|
Home
Topics
About Science & Faith
Apologetics
Archaeology
&
Anthropology
Astronomy
&
Cosmology
Bible & Science
Creation
&
Evolution
Education
Environment
Ethics
Historical Studies
Mathematics
Origin of Life
Philosophy
Physical Science
Psychology &
Neuroscience
Science &
Technology Ministry
Teaching & Research
Worldview
Whole-Person Education
Youth Page
Publications
JASA/PSCF
Articles
Book Reviews
ASA/CSCA Newsletter
Index
Recommended Current Books
_____________
Most biologists and geneticists seem to have concluded that science and faith
are incompatible, but few who embrace that conclusion seem to have seriously
considered the evidence.
From my perspective as director of the Human Genome Project, the scientific
and religious world views are not only compatible but also inherently
complementary.
Hence the profound polarization of the scientific and religious perspectives,
now glaringly apparent in the fields of biology and genetics, is a source of
great distress.
Hard-liners in either camp paint increasingly uncompromising pictures that
force sincere seekers to choose one view over the other.
How all of this must break God’s heart! The
elegance and complexity of the human genome is a source of profound wonder.
That
wonder only strengthens my faith, as it provides glimpses of aspects of
humanity, which God has known all along, but which we are just now beginning to
discover.
--Francis
Collins |
The Physical Sciences in Christian
Context
Biology (genetics,
origins)
Chemistry (atomism, astrology, green chemistry) Geology (age of earth,
earthquakes)
Physics (energy, big bang theory, causality,
global warming, purpose)
The
physical sciences frequented interacted with Christian culture during the early period of their
development into separate scientific disciplines. At times, Christianity acted as
catalyst or, as an inhibitor to the development of a discipline - sometimes both. In
some instances science was subordinate to theology, in others the reverse.
A mixed bag to be sure and one closely related to time and place.
So - beware of generalizations.
In the west, Christianity was part of early scientific
culture because the Church dominated religious and public life
- and the universities.
As the universities became independent of clerical control
and scientific disciplines began to emerge, religious ties became more subtle
or were deliberately avoided as undesirable.
Today, Christians in the sciences generally do not sanctify their work
with Biblical references but they are often called upon to comment on often
controversial social questions that have a scientific dimension
that that may be informed by Christian faith. These might include items such as
"the big bang," "global warming," " life on other worlds," "chaos theory,"
"altruism" and so on. Recently a study has appeared suggesting that religious belief influences how
the public regards
aspects of
nanotechnology.
************************
Owen Gingerich, The Harmony of Nature
Presented at the United Nations General Assembly 66th Session Dialogue on
Harmony of Nature New York, 18 April 2012
Professor Edwin Judge,
Christianity
and Science The relationship between a biblical "Worldview"
and modern Science.
(8 minutes)
The following articles are chosen to exemplify the diversity of potential
interactions.
Biochemistry
BY THOMAS BURNETT, ON FEBRUARY 3RD, 2011 God And Nature Series
 Julie's research subjects, southern ground crickets (Allonemobius socius)
For most of her life, Julie Reynolds has been fascinated by insects, and
when she went off to college, she thought they would make a great subject of
study. Julie majored in biological sciences at the University of
Alabama-Huntsville and focused on ecology. Her undergraduate research
examined the effects of microgravity stressors on crustaceans, and through
these studies she became fascinated with the ability of animals to adapt to
extreme environments.
Excited by these studies, Julie entered a master’s .
. . → Read More: Think
it’s cold outside? How do insects survive the winter?
Biology
genetics
BY EMILYRUPPEL, ON MAY 11TH, 2011
Doug Lauffenburger looks like the kind of guy who might love a good mystery.
Or be in one.
His bone white hair falls just short of thick round glasses as he folds his
hands and ponders the best way to answer a question. In his office, light
from slatted windowpanes stair steps across the large L-shaped desk behind
him, where neatly organized stacks of paper await Doug’s attention.
The question he’s currently turning over in his mind: What
inspired you to combine your lifelong training as a chemical engineer with
your love of biology? After
a few moments, Doug responds, “In contrast to engineering, biology has
always been very mysterious. It’s unpredictable.”
