I must admit that I really have very little aptitude in the left brain. There is little else I am worse at than math, and when I was younger, logical thinking was not a strong suit. I was also never much good with science, and never developed an appreciation for it until recently. Now, I consume high amounts of scientific information; however, since science was never a strong point, I am only able to digest it in small amounts. Quantum physics and astronomy are huge pursuits of mine, nowadays. There is something almost magical about science, yet its laws can be quite cold and restricting, except perhaps in the case of quantum mechanics, which is almost reminiscent of science fiction. At times, science shows that what was previously seen as impossible is now possible. And, there is something richly gratifying in knowing that no matter how small we break down a particle, there is still so much mystery inside that God simply had to be the “uncaused cause” of it all.

I used to eschew science, in part because of lack of interest due to lack of skill, and also because everything I’d heard from the faith-minded said that science was only about trying to disprove God. However, I can’t look at a quark, a fermion, or a supernova, and not see God. He’s in all of it, and I see Him most clearly in creation. In the past, I avoided science and had an almost mystical sort of faith. God existed in every thought, and everything I saw or heard was taken as a sign of some event I perceived would take place. I was wrong every time but kept up with the old pattern simply out of habit–that is, until I learned that God was more practical with me than that. I believe He can work in whatever way He deems best, but I think with me He likes to make things less complicated because I tend to complicate things far too much. I am much more logically-minded now, and the roles are reversed.

I keep seeing a recurring infomercial on TV. In it, a man performs faith healings and gives away free packets of water that are supposed to bestow miracles on whoever drinks them. Many people on the show claim it works. Is this the placebo effect? Is it real for some? Is it a matter of faith? Is the man a charlatan? It is difficult for me to argue with testimony, nor would I want to. If someone’s experience and testimony give glory to God, I must not judge on their veracity. However, I must also not assume that God will work in my life the same way. So, faith has taken a new turn–believing that God can and will do whatever He chooses, but also realizing that He is the creator of the laws of physics and usually dwells within the rules of His making (allowing for the miraculous, which I have experienced and fully believe).

At heart, there really is no discrepancy between faith and science. Science gives credence to religious faith, and faith has the ability to give boundaries to the amoralities of science. Science can give us plenty of destructive weapons, but science cannot tell if/how we should use them. In fact, when the atomic bomb was first created, Albert Einstein (who was instrumental in its creation) wrote a letter to the President of the US, imploring him not to use it. However, the letter never reached the President, because he died. The incoming President, of course, was the one who dropped the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The rest, as they say, is history.

Science is cold, calculating, sharp and biting as an Arctic winter–it cannot make decisions on how to use the knowledge acquired by the scientific method. It is the human employing the science that makes the decisions. This is why a primary concern should be a person’s worldview and psychological foundation; the science follows thereafter (hence my former interest in the Biblical counseling profession, which is a science involved in the improvement of this aspect of humanity). Any science cannot disprove a God which is real; it can only offend or support the laws given by that God to humanity. Thus, it is not science that is at war with religion: It is morality and respect for the law colliding in people who, by nature, want their own way.

Atrocities have been committed on both sides of the fence due to lack of understanding and fear. Galileo is an obvious example, having been under house arrest by the Catholic church for years for his scientific evidence stating that the earth is heliocentric (that is, revolving around the sun), when the common belief of the time was geocentric in nature (the sun revolving around the earth). It was mere hubris that purported that God could not possibly have placed anything at the center of our universe other than humanity. On the opposite spectrum, many very intelligent scientists have persecuted creationists because the creation and young earth theories seem counterintuitive and mystical.  It is also hubris to say that the Big Bang singularity is the only possible and logical explanation for creation. In either case, faith is necessary. The tendency is for both sides to think the other is being highly illogical and ignorant. But really, which is the more ignorant person: The one who may not be able to give name to every wondrous celestial body but appreciates their support of Theos, or the one who has knowledge enough to give names but sees no substance? And so we are at an impasse.

A bridging of the gap seems to be the most logical solution. Science supports my faith, and my faith supports my science in turn without sacrificing doctrine. It is all a matter of setting limits and living by them prudently, yet keeping an open mind. However, in the opening of one’s mind, it is important to keep checking that the brain matter is not pouring out. God is never absent from His creation. This includes the scientific.