductive method: observations theories laws

Theories are never proven only supported.

Scientific method (cont.)

It does not ‘hold on’ to beliefs but welcomes new evidence whether it supports or rejects previously held laws or paradigmsIt changes theories to fit the evidence – not changing the evidence to fit the theory.

Takes into account all possibilitiesOther people can test and verify or falsify hypothesesLeads to laws/theories that cover similar occurrences

We can never be sure we have covered all possibilitiesExact replication may not be possible and findings are always open to interpretationEvery apparently similar occurrence may not be covered

The scientific method is a way to test our ‘common sense’ understanding of things. This is done using the deductive method i.e. what we see usually leads to assumptions. E.g.people believed the world was flat; science showed it wasn’t.complexity & wonder of nature shows that God designed it; science gives an alternative theoryThe Full Moon Effect (people’s behaviour changes); science has found no evidence to support this

Common sense based on actual experienceDeductive reasoning can save us ‘reinventing the wheel’

Common sense approaches are often not up to date People are not always open to common sense being challengedDeductive reasoning only works if your assumptions are correct so not as effective as inductive reasoning

Scientific Method is open to verification & falsification. Laws have been changed over time and will continue to do

so as more evidence is uncovered Science can only verify or falsify things within its scope

Verification is based on proper scientific enquiry Suitable scientific tests are devised to test hypotheses It gives reliable ways to understand the universe

Evidence is open to interpretation Some things are outwith scientific scope Some would argue we need mystery in our lives

Scientific Models

Science uses models to understand difficult conceptsThey can predict results in the absence of hard evidenceCan lead to tried and tested paradigms on which further testing can be based

However good a model is it is not the real thingPredictions are always open to interpretationsSome scientists find it hard to accept challenges to cherished paradigms

Scientific Objectivity

Scientists are objective meaning their views are based on solid evidenceObjectivity safeguards against scientists ‘twisting’ evidence

Evidence is always open to interpretationIt is extremely difficult to remain 100% objective. Some great scientists have followed their ‘gut feelings’ with success.

Scientific Method Summarised

It is based on rigorous, methodical approach where the ‘truth’ is based on best evidence availableEvidence always remains open to challenge and change if necessaryIt is the most reliable way of explaining the world around us

It has flaws which could mean unreliable or misinterpreted theories Can lead to competing claims and scientists are not as open to change as they might thinkIt is limited in what it can explain

Some Christian responses to the Scientific Method

Ordinary people can’t always understand scientific theoryThe meaning of life comes from our own actionsScience is anti-religionScience provides power & knowledge that is too much for humans to handleIt makes humans think they are GodScientific method is full of flaws so we should be waryScientists’ own beliefs affect their resultsA lot of scientific evidence is circumstantial not ‘real’Science involves interpretations, assumptions and leaps of logic and this weakens the scientific method.

Some Scientific Materialist Responses to Religious Belief

Religion is a dangerous delusionIt holds humanity backReligion relies on blind faithReligion is not open to questions and challengesThe contradictions and illogical things in the Bible point to it just being a storyReligious belief is extremely subjective especially religious experiences which cannot be testedRevelation is confusing, unclear, contradicts itself and is not consistent, making it unreliable

Acceptance of Both Revelation and Scientific Enquiry

Religion and science do not need to try and contradict each other; they are just different ways of understanding (NOMA)Belief in God requires faith not evidence; not blind faith but faith supported by reason and teachings Religion doesn’t have to be tested just acceptedSome people believe that religion lets them understand spiritual questions and science physical ones (NOMA)Not everything can be tested so belief/faith fills that gapThere is evidence for religious claims if you are prepared to accept it but it doesn’t necessarily mean a scientific explanation is wrong. Maybe God ‘does’ science too so the theories can complement each other rather than contradict.