CC-BY-SA FR; CC-BY-SA-2.0-FR.
But,
he says, it can be more predictable now that he and scientists like him have
been studying the most basic components of life not as
biologists, but as engineers. Doug is head of the Department of Biological
Engineering at MIT, one of the newest and fastest growing scientific fields,
which marries the elusive, hypothesis-driven elements of the life sciences
with the more data-based, analytical fields of engineering and technology.. full article
Dennis R. Venema, "Genesis
and the Genome: Genomics Evidence for Human-Ape Common Ancestry and Ancestral
Hominid Population Sizes." JASA 62
(September 2010): 167-178. The relatively new and rapidly expanding
field of comparative genomics provides a wealth of data useful for testing the
hypothesis that humans and other forms of life share common ancestry. Numerous
independent lines of genomics evidence strongly support the hypothesis that our
species shares a common ancestor with other primates. Additional lines of
evidence also indicate that our species has maintained a population size of at
least several thousand individuals since our speciation from the ancestors of
other great apes. This article will provide an overview of genomics evidence
for common ancestry and hominid population sizes, and briefly discuss the
implications of these lines of evidence for scientific concordist approaches to
the Genesis narratives.
Francis S. Collins, "Faith
and the Human Genome",
PSCF 55.3:142-153 (9/2003).
Despite the best efforts of the American Scientific Affiliation to bridge the gap between science and faith, few gatherings of scientists involved in biology include any meaningful discussion about the spiritual significance of the current
 revolution in genetics and genomics. Most biologists and geneticists seem to have concluded that science and faith are incompatible, but few who embrace that conclusion seem to have seriously considered the evidence. From my perspective as director of the Human Genome Project, the scientific and religious world views are not only compatible but also inherently complementary. Hence the profound polarization of the scientific and religious perspectives, now glaringly apparent in the fields of biology and genetics, is a source of great
distress. Hard-liners in either camp paint increasingly uncompromising pictures that force sincere seekers to choose one view over the other. How all of this must break God’s heart! The elegance and complexity of the human genome is a source of profound wonder. That wonder only strengthens my faith, as it provides glimpses of aspects of humanity, which God has known all along, but which we are just now beginning to discover.
Origins
This theme is already treated
here and
here on our site. On this page we examine broader
questions starting with the Smithsonian Institution Human Origins Initiative
presented in conjunction with the March 2011 opening of the David H. Koch Hall
of Human Origins at the the National History in Washington DC. As a 5 star
visitation stop for students and the general publication it represents a
significant teaching point on origins and the broader application of the
Darwinian explanation for the diversity of life to evolutionary psychology and
sociobiology.
What does it mean to be human? offers an attractive
description of the exhibit and a thorough picture of the field ranging
from the latest discoveries to teaching methods - and
religious
perspectives
Physics
Alan Guth, A
primer on big
bang theory
Challenging but readable
Recent News Items!
Causality
William R. Wharton, "The Importance of Cauansality in Quantum Mechanics," PSCF 57 (December 2005): 268-278.
Christian theology preferentially favors some
philosophical interpretations of quantum mechanics. By using a case study of
stationary states of atoms, this paper examines the various interpretations. The
preferred interpretation is that all localized events in space-time parts of
chains of contiguous events traversing space-time at a rate limited by the speed of light. This is the process of becoming, i.e., the creation of reality. It is
usually not deterministic, leaving room for many first causes that are the initiation of new causal
chains.
Ben M. Carter, "The Limitations of Mathematics in Assessing Causality," PSCF 57
(December 2005): 279-283. 'From its inception in the sixteenth century, natural science has
sought to construct a complete mathematical model of physical reality. This goal was based
on three assumptions: (1) that mathematics was equal to the task; (2) that humans, insofar as
they perceived the world, perceived it as it is; and (3) that the universe would reveal itself to be
fundamentally fairly
simple. Today we recognize that not only are all three of these assumptions
flawed, their flaws are interrelated and, because of that, formulating a complete mathematical
model of physical reality may be beyond our ability. In this paper, I discuss this development in
light of William Wharton’s work and close with a comment on what this might mean for
scientists who are also Christians.'
