Christianity: Science and Belief

Christianity: Science and Belief Revision – things to go back over and over and over and…

(both use observation, draw conclusions from evidence, have an element of bias, require interpretation, etc BUT one is extremely personal and religious experiences cannot be re-enacted to confirm they were real, experiments can) Revelation and Scientific Method Make sure you know the similarities and differences between the methods of both revelation and science

Scientific method is a systematic approach to understanding the world in a rational and verifiable way Scientific method involves observation, hypothesis, experiment, verification/ It is based on evidence and experiment It focuses on the desire to challenge and evaluate all truth claims It presupposes that the world is intelligible and orderly It aims to put nature to the test It uses the processes of induction, deduction and verification Provides data which can be independently tested by other scientists. Provides evidence/information of a provisional nature which is subject to change in the light of new evidence/ discoveries Describe the scientific method 4KU

The sense of meaning, value and purpose in human life is provided by religion and is often related to the concept of God or other spiritual aspects so religion is necessary to do this. We also need a set of moral values/principles to live by … science cannot give us this as it is not in this ‘business’ Issues which are beyond the scope of science e.g. beliefs about good and evil, existential questions, the question of God …. are not scientific Religion operates at the personal, individual, subjective level and not with the universal … as science does …therefore it is much more meaningful If you add religious beliefs and values to scientific ideas you can get a much more complete picture than just science on its own Scientific bias not always objective Falsifiability - scientific statements are tentative “Scientific method is no more reliable than revelation”How far would Christians agree with this statement?

Creationists – These are extremely fundamental Christians who take the Bible literally (, rejection of modern science, God would not lie). Liberal Christians – Those who are ‘regular’ Christians in Britain today who use the Bible to give meaning and purpose to life, but would accept scientific evidence as showing the way God ‘got things done’ Viewpoints

Bible = 100% true as comes from God and God would not lie (response is the contents of Bible interpreted by fallible humans) Reject BBT = it says billions of years, young earth theory says 10,000 ish Reject Evolution = God created a Fixity of Species, not changing ones Reject Evolution = says we came from animals and are not special, Bible says we are special, image of God, soul so cannot be. More on Creationists

Scientism – ‘Hard line’ scientists who give no room at all to belief. Truth is in the proof. Other scientists – not all scientists are like this. You get open minded scientists who are not religious, but may believe there are limits to what science can find out. You also get religious scientists (in the past many major scientific breakthroughs have been by scientists motivated by wanting to find out how their God did things, or to understand the world God had given them)

God created the world over a period of time …. Timescale varies between Genesis 1 and 2 … human beings were created as the final part/climax of creation over 6 days In Genesis 1, human beings are created last after all plant and animal life In Genesis 1, male and female are created together In Genesis 2, the humans are created first and other life forms follow. The man is created first and the woman is created from the man’s rib In Genesis 2, God took some soil from the ground and breathed life into the man who became a living being Origin of life is as per evolutionary theory In what ways do Christians describe the origin of humanlife?

Take note of the differences between Genesis 1 & 2 – 2 different stories from different times, cultures, and naturally with different emphases. Remember the Bible is a collection of books (not one book by one person, more of a complex library) Used for origin of universe, origin of life, and purpose of life arguments – creationists believe it is literally true, liberal Christians take it in context of the history and draw meaning from it Bible

The Biblical account states this and, as it is inspired by God, it should be accepted at face value as true/accurate. The Bible is understood as being without error in historical, scientific and spiritual matters and so should be interpreted literally (except when a symbolic meaning is clearly intended). The Bible is the word of God and if it says God created the world in 6 days then that’s what it means. If you take the Bible literally then it saves complications; you don’t have to decide what bits are true and what bits aren’t – they are all true as it’s “God’s word.” Having faith means believing things which you cannot prove to be true. People who question the truth of the Bible are not showing much faith. It’s easier to believe in what the Bible says than the complicated explanations of science. The Bible is right and science is wrong. Why might creationists believe the Biblical account of the origin of the universe isaccurate?