Area 2: God Created the Universe

Literal Understanding

God is the creator of everythingAs in Genesis 1If its in the Bible it is trueGod has special powersThe Bible is a book of faith not science

Requires only faith to understandCan be accepted as it is with no need of interpretation or analysing

Doesn’t take into account scientific evidence that contradicts itIt is so simple it rejects the intelligence God gave manIf Genesis is to be taken literally then so should everything else in the Bible some of which isn’t acceptable today

Symbolic Interpretation

It may be true but in a symbolic wayGod’s special powers are portrayed in ways we can understandBy matching the religious claims with that of science it can still be a book of faithGod is the creator but the ‘story’ is symbolism & myth

Allows explanation of things in a more believable wayAllows the use of God-given intelligenceAccepting some of scientific explanations prevents getting to a point where faith & science clash

Aquinas’s Cosmological (First Cause) Argument

Thomas Aquinas (1224 – 1274) arguedEverything has a causeEvery cause has a causeThis cannot go back foreverThere must have been an uncaused cause to start the chainThat can only be GodTherefore God must have been the First Cause

Everything is contingent (relies on something else)God isn’t contingent, God is a necessary beingGod created everything out of nothing (ex nihilo)

Accepting the First Cause Argument

It is a matter of faithDoes away with the need that everything goes back in time infinitelyThe Argument fits in with what most Christians already believeGod is a special case so he doesn’t need a cause

Rejecting the First Cause ArgumentYou can’t say everything needs a cause except God. If that is the case why can’t you say the universe doesn’t need a cause?Quantum physics has shown some things do appear without a cause; this would do away with the need for an uncaused cause i.e. GodBy saying God is the cause of all causes means there is an even bigger creator than him which makes the problem worseEven if the universe was created why does if have to be the Christian idea of God?Maybe it was God but what’s to say he is still around?

Religious Explanations of the Origin of the Universe Summary

It is based on ‘evidence’ from the creator himselfGives a simple & understandable account of universe’s originsGives a meaning & purpose to life Suggests a creator that cares for us

Its based on belief only, with no scientific supportUses texts and philosophical arguments that are open to interpretations

The Big Bang Explains the Origin of the Universe

At this instant, matter, time, energy and space were createdIt does not require a creator – it ‘created’ itselfIt has evidence to support the theory:•Expanding Universe which implies an explosive beginning•Cosmic Background Radiation; the radioactive ‘heat’ is what scientists would expect to find from this type of ‘explosion’•Relative Abundance of the Elements: the materials present and the quantities they are in are also what scientists would expect to findThe search for the ‘initial conditions’ still continue

There is strong evidence to support the theory from a variety of scientific fields

It offers a balanced & reasoned explanation for something that happened when no-one was around to witness it

Much of the evidence is circumstantial (inferred) not empirical

It is so complex it is difficult for ordinary people to understand

Gives no explanation of purpose & meaning of life

Some Christian views on the Big Bang

The Big Bang theory is wrong; there is no mention of it in the Bible It is based on assumptions & interpretations which might be wrongThere is contradictory evidence in scienceSupporters of Intelligent Design argue there is scientific support for the belief in creation by God

Some scientific materialists views on religious belief of creation

The Big Bang theory is right and will be backed up by further evidence in the futureInterpretations of evidence are not ‘blind’; they use reason & logicThe theory isn’t perfect but the best we haveThe Genesis account is not scientifically validIt removes the need for a creator

Both Can Contribute To Understanding Of Origins Of Universe

The NOMA argument suggests you can believe in bothScience explains the physical, religion the spiritualCreation by God is outside science’s scopeChristians can accept the Big bang theory if they do not understand Genesis literallyGod may have started the Big Bang and science can explain it from there

God created Human Life

As described in Genesis 1 & 2: Adam & Eve made in God’ likeness, disobeyed god & banished from Garden of Eden

Literalists believe this word for wordTherefore Earth is only a few thousand years old

Liberalists believe it is a metaphor and allegory and only has symbolic meaningTherefore relates to spiritual not physical matters

Paley’s Teleological Argument or Design Argument

Proposed by William Paley (1743 – 1805)

As a watch is created by an intelligent designer so too must the whole universe

The universe is too complex and complicated for it to have happened by chance (Anthropic Principle)

That creator could only be God

Therefore God must exist and he created the universe

Intelligent Designer?

