Posted on September 14, 2012
This week, I have been doing some research for a presentation I am assigned to do for my geology class this semester. I plan to post at least some of what I find here on a later date. Some of the papers, articles, and books I’ve encountered have been fairly technical and really require me to think. The subject I picked is somewhat complicated as a whole. I am certain that I can’t possibly understand or know all there is to know about my subject, or really anything in science for that matter. No one can. So, then why do we study science? If we will never figure it all out, why even bother embarking on a seemingly endless journey?
Not all scientists have the same (or even remotely similar) answers to these questions. As a Christian and a creationist, I study science not only because it is God’s marvelous gift of our incredibly designed habitat and His creation full of intricate variety that demonstrate God’s sovereignty and omniscience, but also because He commanded us to study it. Science is part of the dominion mandate (Genesis 1:28) because exploring creation is absolutely necessary in order to have dominion over it. No European leader could rule over or have dominion over North American territories until after they sent explorers to figure out exactly what was across the ocean. It’s interesting to note that many of the original great scientists, like Galileo and Newton, were Christians who wanted to explore creation because of their faith, not in spite of it.
However, evolutionists really have no foundational reason for exploring science. In fact, studying science is actually not logical under evolutionary assumptions because it contradicts some of their foundational beliefs. There would be no reason for a person to do experiments and expect patterns (e.g. when I drop something, it falls, hence the law of gravity) if he or she believes everything is a result of accidents and random chance. Neither would they have any logically consistent reason to believe that their senses and memory are basically reliable or believe that laws of logic are universal and unchanging so that they could make a scientific conclusion from an experiment; those are all creationist assumptions that anyone must borrow in order to study science or even attempt to make a sound argument against creation. Furthermore, it would not be logically consistent for an evolutionist to try to convince a creationist of his or her position if they really believed evolution was true because it goes against their idea of survival of the fittest. Why should an evolutionist care if they believe I am wrong? Under their ideology, why disturb “Nature’s” work of natural selection? So you see, everyone can and does study science because our universe is a grand masterpiece, purposefully designed by our Creator, whether or not they believe that He created it all.