Chaos
John J. Davis,
Theological Reflections on Chaos Theory,
PSCF 49:2 (June
 1997): 75-84.
 This paper reviews
the historical origins of chaos theory and some of its key features, and then
reflects theologically on the implications of this theory for a Christian view
of the world. It is argued that chaos theory does not represent a threat to
Christian faith, but in fact provides new ways of understanding the richness and
complexity of God's creative work and providential ordering of the physical
universe.
Purpose
John W. Hall, "Chance
for a Purpose," JASA 61(March 2009):
3-11.
In our popular understanding, chance implies a lack of purpose.
Consequently, the presence of chance or stochasticity in some physical and
biological processes has led to the inference that the universe has no purpose.
But we ourselves construct systems with stochastic features for our own uses.
Several such systems were investigated to elucidate how the set of possible
outcomes of a stochastic process is related to the global and local purposes of
the system. One observation is that when every possible outcome is compatible
with a particular purpose, the outcomes may be described as
“purpose-equivalent.” This and other insights are used in investigating the
relationship of two created systems with what we know of God’s purposes. These
are the physical processes that produced the distribution of matter in the
universe and biological evolution. How stochastic processes relate to other
forms of divine action is also discussed.
The unseen in science and religion
Hyung S. Choi, "Knowledge of the Unseen: A New Vision for Science and Religion Dialogue,"
PSCF 52.2 (June 2001): 96-101.
While contemporary physics
and cosmology take seriously the knowledge of invisible realities, the
discussion of the unseen in religion has been largely neglected in the recent
science-and-religion discussion. Neglecting the issue in theology is ultimately
self- defeating since God is considered the Unseen. In light of contemporary
understanding of the unseen in science, we contend that that there are
significant parallels between scientific and theological claims concerning the
unseen. The epistemic distinction between the seen and the unseen does not
necessarily imply the ontological demarcation between the natural and the
supernatural. New heuristic frameworks such as a multi-dimensional model are
suggested for more holistic and dynamical understanding of reality that includes
both the seen and the unseen.
Origin of the Universe
Perry G. Phillips, "The
Thrice-Supported Big Bang," PSCF 57(June 2005): 82-97.
One cannot dismiss the Big Bang as “just a theory.” Various lines of evidence
confirm the “hot Big Bang” as the best model for the origin of the universe. The
most widely known piece of evidence is Hubble’s Law (galaxy redshifts), but the
universal abundances of light elements and the cosmic microwave background
radiation add convincing support to the hot Big Bang model. This paper discusses
these three lines of evidence with emphasis on the last two. Theological
implications of the Big Bang are also discussed. Among ancient Near Eastern
cosmologies, only the Bible presents the universe as having a beginning ex
nihilo. Two historic alternatives to the Big Bang that avoid a
beginning are presented and rejected. Finally, Gentry and Humphreys have
proposed young-earth creationist models contrary to the Big Bang. We find their
galactocentric cosmologies fail scientific and theological scrutiny.
Chemistry
Going Algae-Green
BY EMILYRUPPEL, ON JULY 29TH, 2011
Algae.
Even the word sounds slightly slimy. “Al-gae”
— especially when articulated slowly, is a sort of squishy, guttural
utterance —and when one imagines the subject of these syllables, themselves,
they seem a rather fitting appellation. To accompany their aural ooziness,
many visual and somatic properties of algae make them organismae-non-gratae
for anyone with whom they come in contact. A lot of folks frankly dislike
the idea of the green stuff murking up their decorative Kio ponds, lining
their local swimming holes, or even staring up at them from the label of
their daily vitamins bottle.
Not biologists. Or chemists, or environmental
scientists, for that matter. To them, algae are one of the most useful and
versatile organisms in the universe — especially on this planet, which is so
full of animals breathing the oxygen algae pump into the atmosphere and
drinking the water that algae help strip of excess carbon dioxide and
inorganic nutrient waste.
Especially on this planet, whose sovereign
species is at the dawn of a global energy crisis.
