Why is the science community so opposed to creationism?
It is important to distinguish between the terms "science" and "scientific community." Science is a discipline concerned with observing, experimenting with, and explaining phenomena. The scientific community is composed of the living human persons who participate in this discipline. The distinction is important, because there is no logical contradiction between science and creationism. Science is a generic term for a type of study, while creationism is a philosophy applied to the interpretation of facts. The scientific community, as it exists today, holds naturalism as the preferred philosophy, but there is no overt reason why naturalism should be preferred by science over creationism.
In general, there is a perception that creationism is "unscientific." This is partly true, in the sense that creationism entails certain assumptions that cannot be tested, proven, or falsified. However, naturalism is in exactly the same predicament, as an untestable, unprovable, non-falsifiable philosophy. The facts discovered in scientific research are only that: facts. Facts and interpretations are two different things. The current scientific community rejects, in general, the concepts of creationism, and so they define it as "unscientific." This is highly ironic, given the scientific community’s preference for an interpretive philosophy—naturalism—that is just as "unscientific" as creationism.
There are many reasons for this tendency towards naturalism in science. Creationism involves the intervention of a supernatural being, and science is primarily concerned with tangible and physical things. For this reason, some in the scientific community fear that creationism will lead to a "God of the Gaps" dilemma, where scientific questions are shrugged off by the explanation, "God did it." Experience has shown that this is not the case. Some of the greatest names in scientific history were staunch creationists. Their belief in God inspired them to ask, "How did God do it?" Among these names are Pascal, Maxwell, and Kelvin. On the other hand, an unreasonable commitment to naturalism can degrade scientific discovery. A naturalistic framework requires a scientist to ignore results that do not fit the established paradigm. That is, when new data does not correlate to the naturalistic view, it is assumed to be invalid and discarded.
There are distinct religious overtones to creationism. Science is only as objective as those who participate in it, and those persons are just as subject to bias as in any other field. There are those who reject creationism in favor of naturalism purely for personal "moral" reasons. In fact, this number is probably much higher than would be admitted to. Most people who reject the concepts of God do so primarily because they disagree with some perceived restriction or unfairness, despite claims to the contrary, and this is as true for those in lab coats as those in coveralls.
In the same way, an unfriendly attitude in the scientific community has had its impact on the perception of creationism. Science has benefited from creationist contributors for centuries; yet today the scientific community, at large, takes a hostile and condescending attitude towards anyone who doesn’t take a naturalistic perspective. This open hostility towards creationist views, and religion in general, creates a strong incentive for persons with those views to avoid scientific study. Those who do often feel compelled to remain silent for fear of ridicule. In this way, the scientific community has degraded and "pushed out" a segment of the population, and then has the audacity to claim that a lowered percentage of creationists in their ranks is evidence of naturalism’s superior scientific merit.
There are also political reasons for the scientific community’s hostility towards creationism and religion in general. Christianity, more so than any other religious system, places immense value on every individual human life. This causes tensions with the scientific community when that concern for life gets in the way of some type of scientific process. Christian values tend to act as a brake on experiments or positions that cause harm to people, or that destroy or damage human life. Examples include embryonic stem cell research, abortion, and euthanasia. In other cases, Christian values butt heads with secular ones when science promotes certain sinful activities by making them easier. While naturalistic scientists may see this as an unnecessary hindrance, they should consider what happens when scientific research is conducted with no regard for morality or conscience. Echoing this idea was actor Jeff Goldblum’s character in the movie Jurassic Park. He stated, "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should."
There is also a level of competition between the scientific community and the religious community over power, producing additional tensions between science and creationism. As even some leading skeptic scientists have admitted, there is a tendency for the scientific community to position itself, even subconsciously, as a priesthood. This secular priesthood has the wondrous and elite knowledge that the laymen need for salvation, and cannot be questioned by any outsiders. In plain terms, religiously tinged ideas, such as creationism, impinge on the scientific community’s claim to superior knowledge of the universe.
While there may be many reasons for tension between the scientific community and creationism, there are plenty of reasons why they should be able to coexist peacefully. There are no logically valid reasons to reject creationism in favor of naturalism, as the scientific community has done. Creationism does not inhibit discovery, as evidenced by the titans of science who believed strongly in it. The derisive attitude spewed at creationists has diminished the number of capable and willing minds in many fields. Creationism has much to offer science and the scientific community. The God who made the universe revealed Himself through it (Psalm 19:1); the more we know about His creation, the more glory He receives!
