When God and Science Mix
Republished with permission from Baptist Bulletin Nov/Dec 2010. All rights reserved.
By Liz Gifford
Challenges and Opportunities on the University Campus
Dad and Mom and their high school son or daughter sit at a table piled with college catalogs, applications, and scholarship forms. “I would really like to study chemistry or biology at the university, Dad.”
“But you know the big news stories coming out of the universities are about professors not getting tenure or even being fired because of their Christian stand on contemporary issues. What are your chances of having classes under an instructor who isn’t an atheist?”
“All I hear is how the university is a negative influence on Christians. Not the place I want to send you,” Mom adds.
“But I enjoy physics and chemistry and math, and I get good grades in those classes. I could help find a cure for cancer or work with plants and find a source of food to end hunger around the world.”
So the discussion goes as parents struggle to help their young people make the right choice of a place to study to be what God wants them to become.
Christian young people who wish to take advantage of the programs offered by a secular university, who wish to study under professors who are leaders in their areas of expertise, who want a diploma from an outstanding institution of higher learning are going to have to confront ideas that challenge their Christian beliefs. These are found in most areas of study, but highly volatile topics come under scrutiny in the sciences. Biology, archaeology, chemistry, and physics classes will force Christian young people to examine what they believe.
Two Christian men, David Boylan and Craig Wilson, have studied science and spent their careers teaching on secular campuses. They can provide an inside perspective on the rewards and challenges of being a Christian, a teacher, and a scientist in a secular university. Boylan was dean of the engineering department at Iowa State University for 18 years. Wilson teaches students at East Stroudsburg University (Pa.) to be science teachers. They are willing shared their experiences and observations, which leave us encouraged yet aware of challenges.
Boylan, a member of Faith Baptist Church, Cambridge, Iowa, has fond memories of his years at ISU. The university had a Christian faculty association with more than 120 members. “They were from most disciplines across the university. We met regularly in great fellowship. A Christian faculty member can find a blessing in just knowing other Christians are working in similar non-Christian situations. They can support each other and enjoy fellowship. And it is an opportunity for the university at large to see the testimony in the lives, as well as in the words, of those who are Christians.”
A graduate of Baptist Bible College and member of Heritage Baptist Church, Clarks Summit, Pa., Wilson finds that a variety of faiths are represented in his department. He says they have a close relationship. The campus also has an active group called University Christian Fellowship.
Both men referred to the opportunities to interact with students. Wilson has this opportunity through monthly Student-Faculty Staff Luncheons. “The purpose of those luncheons is for Christian students, faculty, and staff to get together and ask for prayer requests and then have a short devotional.” He has been able to organize and be involved in that.
Boylan points out that Christian professors can be a help and support for Christian students. Also, believers can find Christian-oriented activities on the campus. These should be an encouragement to families considering sending a young person to a secular campus to study.
Challenges
Christian professors, groups, and activities notwithstanding, a young person entering a secular university needs to know there will be adversity. Some challenges are inevitable. When addressing biological topics in both grad and undergrad courses, Wilson presents an overview of evolution and creation. He points out “that it takes faith to believe either evolution or creation. So it’s important to decide where they want to put their faith.” Students “listen intently and take down notes. Sometimes a couple stay afterwards and ask for clarification,” he says.
Wilson realizes that when taking “the specific proficiency test that teachers are required to pass to become ‘higher qualified,’ they are to ‘identify evidence that supports the theory of evolution.’” They are not asked to point out errors in evolution or to provide evidence that supports creation. This is indicative of “the bias that exists in favor of evolution and makes Christians and non-Christians alike feel that they must choose between the Bible and science.”
While the controversy presents an intellectual and moral challenge, a more personal challenge is the possibility of being attacked for Christian beliefs. Boylan has experienced such attacks. “That is a sad part about a university,” he says. He recalls that his attackers were simply expressing an individual philosophy of life. “When a Christian who is a scientist takes a position that differs from the views of those who don’t believe in God, the believer is considered a bigot or something. Some people take that seriously and use it as a way of attacking. I’ve been attacked, but that is part of the experience of being a Christian. We are to expect this. A non-believer is opposed to a believer. That has been true from Bible times down to the present.”
Opportunities
Contrary to some beliefs, scientists who are Christians are not unusual on a secular campus. Boylan says, “There were always, in my experience, professors who were identified as Christians by their lifestyle. It is a great opportunity for a person who is a Christian to be a scientist. You don’t hear about them in the newspaper, for they are not trying to force their beliefs on other people. They are living a Christian testimony and sometimes that offends people.” The university is a composite of many kinds of people. They are not all atheists; they are not all agnostics; there is room for Christians. But there are enough atheists and agnostics to cause some problems with what might be called a Christian testimony.”