Over the past century, algae have gone from
being a vastly under-appreciated ecological and nutritional resource to
becoming recognized for all of their redeeming qualities, and thus (of
course) put to work as a health supplement, as an eco-friendly fertilizer,
as an energy source, and as a no-engineering-needed air and water purifier.
more
atoms and
atheism
J. W. Haas, Jr., "Atoms
and Atheism: The changing ways that Christians have
 viewed
the nature of matter" (May 2007).
Some of
the most prominent figures in history have struggled to identify the nature of
matter - including Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Galileo, Descartes, Boyle, Newton,
and Einstein. The twists and turns of this 2400 year tale demonstrate the
interplay of religion, philosophy and science in developing our understanding.
In the end, Atomism (without philosophy) won the day because it was necessary
for a coherent scientific view of the world and (for Christians) did not
conflict with the biblical doctrine of creation that displaced the speculations
of the Greek philosophers.
Geology
Logic, Time, and the Divine
BY EMILYRUPPEL, ON JUNE 6TH, 2011
Ask anyone in ASA—becoming a scientist while remaining a Christian requires
a lot of questioning.
Most Christians in science have to find a way to reconcile what the Bible
literally says with what science tells us about God’s creation, but Bob
Geddes has faced the opposite challenge. He became a minister after working
for fifteen years as a geologist, and upon entering seminary, he had to
wonder whether his logical, scientific method-based approach to answering
questions and solving problems would be compatible with the more mysterious,
subjective role of a spiritual guide and counselor.
Fortunately, God works in mysterious and logical
ways, and Bob found that the methods of research and inductive reasoning
that he acquired as a scientist were just as useful when he switched from
studying minerals to being a minister.
Bob grew up in the Presbyterian church and fell in love with rocks on the
stony beaches of Lake Huron, where his family sojourned in the summers. He
went to college at the University of Western Ontario for geology, and after
obtaining his master’s degree with a specialty in glacial deposits, Bob
worked for the Minerals Division of Gulf Oil using glacial materials to
trace out substances like uranium, gold, and base metals .
Full Story
PCA Geologists Report on the Age of the
Earth, Modern Reformation, 2010, vol. 19, no. 3, pages 6-9.
How old is the earth?
Does an honest reading of the opening chapters of Genesis confine creation
to six days a few thousand years ago, or does it allow for an origin of much
greater antiquity?
These questions are hardly new. Scientific assertions
suggesting an alternate interpretation of the
length of creation began
more than 200 years ago, well before the days of Charles Darwin. With
a
debate more than two centuries in the making, one might reasonably expect
that Reformed
scholars long ago resolved the issue. In fact, the
much-sought resolution has proven elusive. In
1998, the Presbyterian
Church of America (PCA) commissioned a Creation Study Committee
(CSC),
made up of both Bible scholars and natural scientists, to consider the
relevant Scriptures
in light of the various existing interpretations and
scientific evidence. The report, submitted after
two years of
investigation, did not recommend a definitive answer, but
did at least
conclude that it is possible to believe both in an ancient earth and the
inerrancy of Scripture.
a recent discussion of the Age of the Earth Question....
Steven M. Smith, Denver RATE Conference (Thousands ..Not Billions) (September 2007)
A geologist provides a detailed report on a conference dealing with the age of the earth sponsored by the
Creation Research Society.
PSCF
59 (June 2007): 143-146)
a scientific examination of
RATE
and Radiometric Dating
..
RATE
group
Responds to the Isaac Essay Review,
PSCF 60
(March 2008): 35-36.
Isaac
Replies to the RATE response,
PSCF 60 (March 2008):
36-48.
Kirk
Bertsche,
Intrinsic Radiocarbon?
PSCF 60 (March 2008: 38-39.
J. Brian Pitts,
Nonexistence of Humphreys’ “Volume Cooling” for Terrestrial Heat
Disposal by Cosmic Expansion PSCF 61 (March 2009):
23-28. The young-earth RATE project posits
accelerated nuclear decay during the Flood. To dispose of heat, Humphreys
appeals to cosmic expansion and Einstein’s general theory of relativity. However, cosmic
expansion is irrelevant to terrestrial physics. The static gravitational
field on Earth conserves terrestrial energy and so is not a heat sink.
