Probably the most frequently used objection to trusting the Bible is that it is contradicted by what we know from ScienceTM yet millions of Christians, and millions of scientists find no contradictions.
How can this be? When asked exactly what in the Bible contradicts science the usual answer is the creation story in Genesis. I’m not sure why this is so popular. Perhaps the anti-Bible people found one objection and didn’t bother reading further to see if there were any others.
Here are some objections to the creation story that I have heard.
The Bible says God created the universe, but today we know from science it was the big bang.
The problem with this statement is that the big bang doesn’t disprove God, but rather is consistent with the notion that the universe was created “ex nihilo” (from nothing). Did you know that in the first half of the 20th century, astronomers “knew” the universe had no beginning? It was a Catholic priest, Fr. Georges Lemaître, who discovered a mistake in Einstein’s theory of general relativity and claimed that the universe was once an infinitesimally small singularity. One atheist astronomer, Fred Hoyle, mockingly called it “the Big Bang” and the name stuck. Fr. Lemaître was vindicated when data from Edwin Hubble and other astronomers confirmed his theory, and Einstein fixed his equations.
The Bible says the world was created 6,000 years ago but we know from science it is much older.
The problem with this claim is that the Bible nowhere states that the Earth is 6,000 years old. That claim was made by James Ussher who suggested it in the mid 17th century, based on his estimates of how long people lived, and using genealogy given in the Bible. This is not the interpretation of most of Christianity, who understand that the Bible’s genealogical lists omit generations (there are numerous provable examples in the Bible).
The Bible says the world was flat/created in six days/etc., but we know from science the Earth is round and it took millions of years to form.
While the Bible does use language that suggests these things, no serious Bible scholars take them to be literal, nor have Bible scholars done so historically. One has only to read St. Augustine’s “The Literal Meaning of Genesis” to see what Catholics were saying in the 300s. Even today we use expressions like “the sun set” even though we know it is the Earth rotating, not the sun moving. Simply because language has evolved does not make the Bible invalid. Speaking of which…
The Bible says everything was created as-is, but we know from science that species have evolved over time.
Again, this is not something that the Bible claims, or addresses directly. It is a view held by a minority of Christians, who interpret the Bible that way. And again, you can look back even before the birth of Christ to find the Greeks talking about evolution. The theory of evolution existed a long time before Darwin. Darwin’s contribution to evolution was to claim that there was no purpose to it, which Christians object to on the grounds that we believe that the universe and science do have a purpose.
So what are some of the things the Bible actually says, that contradicts science? Nothing that I’m aware of. What does the creation story in Genesis actually claim, and what does science have to say about it?
The universe was created from nothing.
While scientists are still trying to come up with theories that disprove this, there are no scientific facts that do, and all the data we have points to a universe that has a beginning.
God is not a “divine watchmaker” but participates and cares about the world and us individually.
Since science can’t measure “caring” I don’t think it can have anything rational to say about this claim.
Everything that was created is good.
Once again, since science does not make moral judgements I don’t think it can have anything to say about this claim either.
Life was created after the universe, and there was a hierarchy from simplest to most complex life form.
I think scientists would agree here.
Humans have two original parents.
Scientific studies of the Y chromosome (which is only passed down from father to son) have suggested that there was probably a single male that is the father of all humans. Studies of mitochondrial DNA (which is passed down from the mother only) also suggest that there is a single mother to all humans. Scientists make the claim “but they couldn’t have been alive at the same time” but the truth is we don’t know that there wasn’t an earlier time when there was a single man and woman. Certainly science does not disagree.
Humans are created in the image of God.
This is generally understood to mean that man is a rational animal, and God is rational Himself. This is reflected in science by the “knowability” of the universe. Certainly we can some to understand the way things work through using our minds.
Man was meant to be in communion with God, but chose not to be.
God has not abandoned man, but continually offers chances to be reconciled to God. Another claim science can’t really address, since relationships are outside of its scope.
We have free will.
Another claim science cannot address, although some scientists claim that it is the case. But these claims are not based on evidence, but on atheist dogma. If you believe the material universe is all there is then you can’t allow for the possibility of free will, since everything must have a physical cause.
So the next time someone mentions that the Bible and science are at odds, don’t let it slide – ask them to back up their statements with facts. I bet they can’t. If they come up with something you haven’t heard, tell them you’ll get back to them and do a little research. Nobody has come up with any factual argument yet, and I doubt they will be the first.
Copyright 2014 Michael Lindner
Michael Lindner
Mike is a scouter, a science geek, a dad, a husband and a Catholic. He earns a living as a software engineer in beautiful New Jersey. In his spare time (ha ha) he muses at his blog What Does Mike Think? He is not a writer (which will be painfully obvious after reading his posts) but feels called to apologetics and evangelization anyway. You have been warned.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.