Science and Scripture
Selected Scriptures
Tonight, we continue in our series on "Is the Bible Believable?" and we come to the study of science and the Scripture; and I think this is such an exciting thing, because science is discovering what the Bible has been saying for centuries. One of the great proofs, one of the great products of Biblical inspiration is the fact that it is scientifically accurate.
Aldous Huxley made this statement. He said, "Modern science makes it impossible to believe in a personal God." Bertrand Russell, who was in the habit of making irresponsible statements said, quote, "That man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving. That his origin, his growth, his hopes, his fears, his loves and beliefs are but the outcome of accidental collocation of atoms. That all the labors of the ages are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so certain that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand." End quote. Christianity rejects all of that and has stood a lot longer than Bertrand Russell.
Others have said that as science finds explanations of natural phenomena, God becomes smaller and smaller. As science advances, and we realize that everything can be verified in a test tube and ultimately resolved to scientific fact, the necessity of God is eliminated; and once God was the Almighty, and now science is the almighty. You know, as Christians, I think we are constantly whipped this point. Believers are faced with a supposed conflict between science and the Scripture. We are told that Christianity is scientifically unrespected, that it doesn't gain the respect of a scientific world, because it makes nonscientific statements and scientific blunders; and the worldlings say that you have to choose either science or religion. You can't have both. Either the facts of science or the fantasy of Scripture, but not both; and, really, the clash goes on; and it's based on the fact that both science and the Scripture claim total authority. There's no question in our mind that the Bible claims that it is right, that it claims total authority, totalitarian authority; but science does too. G. H. Clark says, "The scientific method is the sole gateway to truth."
The scientists demand that science have absolute authority, and faith comes along and demands that revelation have absolute authority. Science says, "You can only know truth as you discover it," and the Christian says, "You can't really discover ultimate truth on your own." Romans 11:33, "How unsearchable are His judgments. His ways are past finding out." And so we say, "No man by empiricism can discover ultimate truth." It only comes when ultimate truth is revealed by God Himself. You can't trust experience. You can't trust experiment. "You can only really trust the Word of God," says the Christian; and so there's a basic dichotomy. Science says, "If it isn't in the test tube, and if it can't be done in experiment, and if it isn't an empirical, proven thing, I can't buy it. Only that which is observable to me, only that which is scientific can be acceptable." The Christian says, "Only that which is revelatory can be acceptable," because even your senses can fool you, right?
Now, there are some scientific facts that we accept, but not in contra-distinction to the Scriptures. Lemme hasten to add this thought. Science does not necessitate God. Science has figured out that everything came from a one-celled thing floating in a pond. Nobody knows where the pond came from or where the one-celled thing came from, but that's how it all started; and that thing began to change. It divided. It split again. It split again and continuously, continuously until here we are. You don't need God in that kind of system. Christianity postulates a creator God. Both of them claim to be right; and, in that, the supposed conflict lies. Lemme hasten to add this. There is no real conflict between science and Scripture. There is none.
R. N. Williams says, I quote, "A great difference exists between science and what may be called scientism, by which we mean the theories of a scientist who is wearing spectacles with philosophically-tinted lenses." End quote. There's really no real conflict between the Bible and science. You can be a Christian and still be very, very capable as a scientist. For example, you have such Christians as Galileo, Kepler, Descartes, Liedmitz, Newton, Pascal, and on and on. It is true that the Bible doesn't use scientific jargon, but that doesn't make it nonscientific. The Bible talks in everyday language. We do not disparage the Word of God and say it's nonscientific because it doesn't use current scientific terminology. The fact is, there is no contradiction, there is no real conflict between science and Scripture. The conflict comes when science stops being science and starts being religion. You see, science, by its very definition, can only deal with that which is observable, that which is reproducible; and whenever it gets outside of reproducible, experimental fact and starts trying to talk about origins and destinies, it becomes religion, because it can't be observed; and there the conflict lies.
You know, all this whole movement known as neo-orthodoxy, they've already bowed to this concept. The Bible's full of scientific error. They've already given up. So the typical neo-orthodox statement is this, "The Bible is only authoritative when it speaks on spiritual matters. When it speaks on science matters, we have to handle it allegorically and spiritually, because it's prone to error." Which means the God who wrote the Bible knew a lot about spiritual things. Didn't know anything about science, which is a very interesting thing if you believe the God who wrote the Bible also made everything.
You see, to say that the parts of the Bible that talk about spiritual things are true, and the parts that talk about science are false is ridiculous for two reasons. No. 1, it denies the inspiration of God in the Scripture. If God is God, then He knows as much about science as He does about spiritual things, right? The second thing it denies is the inerrancy of Scripture. That is, that it's properly recorded. If God wrote this book, and if God wrote it correctly, that's inspiration and inerrancy, then it'll be just as right scientifically as it is spiritually. Right? Has to be. For God can only speak truth. The New Testament says, "God who cannot lie." He knows equally the truth of salvation and the truth of science. There is no thing that He does not know.