One can understand why the relevant gravitational field is static from
either a matching problem or an averaging problem. In the averaging
problem, one averages Einstein’s equations over cosmic distances to get
effective field equations for cosmic parameters; these equations tend to
differ from Einstein’s equations due to nonlinearity. The conserved
terrestrial energy is derived rigorously using the divergence theorem and
tensor calculus. Difficulties with gravitational energy localization might
be due to an unjustified assumption of uniqueness, as Peter Bergmann hinted
long ago.
It is recalled that unwillingness to posit miracles in Noah’s Flood was
largely a later seventeenth-century rationalist Protestant innovation,
making the Flood story empirically vulnerable and contributing to its
ultimate rejection.
Consider the following stories. In 1991 a dispute arose between the EPA and
the National Water Well Association (NWWA) concerning the amount of payment for
a national mapping system of ground-water resources project done by the NWWA for
the EPA.1 Rather
than take the case to litigation, the NWWA agreed to pay $203,273.50 to the EPA.
In addition, the executive director and the finance director of the NWWA
resigned.
In a 1990 issue of Ground Water, an article described a case of data
falsification and scientific fraud perpetrated by a hydrologist with the United
States Geological Survey.2 A
review board discovered that this individual "did knowingly falsify scientific
data and forge colleague review memoranda", "had falsified scientific data for
his Ph.D.", and "forged letters of reference as part of an application for a
faculty position."
In 1993 a headline on page 1, of the business section of the Denver Post
read, "CH2M Hill accused again."3 The
subheading read, "Ex-worker said he was told to lie." The article reported that
the company had come "under fire in a March report by the Environmental
Protection Agency's inspector general for $40 million of questionable charges,
including Denver Nuggets tickets and a $15,000.00 office party."
Finally, while working on an underground storage tank closure project, the
president of the company for which I previously worked showed up on site. We had
just finished removing the overlying concrete and were preparing to excavate the
tank. The president talked to the project manager who was performing the
excavation. When the project manager returned to the excavation, I asked what
the president had to say. His reply shocked me: "Take a couple of loads of dirt
out (for disposal) so that we can turn a profit on this project." The
president's own words demonstrate that the motive was money. Since the
excavation had barely gotten started, it was unknown whether there was any
contaminated soil which would need to be disposed of . ....Full
Article
Global Warming
Thomas Ackerman,
Global Warming:
Scientific Basis and Christian Response, PSCF
59 (December 2007):250-263.
In this article, it is my goal
to address two broad themes. The first is the scientific basis of climate
change, which I address by answering a set of science questions: 1. Is climate
changing and, if so, on what time scale? 2. Do we understand the role of
greenhouse gases in climate and climate change? 3. What is the impact of human
activities on greenhouse gas concentrations compared to those of natural
processes? Can these activities impact global climate? 4. Can we predict
climate change during this century? What confidence should we have in such
predictions? The second theme is how evangelical Christians are responding to
this issue. I attempt to categorize these responses under several headings. I
end with my own personal response.
Loren Swartzendruber,
Global Warming-An Anabaptist Responds in Sermons,
PSCF 59 (December 2007): 265-267.
oil crisis
World Oil Reserves at 'Tipping Point'
ScienceDaily (Mar. 24, 2010)
ScienceDaily (Mar. 24, 2010) —
>
Glen Morton, "The Coming Energy Crisis,"PSCF 52 (December 2000): 228-229.
For as long as the oil industry has existed, there have been those who claimed that the world will soon run out of oil. Such claims have usually been attacked as being too pessimistic. And they were. One would seem to be a fool to say the same thing today. However, some fundamental laws of nature that cannot be avoided will show their teeth during this century. Sometime between 2004 and 2020 the world oil production will peak around thirty billion barrels of oil per year. After that, a slow but inexorable production decline will occur, creating a major societal impact enhanced by an increasing world population and the rising standards of living in the third world.
Glen Morton, "The World's Oil Supply Revisited," PSCF 57 (June 2005): 129-30.
the flood
Theologians Need to Hear From Christian Geologists About Noah's Flood
by Ken Wolgemuth, Gregory S Bennett, and Gregg Davidson,
(2008)Lecture given to the Evangelical Theological Society New Orleans, Louisiana
November 18, 2009
A very readable paper offering a useful approach
to the Genesis account.
