Science & Theology – A Synergetic Relationship

Science is the study of nature. Theology is the study of God. It is a common teaching and belief that since nature is the material world and God is immaterial, science and theology embody two totally different ways of knowing and represent, as biologist Stephen Jay Gould taught, “two completely different, non-overlapping magisteria.” In her book, Total Truth, Nancy Pearcey explains that our culture has separated "truth" into two categories. Theology fits in one category which is subjective and unverifiable. The other category is considered to be verifiable: hard, factual, scientific knowledge. The more I study science and the more I study theology, the more I find that the two categories actually overlap and that there is absolutely no need to keep them separated.

Both science and theology are concerned with knowing the truth about the world; both study the handiwork of God. One studies God’s inspired writings and attempts to interpret their meaning, while the other studies God’s creation and tries to make sense of it. Both use remarkably similar techniques! The Reverend Doctor John Polkinghorne, who has a doctorate in physics and is also ordained as an Anglican priest, notices the similarities between his two disciplines and states, “Theology, as much as science, must appeal to motivated belief arising from interpreted experience.”[1]

Both disciplines look at evidence to determine an explanation for that evidence, and then both test the explanation by seeing if new evidence will fit with that description. Wayne Grudem, in his Systematic Theology, describes the process of “doing theology”: 

1. Find all verses in the Bible relevant to the topic you want to study. 

2. Summarize the points made in the relevant versus. 

3. Summarize the teachings of the relevant versus into one or more points about that subject. 

4. Compare your summary to other writings on the subject and/or talk with others in the church about your summary. 

5. If your views are radically different from others writings on the subject, then you will need more evidence to modify or strengthen your position. 

When doing systematic theology, Grudem states:

…we are free to use our reasoning abilities to draw deductions from any passage of Scripture so long as these deductions do not contradict the clear teaching of some other passage of Scripture.[2]

Compare the above steps for “doing theology” to the commonly accepted steps for “doing science”: 

1. Collect relevant evidence. 

2. Evaluate (summarize) your evidence. 

3. Formulate a conclusion (one or two main points) based on your evidence. 

4. Submit your conclusions to a peer review process (allow others to compare your work). 

5. If your conclusions disagree with others, collect more evidence to either strengthen or modify your conclusion.

Science uses a peer review process and reproducible experiments to test the explanations. Theology uses peer review as well; others in the church cross check explanations with the latest research on the earliest recoverable Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek manuscripts. Both use something a bit different as evidence, but the process to evaluate the evidence is very much the same. Both also refer to past experts for help, as Newton and Maxwell are part of any standard science text just as much as Augustine and Aquinas are part of a theology text; both areas have their accepted doctrines. Obviously, science and theology are studying different areas and usually are asking different types of questions (as they should, since they are different disciplines), but the process of science and the process of theology are very much in harmony, and both use hard, factual knowledge.

      As I wrote about in the previous post, science itself was born out of Christianity because reasoning and using evidence is what Christians did! To the early Christians, faith was believing because of the evidence.  Christianity, as described in the Bible, is itself “scientific” as it is historically based on evidence, testing, reason, and logic. Jesus continuously gave concrete examples and signs. In Mark 2, Jesus says he healed so that you may believe; he gave signs to show that he was the Christ. He was not afraid to show physical evidence to Thomas. In Acts, Paul reasons with non-believers and Peter reminds people of the evidence they saw. John’s entire gospel is an evidential apologetic and explains his faith in his first epistle:

He opens his letter with the evidence of his own eyewitness encounter with Christ. Notice how many senses he appeals to:

What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we beheld and our hands handled concerning the Word of Life, and the life was manifested, and we have seen and bear witness and proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and was manifested to us, what we have seen and heard we proclaim to you also…

Then he closes his letter like this:

And the witness is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may know that you have eternal life.

To John, faith wasn't a blind leap. It wasn't wishing on a star. It was grounded in evidence that led to knowledge. It was certain.[3]

The New Testament furnishes its readers with evidence of its claims and implores them to investigate what has been written. Faith, as described in the Bible, is based on evidence and reason—not merely a blind, subjective leap. 

The Biblical authors repeatedly encouraged their readers to search the evidence to investigate the claims of Christianity (1 Thessalonians 5:19-21 and 1 John 4:1) so they could be convinced of the truth of these claims (Romans 14:5, 2 Timothy 1:8-12 and 2 Timothy 3:14). This encouragement is consistent with the notion that the evidence will lead us to a rational conclusion about the nature of Jesus. In fact, Jesus also encouraged his followers to consider the evidence he provided about his deity (John 14:11 and Acts 1:2-3). Christian faith is not blind. Instead, the Christian faith encourages investigation related to Jesus and to the world around us.[4]

            If you really want to understand the world and the true nature of reality, you must not limit yourself to only one domain.  There is no reason why they can’t go hand in hand, as they have historically done.  Both science and Christian Theology can teach you truth and each can enhance the other; showing you two different symbiotic aspects of the universe. You can approach both Christianity and science using evidence, reason and logic.  When you do, you will discover how much they complement and enhance each other.  In Romans, we are told to look at nature to learn things about God, while knowing about the Creator can give us a different perspective on the creation.  As Rev. Dr. Polkinghorne says it:

…science describes only one dimension of the many-layered reality within which we live, restricting itself to the impersonal and general, and bracketing out the personal and unique.[5]

If interpreted experience is to be the basis of our understanding reality, then our concept of the nature of reality must be sufficiently extensive to be able to accommodate the richness of our experience.[6]

---

[1] John Polkinghorne, Quantum Physics and Theology, Yale University Press, 2007.

[2] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, Zondervan, 1994.

[3] Gregory Koukl, Stand to Reason, Solid Ground, February 2000.

[4] J. Warner Wallace, Christianity Promotes Rational and Evidential Exploration, http://ratiochristi.org/pepperdine/blog/post/christianity-promotes-rational-and-evidential-exploration/1588?tab=all_blogs_tab#.UtGb2p5dWSo

[5] John Polkinghorne, Exploring Reality, Yale University Press, 2005.

[6] Ibid.