When science sets itself against God's revelation, it ceases to be science. It becomes ignorance. It becomes an ignorant religion, and there's the conflict. You see, the scientist isn't content to just observe what's going on now. He's gotta extrapolate everything into the past and everything into the future and discuss origins and destinies, but he can't do that, because it isn't science, because he can't put it in a test tube. It isn't reproducible.
Now, watch. Science can only observe the present. That's all. The observable activity of a microscope or a telescope or a test tube, now is all he can deal with; and, of course, he's got some past records of tests and experiments and so forth that he can lean on; but when you get into pre-history, when the scientist starts going back behind recorded history and starts telling us, "You got this think happening and that thing happening in evolutionary cycles, and such and such is happening, and such and such is happening," that is not observable. There is no record of it ever written. It is not reproducible; therefore, it cannot be made a scientific test. Consequently, it becomes a matter of faith. So the scientist speculates about prehistoric origin, and he speculates about eschatological futures; but neither of those things have any record of observation. Neither of those things are test tube items. Now, if you're gonna know anything about prehistoric fact and eschatological fact in the future, the only way you're gonna know is if somebody told it to us; and somebody did; and here it is; and if you deny this, you've got nothing else but just imagination.
The word science is simply the word knowledge, that's all. It's synonymous with the word knowledge. That's how it's used in Scripture. It can only deal with present things, natural present processes. When it attempts to interpret the past, prehistory, when it attempts to interpret the future, it can't. It has to be faith.
Lemme tell you how science works. Science basically has postulated a theory that we call uniformity. Now, the theory of uniformity says that everything going on in the present at the present rate has always gone on at the same rate and will always continue to go on at the same rate. In other words, from the origins to the absolution, everything is an absolute, uniform constant. That's the theory of uniformity, so the scientist goes through his little experiment of natural processes today, and he says, "It takes so-and-so long to do this, to do this. Therefore, if we go backwards, and it took the same and the same and the same," and he extrapolates his uniformity way, way back; and, consequently, he's gotten man millions of years ago. He's got the earth billions of years ago, because he has postulated a theory called uniformity that everything goes on at the same pace in the past and the future that it's going on now.
Does he know that? No, he doesn't know that, because he has no information about it. He has absolutely zero information about it. There isn't even anything written very much further back than the Old Testament period, and people were people then, not hanging in trees by their tails or not in process of becoming people. There is nothing back there. There is no record. Man just takes the natural process of sequence today and extrapolates it into the past and then keeps pushing it back and back and back at the same constant level that he observes it today.
Well, that's fine if he wants to believe that. That's defined in 2 Peter chapter 3 verse 4. Here is the typical theory of uniformity. The false teachers taught it in Peter's day, and they're teaching it today. They say, "Where is the promise of His coming? You keep talking about Jesus is coming. Where is He? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation." Now that is a statement of the theory of uniformity. Why, they're extrapolating the present processes back from the beginning of creation. Everything's always gone along the same way...
Now, if a scientist wants to hold that theory, that's fine. He can do that. He can actually hold that, and he can defend it. He can say, "You see? When I go back and I see the processes today, and I go back and I find a bunch of rocks, and I know how fast the changes take place, and I see the changes in the strata of the rock, I figure they've gotta take this many million of years, and this many million more years, and this many million more years to make those changes when I calculate it off the basis of change that takes place in my observations today." And so he fits everything into this limitless past and limitless future. He's figuring everything will always go like it's going now. Everything always has gone like it's going now. That's uniformity; and he puts everything into that - the evolution of life, the evolution of galaxies, the evolution of chemical elements, the evolution of everything; and you can't really prove he's wrong. I mean you can't go up to the guy and say, "You're wrong, fella. I wanna prove to you you're wrong." The reason you can't is because those events are not reproducible. You can't reproduce those things. There's no way. They're not subject to scientific checking. He only believes in uniformity because he's got the faith that that's right, not because he can ever defend it. No way. It is simply a matter of faith that uniformity has been constantly true.
You say, "What's the scriptural view?" Well, look at it here. "Ohhhhh," they say in verse 4, "all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation...Oh, really?...For this they are willingly are ignorant of it: by the Word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water...Now watch...By which the world that then was was overflowed with water and perished. The heavens and earth, which are now, by the same Word, are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the Day of Judgment and perdition of ungodly men."
