To say that science and faith are not mutually exclusive based on historical examples of the myriad scientists who were also theists is not sufficient in determining whether or not science and faith are mutually exclusive. Attempting to do so is argumentum ad hominem—just because there are examples of people did something or held to a particular view does not mean that they were rational, logical, or otherwise justified in what they advocated. They may have been, but the fact that they held a position does not in itself justify the position held.
The Real Threat to Faith Isn’t Science
Body
“most of these [Christian] beliefs contradict prevailing scientific accounts of history and the natural world. As a result, many Christians perceive science as a threat to biblical faith. They are mistaken. Scientism is the real threat, not science.” - TGC
Biblical Faith Seeks Scientific Understanding
Body
Collin Hansen talks with Hans Madueme, author of Defending Sin: A Response to the Challenges of Evolution and the Natural Sciences. - TGC
Darwinizing the Universe: A Theory That Explains Everything Explains Nothing
Body
“What if, instead of a process limited only to biology, Darwinian evolution was promoted to a fundamental law governing all physical reality? That’s exactly what some scientists have tried to do, most recently in a much-heralded paper” - Breakpoint
No, Science Can’t Provide Morals: Why the New View (Still) Falls Short
Body
“…in addition to the traditional areas of scientific inquiry and expertise, such as chemistry, physics, and medicine, many now even look to science for guidance on moral questions—and many scientists and science boosters are eager to claim they can provide it.” - TGC
Atheism and the Evidence for God
Body
“As with many atheists, Dawkins prides himself on the fact that science can provide us with all the answers. However, it is not science that proves that God does not exist but the philosophical system that Dawkins uses to interpret science and evidence, namely naturalism.” - AiG
“The existence of morality as most of us commonly define it is at odds with traditional Darwinism.”
Body
“In the preface to their book Science and the Good: The Tragic Quest For the Foundations of Morality, James Davison Hunter and Paul Nedelisky proffer the stunning admission that, ‘While the new science of morality presses onward, the idea of morality – as a mind-independent reality – has lost plausibility for the new moral scientists.
“There is no oughtness in a world that just is.”
Body
“He wrote me an eloquent letter in which he used his training in philosophy to wonder out loud if Christianity is merely a set of Jungian archetypes, a set of myth-making stories that echo something deep in the human psyche that somehow over evolutionary millennia we have found useful. …Here was my response.” - Mark Ward
Book Review – Plantinga's Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism
Amazon Affiliate LinkLesser mortals like me can’t claim to fully understand everything Alvin Plantinga writes in books like Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism. What we can do is pick up some high-protein food for thought, and possibly, along the way, improve our thinking habits in some potent ways. I read the book primarily as an audiobook, but also in the hardcover form.
