Does Science Disprove God?
Is the End of Science the Beginning of Discovering God?
A Scientist looks at the End of the World
Each talk will engage with Biblical passages, with a particular focus on Acts 17:16-34, which recounts Paul's visit to Athens and his speech on the Areopagus. [This is the subject of some earlier posts].
Does Science disprove God? No. But, it also does not prove his existence. Due to its practical naturalism Science is silent about the existence of God. Hence, we need to look outside the natural sciences to find whether there is a supernatural being, what is the character of this being (if it exists), and whether the being has acted in human history. I wish to proclaim this "unknown God" as the God who raised Jesus from the dead. More to follow...
That's good, Ross. Look forward to reading more of your thoughts on the matter.
ReplyDeleteThere certainly seems to be an expectation out here in layman's land that if God is to be proved, it must be by scientific definition through a scientific discipline. As a society we have come to believe that given sufficient time and resources, "science" can do anything. Rather than viewing scientists as human beings who are highly skilled in their vocation of examining, interpreting and predicting the natural world, we see you (scientists) as infallible, perhaps even prophetic figures who provide answers and explain life to us. The climate debate is the first time that I have ever seen people challenge the findings of scientists and be given any public credibility.
Your point about science being in essence an empirical discipline is one that needs to be clarified in our apologetics. Trying to examine theology with scientific method is like trying to measure hope with a slide rule.
PS: that is not to say that there is no intersection between science and theology. Your post on scientific success (July 21) is a good example of how science, worldview and theology influence one another.
ReplyDeletePsalm 19:1
Dear Damien,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughtful comments. There is just one minor point I should clarify, in response to your statement:
"The climate debate is the first time that I have ever seen people challenge the findings of scientists and be given any public credibility."
I think those challenges are largely ill informed, unhelpful, and inappropriate. I do not think those challenges deserve the "public credibility" they receive. I recommend looking at the blog [written by a Christian] www.skepticalscience.com
which discusses these issues in more depth.
Only scientists should challenge scientists about science. Anyone can challenge them about the political, philosophical, or theological implications of their science.