He says, "Those people who are saying all things continue as they were have forgotten that that's not true. Have they forgotten the Flood?" And those people that think that all things are gonna continue as they were at the same pace. Have they forgotten the fiery Day of Judgment? You see what the Bible says? The Bible says you better believe in catastrophism. You could explain all the strata. You can explain all the scientific facts and data and fit it beautifully into the system that God has set forth in His Word, so it boils down, folks, really to whether you wanna believe in a uniformity theory that you can't prove, or whether you wanna believe in catastrophism, which the Bible defends.
Now do you see what I'm saying? There's no conflict between science and the Bible. There's only a conflict on a moral basis between a man and God. You can't argue either case. You can't argue catastrophism, 'cause you can't reproduce it, but you can argue that a man is really fighting against God. I'll tell ya, the guy who is the uniformitarian, who's got all that constant going, in my mind, he's got greater faith than the man who believes the Bible, 'cause he hasn't got anything to believe. At least we have the Bible. The conflict, then, is not science and the Scripture, but scientism, philosophical science. Science as religion and the Word of God. One scientist said on the science newsletter that I read, he said, "I reject the idea of a transcendent God, so what other option do I have? That's why I believe in it."
The final decision is moral. Henry Morris says, and I quote, "The Bible does provide a perfectly sound basis for understanding physical processes. It serves well as a textbook on science within which we can satisfactorily explain all the data of science and history. The issue is not - the issue is not between science and the Scripture. The issue is whether a man wants to submit to the Word of God or does not, and it boils down to Romans 1:28, which defines man in these terms: "They did not like to retain God in their knowledge." And so having dumped God, they had to come up with some explanation. Having rejected His revelation, they came up with the only other option. If God didn't make it, then it just happened...
You say, "Well, then there really is no conflict? What about all of the scientific things that we've learned? Does the Bible say those things? Aren't there scientific errors in the Bible?" Lemme show you some things in the Bible on the subject of science. Now, get in mind that the Bible's ancient, and we're gonna be dealing in the Book of Job, which goes way back; and we're gonna be dealing with some things that were spoken in the Word of God that are just astounding when you think about how late in man's history man discovered them scientifically.
Now, let's look at several things. First of all, the basic principles of science. Now, all scientists agree, and I say that somewhat hesitatingly, the majority of them do, that several things are necessary as basics. First of all, science must deal with things, and that is matter. Science secondly must deal with happenings. That is energy, and, thirdly, science must deal with a matrix in which those things happen. That is space-time, hyphenated. So the basics of science are matter, energy, and space-time. That's a fairly simple catalogue. Any respectable scientist would agree to that. The universe, in essence, then, now mark this, must be a continuum of space-time, matter, and energy. Science tells us that one of those cannot exist without the other. You cannot have matter existing without energy and existing without a place for it to exist. Do you see what I'm saying? All three have to be together. The continuum must have existed simultaneously from the beginning of life, says science.
You know something remarkable? In Genesis 1:1, you have it all right there. "In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth," includes all those things. It includes the space-time matrix, energy, and matter. The very first verse in the Bible has God creating the three basic dimensions of science simultaneously, and all scientists of respectable quality would agree that those three things are basically necessary. Once the universe had been created, its processes, say scientists, were designed to operate in an orderly fashion. All the different phenomena of nature was ordered by and sustained by these forces, and science says the forces continue and continue and continue and continue. No further creation was needed, and, you know, that's what the Bible says, too? You know, there is a block of matter and energy that is created, and it continues and continues and continues and continues and continues. It takes different form, but it continues. Energy is never totally lost. Matter is never totally lost. The same continuum goes on and on and on. There's no need for later creations, and that's exactly what it says in Genesis 2:2, "God ended His work which He had made." God, in the right simultaneous beginning, put all the right things together; and when He put it together, He stopped and creation ended right there; and science agrees that there was the initial beginning of these things; and then, out of that, came the cycle of reproduction; but energy and matter have continued.
The complete cessation of creative activity has been inadvertently recognized by modern science as the first law of thermal dynamics. It's the law of the conservation of mass and energy, that the universe converses mass and energy. It is the most universal and the most certain of all scientific principles. Science has shown that there is nothing being created in the known universe now. There are things changing and energy affecting matter and matter affecting energy and so forth and so on, but nothing is being created now, and the Bible says that when God ended His work, He ended it, and it fits the scientific fact...
Lemme show you a couple of interesting verses. Isaiah 40:26, "Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, who bringeth out their host by number. He calleth them all by names by the greatness of His might, for He's strong in power...listen to this...not one faileth." There is the law of the conservation of mass and energy. When God made it, He said, "It will not cease to exist. It will not cease to exist." Conservation, the first law of thermodynamics; and Nehemiah 9:6, "Thou, even Thou, art Lord alone; Thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, all things that are in it, the seas and all that is in them...now watch...and Thou preservest them all." You see again the statement that the continuation of the existence of mass and energy is part and parcel of God's creative work. Scientists, as I said, inadvertently thought they discovered the first law of thermodynamics. They really just discovered Isaiah 40 verse 26.
