Main Topic: Navigating Science and Faith Conflicts
The two-books model is one pr
Main Topic: Navigating Science and Faith Conflicts
The two-books model is one principle many Christians employ regarding science/faith conflicts. Essentially, the underlying principle is that when there is some apparent conflict between what we are reading in Scripture and what we find through the tools of science, we interpret one or the other (or both) incorrectly. This principle is because God is the ultimate author of both creation and Scripture, and the two ought not to be in conflict. Historically, some examples were:
Genesis 1 seems to indicate a literal ocean above the ″firmament,″ and we figured out there is no ocean there, thus requiring a reinterpretation of how many early Christians thought about this heavenly ocean.
The Bible seems to indicate a geocentric worldview as it only describes the sun moving around the earth, not the other way around. However, this view became untenable with advancements in science, starting with the Copernican revolution and ending with parallax measurements, this requiring a reinterpretation of the plain reading of many Scriptures to Christians at the time.
Today, we can quickly identify that the solution to these dilemmas was that we were misinterpreting Scripture. Historically, there are not many examples of the reverse occurring where our understanding of science was corrected based on what we read plainly in the Bible. This leads to two potential common cultural beliefs. Either a) it is just a matter of time until we replace religious beliefs with more rigorous scientifically tested ideas, or b) we need to double down on the plain truth of Scripture and push back against this atheistic or godless science and fight for a return to a prior age. Choosing ′a′ is not a reasonable option for Christians, and choosing ′b′ could be a good option, though to the detriment of sounding like a banging gong to non-Christian scientists or science-minded individuals. For many non-Christians, that may put them off towards Christianity when they are given two options: either this rigorous scientific process that appears to be based on empirical evidence or trust a verse in the Bible by faith. While the latter argument is compelling for many Christians, it becomes a stumbling block to many non-Christians.
Your task in this essay is…
When does it make sense to dismiss some scientific result based on the authority of Scripture? How does your argument differ from historical examples like geocentrism, the heavenly ocean, or others listed in this week′s Science and Scripture lecture?
Think about some areas where there is a potential conflict between what you read in Scripture and the consensus of modern science.
This could be related to cosmology, evolution, climate change, etc. Look up some examples online if you cannot think of anything personally.
Find some arguments for and against the scientific topic you choose.
Find some arguments for and against your sсrіptural/Christian interpretation.
Suppose you use the authority of Scripture as an argument against some scientific consensus. How might you communicate this to a non-Christian science-minded person such that it does not become a stumbling block to them?
If you did not use the authority of Scripture as a guiding principle on some of these topics, how can you better communicate scientific results to Christians who do?
Run your ideas by another person, get their feedback, and record it here.
Your essay should be approximately 2+ pages.
Grading breakdown:
40 points: engagement with current science on the topic. For full credit, you should make factually correct statements but also indicate uncertainty, if there is any, for your particular focus
20 points: following the prompt. For full credit, you must at least address all the questions.
5 points: for recording the reaction of another person. You do not necessarily need them to read your entire essay, but run your ideas by them.
15 points: the Bible on your topic of choice. You do not need to present any particular perspective, but a solid paragraph outlining what you think is the most accurate perspective.
20 points: critical thinking and formatting. Show your professor that you have thought about this and ensure words are spelled correctly. Grammarly can help check this for you. Also, since you should use some sources, they should be cited appropriately in the formatting of your choice.
This assignment is due by Saturday at 11:59 pm.
Choose a submission type
include sсrіpture on each page