The word philosophy comes from the Greek word philosophia, which means “love of wisdom.” The study of philosophy is about using rational argument and critical thinking to analyze the way human beings think and know and perceive the world around them—both the physical world and the abstract world of ideas. Questions like “what is real?” and “can the truth be known?” and “what is beauty?” are all philosophical questions. As lovers of God and believers in Jesus Christ, we should love wisdom (Proverbs 4:6; 7:4), and there is therefore nothing wrong with a Christian studying philosophy. A study of philosophy is good and proper insofar as it furthers a pursuit of truth. The book of Ecclesiastes delves deeply into philosophical matters, dealing as it does with several different worldly philosophies before concluding that a philosophy that fears and obeys God is the best (Ecclesiastes 12:13).
All necessary questions pertaining to God, eternity, and the godly life are answered in the Bible. However, as a field of academic study, philosophy can be enlightening and beneficial in one’s dealings with the world. It is fascinating to study how men have thought through the ages about the nature of reality and their purpose (or lack thereof) in the cosmos. It is as equally fascinating to find that various philosophers throughout history have hit upon biblical truths, sometimes unwittingly.
An understanding of the various philosophies of men is a valuable tool in evangelism. It helps to know where people are “coming from” and to have an idea of why they think the way they do. Does this person subscribe to Spinoza’s version of pantheism? Has he been reading Hobbes? Does he lean toward rationalism, subjectivism, or existentialism? An evangelist with some knowledge of philosophy can more readily engage individuals who care about such things and meet them where they are. Paul gives a great example of this as he was able to engage the philosophers on Mars Hill because of his familiarity with Greek writings (Acts 17:28). He also quoted a Cretan philosopher to make a point in Titus 1:12.
Faith is often seen as a “non-intellectual” pursuit, something understood with the spirit and the heart and not with the mind. Some people—even some Christians—go so far as to say faith is opposed to reason, as if faith were necessarily irrational or anti-intellectual. If it doesn’t make sense, that’s okay. But the Bible presents faith in God and in the gospel as being grounded in reality. We believe in what is real; our faith is founded upon historical happenings recorded by eyewitnesses to extraordinary events. Luke writes of the “many convincing proofs” of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 1:3). The ministry of Christ “was not done in a corner,” as Paul points out to a skeptical king (Acts 26:26).
The idea that faith and reason are in conflict goes all the way back to ancient times. The Greek culture, the birthplace of philosophy, could not understand the Christian message, which seemed irrational to them. As Paul said, the preaching of the cross was foolishness to the Greeks (1 Corinthians 1:23)—an intimation of the limitations of human philosophy. Man-made philosophy, while a valid field of study in its own right, can never arrive at the truth of the gospel on its own. Paul warned of giving heed to “opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge” (1 Timothy 6:20) or “so-called knowledge” (NLT). Much of secular philosophy falls into that category. We need God’s revelation to see the truth. “By faith we understand” (Hebrews 11:3).
Without God’s revelation of the Bible, man in his natural state cannot understand the things of the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:14–16). Wisdom does not come from the natural mind because man’s mind and his reason are fallen; that is, they are affected by sin. Wisdom is a gift from God (James 1:5). To be truly able to think rationally, a person must be introduced to the ultimate source of wisdom, which is God Himself. We need “the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16). Through faith, we rely on God’s direction and not simply our own wisdom (Proverbs 3:5–6).
Christians can and should study philosophy if led in that direction, but, as in all things in life, the study must be carried out in submission to God. Philosophy can be used to build beautiful and enlightening arguments based on what is revealed by God to be true, or it can be used to deconstruct and confuse a fallen mind that trusts itself rather than its Creator. We praise the Lord for Christian philosophers through the centuries who have exerted a positive influence in the world of philosophy and have pointed people to the truth: Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, Kierkegaard, and others. We are also indebted to more modern thinkers such as C. S. Lewis, Alvin Plantinga, Norman Geisler, Francis Schaeffer, and William Lane Craig, who have continued to prove that Christian theology more than holds its own in the study of philosophy.