Lemme give you another one. Back in the Old Testament in Ecclesiastes 1 verse 9, listen to this. "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be." You get that? "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done, is that which shall be done; and there is no new thing under the sun." Did you get it? There again is the continuation of all of this. "Is there anything whereof it may be said, 'See, this is new?' It hath been already of old time which was before us." That's right. When God created the totality of mass and energy, and science says it was in a unit. Of course, they it occurred evolutionary cycle as a unit. We say God made it, but notice the agreement at that point. Ecclesiastes 3:14, "I know that whatsoever God does, it shall be forever; nothing can be put to it, nor anything taken from it. That which hath been is now, and that which is to be hath already been." Isn't that amazing? The Word of God is absolutely accurate in defending and defining the first law of thermodynamics, the conservation of mass and energy. Spontaneous generation can't happen. It never has. It never will.
Then there's the second law of thermodynamics, and this is the law of increasing disorder. It says that, though there is never the loss of mass and energy, its ability to produce and to make productive contribution breaks down and breaks down and breaks down, and finally becomes random. Disorder instead of order. All processes finally will cease, and the universe will be dead, science tells us. You say, "Does that fit Scripture?" Sure does. Do you know God didn't make the world with the second law of thermodynamics operating? God made the world, and He look at it and said, "It is...what?...it is good." But when man sinned, the second law of thermodynamics came into being. Science has never been able to figure out how that law works or where it came from. We know where it came from. It came from the fall of man. When man sinned and fell, Genesis 3:17, God said, "Cursed is the ground," and that was simply the symbol of the curse that stretched everywhere. The heavens have even been cursed, and you know who runs around up there with all of His angels. Safe.
Lemme show you something in Romans chapter 8 if you want a good explanation of where the second law of thermodynamics came from. It's Romans 8:20. "The creation was made subject to vanity, not willing, but by reason of Him who hath subjected the same in hope, because the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know the whole creation groans and travails in pain together until now."
There we have basically that law, that the whole creation is in disorder - that it is breaking down. This is the law known as entropy, the breaking down of the productivity ability or capacity of matter and energy. I hasten to add, however, folks, that, because of that passage right there, it says the breakdown's only temporary. Say, "What do you mean by that?" Well, the Lord's gonna come and create a new heaven and a new earth with no curse. Are you ready for that? No more curse. No more death. No more tears. No more sorrow. No more crying. No more pain. No more regrets. No more exile. No more trouble. No more hurting. No more destruction. No more decay. No more unrighteousness. No more sea. No more temple. No more night. No more sinners...A lotta no mores.
God's gonna end the breaking down random disorderly character of the universe and recreate a new heaven and new earth just like the one He made the first time before the fall, and it'll have not operating in it the second law. But notice, the second law of thermodynamics is completely explained by the curse that came upon man; and from the very beginning, the fact of earth's disorder and random and breaking down is clearly outlined in the 3rd chapter of Genesis. Amazing.
Lemme give you another interesting area, and those were just generalities. Have you ever studied the area of hydrology? Well, I hadn't until I got out all the encyclopedias and started studying it, 'cause there were some interesting Bible verses that I knew must be related to it. Hydrology is basically the science that deals with the waters of the earth. Water is evaporated up into the atmosphere, collected in the clouds, and then redeposited on the earth in the form of rain and snow, and then certain amount of it evaporates again, and goes through the same cycle. Other of it flows into the runoff, into the lakes and the streams, winds up in the ocean, evaporates from the ocean, and the cycle just keeps going on and on and on. Part of the rain and show that falls seeps into the ground and, therefore, we have the water table that's in the ground which provides water, as well.
So this whole cycle of hydrology and the hydrological cycle of water being carried up and dropped back down and so forth and so on really puzzled the world until the 17th century. In fact, until the 17th century, people believed in subterranean reservoirs - that in the middle of the earth, there were huge inexhaustible reservoirs of water. That that's where springs came from, just kept bubbling and bubbling out of these reservoirs. They didn't believe that water could seep through soil and create those reservoirs. They didn't believe there was any way to replenish them, so they figured they must be mammoth things. Men like Mariotte and Perrault and Halley from England came along in the 17th century and opened up the modern concept of hydrology where water is taken up into the clouds, redeposited, seeps into the earth, creates the reservoirs of water in the ground, as well as runs off and fills the seas, etc., etc. Science had discovered and studied this. Evaporation, transportation, and precipitation, etc.
Well, you know, if they'd just read Isaiah 55, they'd had the whole thing. They didn't need to wait till 17th century. Listen to Isaiah 55:10. "For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there without watering the earth." Now wait a minute. It says, "They do not return there." There's the cycle, isn't it? They don't return there until they've done their job. God deposits the r