Evolution: Education and Outreach,
(3 June 20010) Abstract
Half of US respondents to the 2006 General Social Surveys
did not believe in the “Big Bang” origin of the universe;
they were closely correlated with those who did not believe
in human evolution. Religious fundamentalism is the major
predictor of both disbeliefs. Low education and political
conservatism have lesser but independent effects. The notion
of continental drift (plate tectonics) faces relatively
little opposition from religious fundamentalists, and
according to survey responses, its validity is widely
accepted, more so than the fact of a heliocentric solar
system.
By Robert C. Newman,
Interdisciplinary Biblical Research Institute,
Biblical Theological Seminary
ABSTRACT: Because
of the tension which has developed between the scientific
and the evangelical communities in the past century and a
half, Bible believers are often (rightly or wrongly)
suspicious of the discoveries and theorizing of modern
science. This has led to a rather widespread attraction to
theories viewed as crackpot by scientists and other educated
people. Some examples are discussed and strategies proposed
to protect Christians from looking unnecessarily foolish
before the watching world.
Dating Methods
in Science :
Strata, Fossils and
Age of the Ear
How the Earth was made a Discovery Channel 10 part video series on earth history
Historical Geology 1 (10) Video 9 min
Historical Geology 2 (10) Video 9 min.
The remainder of the series may be accessed at youtube Arthur V. Chadwick, A Modern Framework for Earth Sciences in Christian
Context (Copyright 2004) Offers a quick survey of the various subfields and something of
the struggles of Christians who work in them.
Earthquakes
Why We Need Earthquakes
Without them, the planet couldn't support creatures like us.
CT April 2011
The problem of theodicy—why bad things happen to good
people—predates Christianity. Writing around 300 b.c., the Greek philosopher
Epicurus framed the problem this way: God is believed by most people to be
infinite in his power and also in his goodness and compassion. Now evil exists
in the world and seems always to have existed. If God is unable to remove evil,
he lacks omnipotence. If God is able to remove evil but doesn't, he lacks
goodness and compassion. So clearly the all-powerful, compassionate God that
most people pray to does not exist.
This old critique has been revived by Bart Ehrman in God's
Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question—Why We Suffer.
Theologians over the
centuries have responded to questions about the existence
of evil by pointing out that man, not God, is the author of moral evil. Evil in
this view refers to the bad things that people do to each other. Moral evil is
the necessary price that God pays for granting humans moral autonomy....Full
Article
“PCA Geologists on
the Antiquity of the Earth,” Modern Reformation, 2010,
vol. 19, no. 3, pages 6-9.
8 professional geologists support an old earth.
Kirk
Bertsche,
Intrinsic Radiocarbon?
PSCF 60 (March 2008):38-39.
J. Brian Pitts,
Nonexistence of Humphreys’ “Volume Cooling” for Terrestrial Heat
Disposal by Cosmic Expansion PSCF 61 (March 2009):
23-28. The young-earth RATE project posits accelerated nuclear
decay during the Flood. To dispose of heat, Humphreys appeals to cosmic
expansion and Einstein’s general theory of relativity. However, cosmic
expansion is irrelevant to terrestrial physics. The static gravitational
field on Earth conserves terrestrial energy and so is not a heat sink.
One can understand why the relevant gravitational field is static from
either a matching problem or an averaging problem. In the averaging problem,
one averages Einstein’s equations over cosmic distances to get effective
field equations for cosmic parameters; these equations tend to differ from
Einstein’s equations due to nonlinearity. The conserved terrestrial energy
is derived rigorously using the divergence theorem and tensor calculus.
Difficulties with gravitational energy localization might be due to an
unjustified assumption of uniqueness, as Peter Bergmann hinted long ago. It
is recalled that unwillingness to posit miracles in Noah’s Flood was largely
a later seventeenth-century rationalist Protestant innovation, making the
Flood story empirically vulnerable and contributing to its ultimate
rejection.
Top
|