Examples: Moses on Mount Sinai. Abraham Mother Teresa The supreme revelation of God in Christ. Revelation means that God has taken the initiative in revealing something of his attributes to humans. Theology would be impossible without a self-revelation of God. Revelation is a supernatural act of self-communication – a purposeful act on the part of God. Explain the importance of revelation for Christians

• General – ‘revelatio realis’ –revelation in nature, in human consciousness and in the providential government of the world. General is rooted in creation, addressed to human reason. It finds its purpose in the realisation of the end of his creation – to know God and enjoy communion with Him. Special– ‘revelatio verbalis’ – a revelation embodied in the Bible as the word of God Special is rooted in the redemptive plan of God – is addressed to man as sinner and can be understood by faith. • Special revelation gives knowledge of mysteries – Trinity, Incarnation, Redemption. It is not rationally demonstrable but must be accepted by faith The only proper way to obtain perfectly reliable knowledge of God’s attributes is by a study of God’s self-revelation in Scripture. Revelation through the works of God – nature – God as designer. Revelation through the word of God – scripture providing truth in all matters of experience including history and science.

To be used for Origin of Universe questions If asked KU on Cosmological / FC A then try and explain it using the Three Ways from Summa Theologica if you can’t remember it copy the next slide!!! (, all drawing conclusion of God as First Cause / Unmoved Mover) Remember objections and possible replies. First Cause Argument (Aquinas)

The universe itself is the most vital piece of evidence for the existence of God. If God does not exist the world as we know it cannot be explained. 1) Everything that moves is moved by something else. This cannot be infinite or the movement would not have started in the first place. There must be an ‘unmoved mover’ – God 2) Everything has a cause. There cannot be an infinite number of causes therefore there must be an ‘uncaused cause’ – God is the First Cause 3) Nothing can come from nothing. Something only comes into existence as a result of something that already exists. There must be some ‘necessary being’ that exists of itself – God. In what ways does the cosmological argument answer thequestions about the origins of the universe?

There does not have to be a First/final Cause to the universe – it might have come into existence spontaneously with no actual/first cause The First Cause of the universe may not be God … it may be a natural event If everything has a cause, then God must be caused by something, you cannot just stop at any point in the chain and randomly call this God Just because individual things within the universe have causes, it does not mean that the world/universe itself has a cause Just because every human being has a mother it does not follow that the universe has a mother This is too simplistic an argument … God is far greater than we can ever explain with our finite logic. Explain two criticisms of the cosmological argument.

Bertrand Russell If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. It is unreasonable to say that everything has a cause except God. The universe may not have a cause at all. How can we know that the universe needs a cause? The only thing we know for sure is that the universe exists David Hume Everything in the universe appears to have a cause, but the creation of the universe was a unique event and did not have any witnesses so we cannot say if it needed a cause or not.

It was NOT an explosion in space – there was no space to explode in! The ‘explosion’ contains all space and time – we don’t even know if there is an ‘outside’ or what it would be like, just that it is not space and time as we experience it. Remember words like singularity, expansion and cooling, 12-15 BILLION years, etc Big Bang Theory

The universe began with an “explosion” called a singularity around 12-15 billion years ago. After about 3 minutes, particles were produced (neutrons and protons) which combined to form nuclei the key centers of atoms. About 500,000 years later atoms finally came into existence. In another 500,000 years the atoms produced expanded and cooled and some clumped together as a result of the force of gravity and eventually formed galaxies out of which came suns. Clouds of gas developed which then spun under the force of gravity. This produced heat which led to the first stars and out of these came the elements of hydrogen, helium, carbon, oxygen. These chemicals eventually produced more stars and planets and this resulted in solar systems, including our own, about 4.5 billion years ago. These solar systems gradually cooled over millions of years to produce the planets which we have today. Describe the Big Bang theory.

Heat. Red shift of galaxies. Microwave background radiation. Primordial elements. Spread and distribution of galaxies. What evidence is used to support the Big Bang Theory?

