There are some that criticize the Biblical Christian worldview because they see Christianity as being mythical. As a Christian I was taught to walk by faith and not by sight. That concept is very difficult for some to grasp because if they cannot see, touch, or taste it then it doesn't exist. I feel having science along with the God's grace leading the way you have the best case
In J.P. Moreland’s, Christianity and the Nature of Science, he discusses some of the basic presuppositions of science and points out how science alone is unable to explain the universe. 3 Therefor, nonbelievers contradict themselves by believing the universe has a natural cause despite the lack of observational evidence to support their theory. Moreland seems to wish for a world in which religion and science can completely understand each other, however it might be a detriment to Christian faith if such were true. The majority of the Bible depicts natural occurring events, however the Christian God is capable of miracles and phenomena that should not be understood further than His all-knowing wisdom and power. Therefor, the Christian response to scientific investigation should be to examine and understand to the extent of
‘Science can purify religion from error and superstition; religion can purify science from idolatry and false absolutes. Each can draw the other into a wider world in which both can flourish…We need each other to be what we must be, what we are called to be’ (Pope John Paul II). Throughout history, from the times of Galileo Galilei and his proposition of a heliocentric universe, to Charles Darwin and his Theory of Evolution, the debate between religion and science has been heated and controversial. Although the argument continues today, a middle ground has emerged which raises the question of duality between the two. Whilst a contextual understanding of the Judeo-Christian story of creation is compatible with modern scientific theories,
He says that “evolution (…) can only be doubted by those who are ignorant of the evidence or are resistant to the evidence. (…) By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification.” Another biologist and geneticist quoted in Moran’s piece is R.C. Lewis. This man has written many papers on the subject of evolution and completely agrees with Moran’s thesis. These are just a few of the credible scientists Laurence Moran utilizes in his essay in order to prove that evolution is indeed a fact.
Many scientists believe that science and religion should not entwine. Scientists often keep religion separate from their work. Humans like you and I, turn to religion for an answer, for hope. Like Goodall, I believe science and religion are not different from each other but simply the way a person’s views the world as. Whether God created this universe or if they is a scientific answer to the creation of this universe, it is not as important than our future.
Perspectivalism differs from the first two in that it states that it is impossible for accepted scientific theory to be in conflict with religion. Perspectivalists believe that science and religion describe the same realities but in different ways. They deal with the same things but tend to ask different questions about them. The fourth and last model for relating science and religion is harmony. In this model the harmonizers position is that religion and science go hand in hand and that they coexist with each other.
Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection gives us an alternative way to explain the complex functionality that leads to Paley thinking that a designer has left his mark on the universe. However, the anthropic principle helps prove God’s existence. The Big Bang theory has strengthened the case for God, as has the theory of evolution. In fact when we consider all the physical conditions that the universe had to possess for humans to evolve then there seems to be a conspiracy to fix the
Christian Worldview Paper: Scientific Method Vikki Gitlin Liberty University Coun 503 LUO Research and Program Evaluation Christian Worldview Paper: Scientific Method The search for knowledge and truth, knowledge being the acquisition of facts and truth being defined as “that which accords with known fact or reality” (Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary, n.d.), has been a human endeavor throughout recorded history. The scientific method is a valid process in the search for knowledge, but not the only one and in itself incomplete. The a priori belief that all knowledge can be discovered through experimentation with the tangible and concrete errs in many ways says nothing of truth, which is our response to the knowledge gained.
Introduction One aspect of the contemporary debate between science and religion is related to humans’ acquisition of knowledge and truth. An individual’s worldview, or explanation of the world and an application of this view to life, plays a key role in this debate. Scientism is the belief that the most accurate knowledge comes from the scientific method (Gousmett, 1996). Conversely, the Christian worldview recognizes that God is the source of all truth (MacArthur, 2006). While on the surface these worldviews conflict, this paper argues that there is a role for both.
Science was central to the 18th century “Englightment Project", as the belief in science over religion became more important. Science was seen as a provider of true and objective knowledge about the world, which could be used for progress. So the early modernist sociologists thought the same scientific principles could be applied to the understanding and betterment of society. Positivists believe that it is possible and desirable to apply the logic and methods of the natural sciences to the study of society. Society is like the nature, an objective factual reality; it is a "real" thing made up of social facts that exists "out there", independently of individuals.