Young scientists
To young people who are interested in studying science, these men have advice. Wilson strongly encourages them to enroll in a university where they can receive an excellent education in the science of their choice because there is clearly a need for Christian scientists. He suggests that they “learn how to think critically, which involves the sciences of observing and inferring. Learn to use those effectively.” He also suggests listening to Christian radio, because quite often preachers speak about philosophy and worldview. He says, “Watch the news and read the newspapers; read and listen critically. Be prepared.”
Boylan’s advice to young people interested in becoming scientists is to make sure that their own personal beliefs are established and that they don’t have questions concerning their own beliefs. He warns, “Make sure that you understand that there are oppositions in the world and understand the Christian position on those worldviews. Be strong enough so you will not waver from that position. I just read a portion in Psalm 119 that says teach me your commandments so I won’t be ashamed” (Psalm 119:5, 6). He points out that Christians should not be wishy washy about their own beliefs and that they need to be established in the Word. They have a responsibility—a responsibility to be a worthy Christian—“and that,” he says, “includes understanding the culture and staying within the bounds of culture, yet not backing away from being a strong Christian. That will show up in the life. You don’t have to be a buttonholer as a Christian. But you need to have a strong Christian life, and then you will be the greatest testimony. That is more telling than words sometimes. So I encourage anyone that wants to go into science, just make sure you understand that you are in the world and the world is not in itself a theistic world: it is an evil world. The Bible clearly teaches it: there is a worldly culture and there is a Christian culture. They interact, but one does not except [exclude] the other one in its interaction.”
Reflecting on the profession in which he spent his life, Boylan says that “science is a human endeavor directed toward the world that we live in. It’s a human endeavor. Humans carry it on, so anyone that pursues in a scientific fashion the understanding of the world in which we live can do that: Christian or non-Christian. Some people don’t believe that is true. There is no requirement to believe in God or to not believe in Him to be a scientist. Some of the great scientists of the world in the past and present are Christians.”
Parents, go ahead and help your future Nobel Prize winner fill out the application and scholarship forms for a secular university. As a part of settling your young person on the campus, seek out solidly Biblical Christian organizations in the area and visit a local church that supports the values you have been instilling in your child. Encourage your young adult to identify the professors who live Christian values, such as Boylan and Wilson, who are examples of the positive influences available on the university campus.
Liz Gifford (MA, Iowa State University) teaches English at Faith Baptist Bible College and formerly taught at Ballard Community H.S. and Iowa State University. She is a member of Slater Baptist Church, Slater, Iowa.
- 3 views
also, consider engineering. the focus is more on results suitable for industrial use (now) and not on developing theories of past eras.
So much of science is specialized research, and there is really no reason why believers cannot excel at this work regardless of the evolutionary commitments that currently dominate science. It’s mostly in the popular level literature/rhetoric that evolution plays a huge role. As far as results are concerned, it doesn’t matter much what your worldview is when you are studying how a particular protein behaves under particular conditions or how to make a chain of carbon molecules one molecule thick, etc. And—I speak as an outsider—it seems to me that even the heavily worldview-polluted peer review process would have to honor studies that are well conducted and produce significant results, regardless of the beliefs of those who conducted it.
Believers pioneered science. They should still do it better than unbelievers. Somewhere along the line we dropped the ball.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
This is easy to prove.
If you are a Bible-believing Christian, what is 2+2?
If you are a passionate atheist, what is 2+2?
Now when you start talking about why 2+2 is 4 or why it matters, etc., you quickly get to where worldview matters. However, much of science is not interested in why or why or why it matters, but simply what happens.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
But if you don’t believe worldviews overlap at all, it certainly makes sense to take the position you do.
But I submit that they do overlap a great deal, otherwise we would not agree that 2 and 2 are 4 and would not eat at the same restaurants, drive the same cars, read many of the same books, speak much of the same language—on and on it goes.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
[RPittman] Nathan and Hebrew National franks are two of the best brands on the market. They’re kosher. Does it mean that my own Christian and the Jewish world-views overlap when I eat kosher wieners?These worldviews overlap whether you eat the franks or not. But eating them does demonstrate that you agree with them that they are good food… and yes, this is overlap in beliefs. I think that particular belief doesn’t fit in “worldview” category, though.