Accepting the Teleological ( or Design) Argument

The conditions on earth are just right for lifeSuch precise conditions are unlikely to have happened by chanceIt must have had a designerThe logical conclusion is the designer is God

Rejecting the TeIeoIogical Argument Maybe it was designed but maybe it wasn’t the Christian GodMaybe it was a team of ‘Gods’It begs the question ‘Who designed God?’Why did the universe need a cause if God didn’t?Maybe the laws of physics are ‘God’?The universe & earth are by no means perfect; sustainment of life requires the death of other plants and/or animals. How does this point to an intelligent designer? Luck rather than order seems to reign; there is no order in natural disasters. They are random acts causing suffering to innocent people.The anthropic principle says the conditions have been made perfect for life. It is the other way around - life is here because of the conditions.

Human Life Emerged as a Result of the Process of Evolution

A living thing depends on fitting its environment to survive e.g. climate, food source Those which adapted survived (through random mutation)These adaptations were passed on through the genes to next generations to ensure survivalNature selects those fit for survivalIf the environment changes only those who can adapt to the change can survive to pass on the genesThis is natural selection

Darwin had a lot of evidence for this theory e.g. fossil evidence & geographical diversity (different environments showing different adaptions for survival)Everything that is alive today (10% of all known species) has adapted to environment as it is now – any changes to environment means these will have to adapt again to survive

Darwin’s theory was based on circumstantial evidence but has since been backed up by discoveries in DNA

DNA mutates randomly; when this mutation is beneficial to a living thing it increases its chance of survival

DNA is major driving force behind evolution DNA & natural selection is therefore a ‘blind’ process that

doesn’t require a creator Life began in a primordial soup where inorganic elements

somehow became organic Humans evolved through the same process meaning we

share origins with other primates Therefore human life is just another life form

Darwin meticulously researched his theory using different disciplines such as biology & geology

Provides a working explanation of what we can see such as biodiversity & similarities between species as well as explaining extinction

Supported by recent discoveries such as DNA Since it is a ‘blind’ process there is no need for God and

therefore an explanation for God’s origins

Much of Darwin’s theory is circumstantial & inferred which leaves it open to interpretation

There are gaps in the theory such as incomplete fossil records

Doesn’t answer the meaning & purpose of life

Interpretation 1: The Bible’s Creation Story is Right

The Bible creation story is true therefore humans didn’t evolveIt is based on belief & faith and rejects scienceSome Christians accept Genesis as symbolic. It is not a scientific explanation but as a way to explain what human life is for

It is clear – if the Bible says its true then it is trueIt gives answers to the meaning & purpose of life

Uses the truth in the bible to back up the truth in the Bible – a circular argument open to debateDoes not take any scientific evidence into account

Intelligent Design

Supporters of Intelligent Design argue that there is scientific evidence supporting creation of human life by God, e.g. irreducible complexity.

There is a strong scientific basis for Intelligent DesignDoes away with the need to use only the Bible to support God as the creatorSuggests credible alternatives to the flaws in Darwinism

Scientific argument is complex and could be beyond ordinary people including ChristiansImplies the Bible story is not enoughStill doesn’t prove the Christian idea of God created life. Leads back to ‘who designed God?’ Schoolboy Objection

Interpretation 2: Evolutionary Theory (ET) is Right

Scientific materialists (SM) argue that the evidence for ET is vastIt’s the best explanation even if its not perfectSM reject theories of ID e.g. even if theory of ID are correct it doesn’t prove God was creatorSM say ID is ‘bad science’ or science interpreted in a way to suit their theory i.e. one already based on a creator, God

Interpretation 3: Both Revelation & Theory of Evolution Contribute to Understanding of the Origin of Universe

Some people accept both at the same timeEvolution may be the mechanism God used to create & regulate life on earth ET can answer physical aspects & Revelation the meaning & purpose of lifeBoth believe life is valuable and should be cherished