In what ways is the Big Bang Theory compatible with the cosmological argument? Big Bang suggests a beginning. No pre-existing matter. Something cannot come out of nothing. Something had to cause Big Bang. Cause was God.

Agree It explains the origins of the universe without the need for a God. It is based on scientific evidence, not faith – it can be proved. Quantum physics shows that the Big Bang could have come from nothing so there is no need for a First Cause. Disagree God could have caused the Big Bang. It is open to the same basic challenge as the existence of God – if nothing can come from nothing, who caused the Big Bang? The Big Bang is still a ‘theory’. “The Big Bang theory is an effective challenge to the First Cause argument.”

Fits with Origins of Life questions Remember for KU on Teleological / D A to give in-depth step-by-step account Paley used human eye as evidence of design Know criticisms and replies Design Argument - Paley

A special application of the Cosmological argument. Infers the existence of God from the presence of order. Order is seen as a mark of design. Coincides with a revival of interest in natural theology. Analogy is between the universe and a man-made machine – Paley’s watch. Human eye cited as evidence/comparison. Causal link = watch 􀃆 watchmaker 􀃆 God Just as design apparent in watch could not have happened by chance, so ‘design’ in universe – including living creatures/humans – demand a designer to explain them. Swinburne: order means world runs according to regular laws. God responsible for scientific laws – the explanation for the orderliness of the universe. This is called the Anthropic Principle FR Tennant – Aesthetic Principle Explain how the Teleological Argument uses observation of the world to support Christian belief in God

Explain the Design Argument for the existence of God The analogy of the Watch. • If someone walking over a heath, stumbled against a stone and asked how it got there, they might say it had always been there. • But if they found a watch they might say that its various parts are complex and do/must have a purpose. • Also the watch must have had a watchmaker – someone who had designed it as a complex machine. • The universe, like the watch, gives the impression of a vast designed machine. • All machines are the product of intelligent design – they have been designed by someone superior in intelligence. • Therefore the designer of this complex universe must also be a superior intelligent being whom we can call God. • Additional arguments would be acceptable.

Agree The complexity of the world must point to a designer (examples of human eye, bucket orchid, human brain etc.) It is not reasonable to believe that the debris from the Big Bang would form such complex things in the universe – therefore there must have been a designer. Life is too awe-inspiring and complex to be the result of chance, therefore the belief that God created the universe gives life special meaning Disagree Comparisons used to explain the design argument need to be similar. Analogies used are based on assumption and not fact. There is evidence of bad design in the world, so perhaps this is down to chance rather than design. The universe doesn’t need a creator, maybe it has always been there. Relies on a leap of faith – the universe was designed therefore it was God who designed it. “The Design Argument has more strengths than weaknesses

Evolution • No need to discuss development in to much detail • Explain life developed from simple single celled organisms to more and more complex ones • The ones best adapted to environments survive • Also competition for resources gives a regime of ‘survival of the fittest’ • The ones that are best adapted and survive the best have differences that make them better – these differences happen at a genetic level in DNA. • Random genetic mutations give an organism an advantage or disadvantage that can be passed on to offspring. • Over thousands of years these changes ‘take hold’ and species can change and survive, or change and die out. • Not all members of a species will change, so evolution happens with ‘branches’ and is not linear (so we have not descended directly from primates!)

“For some Christians there is no contradiction in believing that God created human life and also believing in the theory of evolution.” Can this claim be justified? • Evolution can be seen as a creative process with God behind it. • Evolution shows the power of God and enhances belief. • Evolutionary theory explains how life developed, revelation explains why (complementary) • Religious and scientific truth are different and should not be confused • Anthropic principle supports existence of an intelligent designer

Acceptance by Christians that there is random chance but that the rules were formulated by God. • A theistic interventionist approach suggests that evolution is acceptable but God intervenes directly. Body of Adam result of natural selection from other species, but the soul created directly by God. • Evolution is the mechanism by which God creates and operates. • Some people – Vitalism - (Bergson) sees the action of God within the evolutionary process. • Evolution is purposeful (Peacocke) – God’s activity determines the ‘final causes’ of everything.

Christianity: Science and Belief