However, the fact that both you and they believe it’s OK to eat meat is a worldview overlap.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
God created a universe in which scientific exploration can take place. Of all people who should be involved in this endeavor it should be Christians. It is unfortunate that we may have to receive our scientific education from atheists. This should be an encouragement to Christian schools to better develop their science departments. The church needs to come along side of conservative christian colleges and universities in an effort to build this much needed field.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Since he starts with a hypothesis, his worldview can be a big factor from the outset, but isn’t always.
Much of science is just about trying to build better mousetraps and it’s up to philosophers and theologians to figure out whether we ought to be trapping mice or why it matters or what it reveals about us and mice and so on.
I’m rambling, but the point is just that science is not our enemy. Some theories unbelievers have built from their science are obviously incompatible with our faith, but it’s not science that is the problem.
[RP]It really has nothing to do with Theonomy or Reconstruction (!). The work of the church includes teaching believers to apply Scripture to all of life. Jesus is to be Lord of all. We are to love Him with heart, soul, mind and strength. That includes studying the world He has made in a Christian way. Loving Him with the intellect.[NOTChip… CPHurst] The church needs to come along side of conservative christian colleges and universities in an effort to build this much needed field.This all really sounds attractive and it fits well with Theonomy and Christian Reconstruction but I cannot find in Scripture where this is the mission of the church. It seems that guys who pursue this path usually end up in some kind of theistic evolution (e.g. Vern Poythress’s Redeeming Science advocating a framework theory).
So the church does have a role in helping believers do that.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Why is it that my voice always seems to be loudest when I am saying the dumbest things?
[Chip Van Emmerik] Uh, Aaron, if I promise to agree with you, will you check the quote attributed to me in post 14?As long as you send a check in the mail also (lots of zeros recommended)!
Sorry about that. :) I’ll fix it.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
(1). It is an historical fact that the Christian Worldview created the state from which the Scientific Revolution flourished. Not to say that all of the scientists had the same conservative theology we have. It is to say that many if not most of them were theists in some fashion. They believed that because there is a God who created order they can then study that order and discover its workings.
(2). In reference to the Darwin comment. This is not to say there were not atheists, evolutionists or unbelieving scientists around before Darwin. Augustine was a Christian who served the church but he believed in an early day-age theory. What I am saying is that Darwin and the Scopes trials did much damage to the Christian worldview in terms of its contribution to understanding creation, origins and the complexity of life that we see. At the time Darwinism crushed many Christians trust in Christianities view of origins. This is where we see the divide between faith & science taking place. An unnecessary one but it happened none the less. This is part of the whole current discussion on faith & reason/science. Thankfully there is a mounted effort for Christianity to reenter the philosophical and scientific discussion about the origins of life.
(3). Of course the problem is the paradigm. No argument there. The chosen paradigm does not rule of the fact that scientists can only do what they do because God did what He did - create everything with order and purposefully.
(4). The definitive mission of the church no but part of it yes if the church is the “pillar and ground of truth”. The church has the responsibility to equip and educate believers in their faith and provide answers to the world. Since science touches on creation, origins, etc. then the church needs to be involved in some way with this. Believers are to give an answer for why and what they believe so they will need to be involved in the scientific enterprise if they are to have Bible based scientific answers to atheistic scientific assertions. I am not advocating a Theonomist or Christian Reconstructionist theory. The Christian worldview has the answers. The church is God’s light to the world. Therefore the church must get involved (thanks for the support on this Aaron!).
What do you propose as an alternative?
This is where we see the divide between faith & science taking place.I’d say it happened before that. And this is the kernel of truth in what RPittman says: there was a shift beginning with the enlightenment (which is what you are calling the Scientific Revolution?) toward a more and more exalted view of observation and reasoning. Increasingly, scientists began to believe that immanent reality is ultimate reality. Eventually naturalism (everything happens as a result of natural causes) and materialism (material reality is all that is or at least all that matters). So “modern” science came ins with “modernism” and tends to dominate today.
But not all people who do science today are “modern” in that sense and even many who are happen to be doing science of a sort where their beliefs about ultimate reality and truth are not major factors.
So the fact that many do science badly nowadays is not a reason for generalized hostility toward the discipline of science itself.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Some, in their zeal to reject the problems of the Enlightenment way of thinking, have thrown out some solid stuff along with the error and either left a huge hole in place of it or something just as bad or worse (or just incoherent) in place of it.
Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.
Discussion