Has modern science disproved God? That is a rather loaded question, even if it is a common question. Christians believe firmly in the importance of the natural sciences. It is the worldview so often associated with natural science that is at odds with Christianity. Naturalism, as it is often identified, is incompatible with Christianity. But Naturalism has not, nor can it, disprove Christianity.
It is important to understand that this worldview is a theory proposed, but not fully supported. As Thomas Nagel’s recent book has argued so well, “[Naturalism] is an assumption governing the scientific project rather than a well-confirmed scientific hypothesis.” Furthermore, it is an inconsistent worldview. Vern Poythress notes the contrast between an impersonalist materialism and the longings of the human heart. He writes:
When considered in its totality, the materialist worldview is bleak and forbidding in comparison to human spiritual aspirations. We may meet people who try to hold to it consistently. But we meet many more who are influenced by it without swallowing every piece of it. They long for human significance. They find ways of adding more comfortable extra stories onto the materialist subculture of matter and energy and motion. (28-29)
The contrast lies at the foundation of the worldview. An impersonalist foundation cannot give real personal meaning to life, nor, as Nagel argues, can it explain why we have this longing. Materialism is deeply flawed at its very core. But it is from this core that many materialists critique the Evangelical doctrine of inerrancy, so we must respond it.
Because the Naturalist/Materialist position is often assumed, though not supported, it is often applied as the tool through which we read the Scriptures. So as we read the Scriptures we make decisions about how we interpret the text, what we can believe, and indeed how we should understand the whole world. Poythress adds:
If we apply such approaches thoughtlessly to the Bible, we create difficulties. In fact, we are likely to think that the Bible shows deficiencies. But the deficiencies actually belong to modern thinking. (31)
When we apply an impersonalist worldview to the personalist worldview of the Bible it will naturally create a problem in our interpretation. But that is because the Bible does not operate from that foundation! We must read the Bible on its own terms.
Next week we will look at some specific examples of how this plays out in our interpretation including examples like morality, miracles, and prophecy. The point to be insisted upon now is that we cannot impose the impersonalist worldview of Naturalism onto the Scriptures. We must read the Bible as it was intended to be read.
Sparrow & Heart Soul Care 