Sunday, June 01, 2008

Science and Faith at War?  1.3 God is not a god of confusion

Notes from a Sunday School that begins on May 25.

Comments, corrections, and routine editing: absolutely welcomed!

An index of all posts is on the right frame.

A blog with only the Sunday School Posts is here.

Location: Grace Baptist Chapel
805 Todd's Lane
Hampton, VA 23666
Time: 10:00-10:45 am

1.3 God is not a God of Confusion

For God is not a God of confusion but of peace. (1 Cor. 14:33)
This section is really a summary and reiteration of the previous two. In those sections we discussed four topics:

  1. The Bible, which we are taking to be the perfect, inerrant, and inspired word of God.

  2. Creation, which we are taking to be God’s perfect handiwork—perfect in the sense that He made it exactly as he intended. Creation reflects the creator—it is not meant to be a deception. And, unlike virtually all other religions, as well as some enduring heresies, creation for the Christian is good, not bad. The material word is good, not bad. Our Lord had and has a physical body.

  3. Theology, which we saw was a demonstrably imperfect way to study what is perfect (the Bible.)

  4. Science, which is also a demonstrably imperfect way to study what is perfect (creation.)
We can say then that we understand the SAT-like analogy: 22
Bible:theology :: Creation:science
When we say “God is not a god of confusion,” we are stating that what is perfect cannot be in conflict. Perfection must be self-consistent. The Bible and creation may, for the most part, each speak to is own magisterium, but when they do overlap, no matter how much or little that occurs, there can be “No Final Conflict.” When apparent disagreement occurs, it is always, always to be understood as occurring between imperfect theologians (often of the armchair variety) and scientists (ditto.)

The recurring problem is that when inevitable disagreements arise on the right of this picture, Christians often state that science is disagreeing with the Bible rather than first asking whether it is just their theology that is under fire. Some scientists, interestingly enough, will agree with them, for it suits their philosophy to have their science in conflict with scripture.

At the risk over overkill, we make the same point one more time with a picture:

22 SAT “like” because, alas, these venerable constructs have been removed from the SAT.

No comments:

Post a Comment