Modern Science and its Christian Basis

There is a common misconception nowadays that atheism is essential for science, and Christians are somehow automatically eliminated from scientific fields. Darwin's Flying Monkeys© insist that naturalism and atoms-to-atheist evolution are science. Truth is, there are Christians and biblical creationists active in scientific fields.

Credit: RGBstock / Krzysztof Szkurlatowski

The idea that naturalism is essential for science is based on presuppositions rooted in scientism. This view is self-refuting. For science to operate, conditions need to be reliable and consistent. The biblical creation science worldview consistently furnishes the necessary preconditions of intelligibility, but in atheistic and evolutionary worldviews, science is impossible — they must tacitly admit that their views are flawed, and must stand on our worldview!

"But Cowboy Bob, you creationists are science deniers!"

Not hardly! We deny bad science, and erroneous philosophies that are utilized by secularists. If you study on it, you'll find out that the Bible not only makes science possible, it encourages science. Also, while some folks way back when did some science stuff, but when the sciences were being corralled, the founders and developers very often were Bible believers.

Recently, Professor Mike Klymkowsky of the University of Colorado–Boulder, uploaded a blog titled, ‘Go ahead and “teach the controversy:” it is the best way to defend science.’ In this he laments the unwillingness of some to accept what he claims are “rigorously established scientific conclusions,” one of which, of course, is evolution. This, he believes, is due to the failure to realise that “a foundational principle of science is that the natural world can be explained without calling on supernatural actors”. Also part of the problem, he thinks, is the belief in “the existence of a supernatural entity that cares for people, at least enough to create them”.

Much of the trouble, he argues, has arisen from a failure to teach science properly. However, he says that the solution is only to teach the controversy if “teachers understand the science and its historical context”. Sadly, there can be no doubt that it is Professor Klymkowsky who does not understand these.

To finish reading, click on "Remembering the Christian roots of science". You may also like to see "An Improper Environment for Science".