Friday, February 03, 2006

Science and Religion: a few thoughts

As far as I can work out, reality is either observable or unobservable. Science uses Reason and applies it to what can be observed; Religion holds to the existence of unobservables, but uses Reason and Revelation to draw conclusions about the world around us. Revelation is the process by which that which is unobservable is communicated to the observable, and thence Reason can be applied to make the appropriate inferences.

The issue of Creation is a contentious issue amongst Christians, and certainly amongst Sola Scriptura Christians and Darwinians. According to both Darwinianism and Creationism, the Universe came into being at a finite time in the past.

Darwinianism goes hand in hand with the Scientific theory that the Universe came into being via a Big Bang several thousand million years ago and subsequently evolved into the complex system of stars and planets with the complex varieties of life that exist.

Creationism (or, more properly, Intelligent Design) states that the Universe is a matter of a few thousand years old and was manufactured by God in six days according to the opening chapters of the First Book of Moses (i.e. Genesis).

So which is right?

I wonder whether the answer lies by answering the question: is the act of Creation observable or unobservable?

Manifestly, the moment Universe began is unobservable, since this would necessarily involve the creation of the instruments of observation. Thus the observable comes into being from some unobservable event. The act of bringing into being the universe is a a vast act of Revelation, but then - as a Christian - I would say that. Scientifically we can only infer back in time from what we know now, but from Revelation we have some understanding whence we came.

That's not to say that events unfolded in the verbatim literal way that Genesis implies. Personally, the Revelation of Creation is bigger than can be written down: it's a story, but a story that illustrates that which cannot be put into words, because words themselves have a tendency to be observed with a finite meaning rather than marked with a Revelatory colour. I suppose that's why sermons are so important in Church, for then the words spoken are given a fuller meaning than when written down.

I firmly believe that God made this Universe. I can't be sure why or how. I am happy with the Big Bang as a description because I think that it fits best the facts which I, in my short career in academia, have personally observed. However, I don't believe for one minute it's the whole story.

1 comment:

Warwickensis said...

Okay, I've made a boo-boo in equating Creationism with Intelligent Design. Apologies if I've made an offence there.

Only Creationism follows the doctrine that the Creation follows the First Book of Moses, Intelligent Design merely posits that there is an Intelligent Designer!

Apologies once more, and thanks to Ed.