Is Christianity true? (Science versus faith in God - Part 7)
This blog is part of my series titled “Is Christianity true?” The series addresses four common objections to the truthfulness of the Christian worldview, namely concerns about: (1) the trustworthiness of the Bible; (2) the historicity of Jesus’ resurrection; (3) the compatibility of faith in God with modern science; and (4) the incompatibility of Christian truth claims with those of other worldviews.
DO THE FINDINGS OF SCIENCE INCREASINGLY POINT TO GOD? (cont’d)
“They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them…Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities…So they have no excuse for not knowing God.”
EVIDENCE FROM BIOLOGY (cont’d)
Turning from the seemingly insurmountable problems facing the chemical evolution hypothesis to the issue of complex life evolving from less complex ancestors, Darwin admitted that his theory flew in the face of huge gaps in the fossil record, particularly the sudden appearance of new life forms in the Cambrian explosion. In fact, with the passage of time since Darwin, the fossil record has become even more problematic as additional examples of new creatures suddenly appearing in the fossil record have been discovered.
In disciplines that study events in the remote past, theories cannot be tested in laboratories through experimentation and observation. Recognizing this constraint, Charles Darwin and his close friend geologist Charles Lyell articulated a forensic or historical approach for testing scientific theories. According to this method, multiple competing hypotheses are developed to explain a particular phenomenon. The task is to then determine which hypothesis best explains the observed effects. Using this approach, Darwin extrapolated from observed change within species, or microevolution (think finches’ beaks), to the non-observed change involving the emergence of new species from pre-existing species, or macroevolution.
“The creation of new information is habitually associated with conscious activity.”
Let’s apply this forensic approach to modern-day biological discoveries. As a result of the pioneering work of Watson and Crick, the discoverers of DNA, we now know that individual living cells contain billions of DNA molecules that bear information critical to life. Analogies include alphabetic letters in a written text, machine code in a computer program, ancient hieroglyphics, and radio signals. In each case, the common cause explaining these effects is mind or consciousness. Quoting Henry Quastler, a pioneer in the field of information theory, “The creation of new information is habitually associated with conscious activity.”
In fact, we know of no other cause by which one can get from chemistry to code. Material forces cannot explain discrete infusions of information at various points along the time continuum from the origin of the universe to the present day. This forensic approach makes a strong case that the ultimate cause explaining the origin of life is a transcendent mind, or a being outside the realm of space, time, matter, and energy. Borrowing a term from Dr. Stephen Meyer’s latest book, we could call this ultimate cause “the God hypothesis.”
While most scientists today agree that microevolution is a real phenomenon, there is considerable controversy surrounding macroevolution. Indeed, like the origin of life field, Neo-Darwinism is a theory in crisis. While this crisis is apparent in the peer reviewed scientific literature on evolution, it is not generally acknowledged in the classroom where Darwinism (updated to reflect post-Darwin discoveries like genetic mutation) is taught as absolute truth!
In summary, there is no conflict whatsoever between science and faith in God, there are real limitations to the explanatory power of science, and there is mounting scientific evidence supporting “the God hypothesis.”
We now turn to the incompatibility of Christian truth claims with those of other worldviews.
Photo by Hans Reniers on Unsplash
