With over 1,000 videos and eight million subscribers, the Jubilee channel on YouTube is a popular platform for debate. Each episode of Jubilee brings people who have disagreements together to try to hash out their opposing opinions. They have episodes about everything from abortion to immigration to the Israel-Palestinian debate. In one of the episodes, two sides debate whether the earth is flat or not. Of the three proponents that the earth is flat, two of the three were Christians. The three opponents were all scientists.

How did we get here?

Christian friends, we’ve got to do better.

A Rich History

As many have argued, the scientific revolution was founded on Christian principles. Psychologist Steven Pinker explains,

The signature practices of science, including open debate, peer review, and double-blind methods, are designed to circumvent the sins to which scientists, being human, are vulnerable. As [physicist] Richard Feynman put it, the first principle of science is ‘that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool.[i]

Building on this insight, Glen Scrivener argues,

So these are the three foundational teachings from Genesis: the freedom of God; the figure-out-ability of the world; and the fallibility of humans. Press deeply into these truths—as Christians did, especially in the Middle Ages—and what you get is a scientific evolution.[ii]

For many today, the perception is that you must choose between Christianity and science. How sad. Christianity used to be the leading institution on earth for scientific inquiry. Nicole d’Oreseme (14th century) established that the earth turns on its axis. Sir Francis Bacon (16th century) popularized the scientific method. Galileo (16th century) made massive advances in astronomy. Nicholas Copernicus (16th century) advanced a helio-centric theory of the universe. Johannes Kepler (16th century) discovered laws on planetary motion in the 1600s. Blaise Pascal (17th century) established the foundation for probability theory and made significant advances in physics. Sir Isaac Newton (17th century) discovered the three laws of motion and formulated the notion of gravity. Robert Boyle (19th century) made significant advances in chemistry. Michael Faraday’s (19th century) theories formed the foundation for modern computers. Gregor Mendel (19th century) created the foundations for modern genetics. William Kelvin (19th century) was part of a small group of scientists who laid the foundations of modern physics. Max Planck (20th century) created quantum theory. Lise Meiter (20th century) discovered nuclear fission.[iii]

Many Christians still labor hard in the halls of science. Francis Collins led the Human Genome Project. Andrew Pinsent contributed to the creation of the Large Electron-Positron Collider at CERN. And Mike Hulme is a leading climatologist.[iv]

And yet the public perception is that Christianity is anti-science.

A Line in the Sand

The unfortunate reality is that this perception is not without merit. There are not a few Christians, who, with good intentions, have drawn a line in the sand at evolution. You can sum up that argument: you either believe the Bible or evolution.[v] In the words of one such proponent, “If God used evolution, God came from an ape.”[vi]

I laud anyone who seeks understanding and digs deeper into important issues. Seek understanding. There is no doubt that Genesis 1 and 2 may describe a literal six-day creation. And, as a Christian, if that is what God is saying, then I need to trust him at his word.

Other Interpretations?

But may our posture ultimately be one of humility, not hubris, of charity, not divisiveness. There are many Bible-believing Christians who believe that Genesis 1 is poetic and, while describing ultimate truths about God and creation, does not do so in a way that defines the manner or timeline in which God created everything out of nothing.

This is a meaningful conversation that faithful Christians can come down on different sides of.

 I’m grateful to have grown up in a Christian home where my mom was a scientist. There was no perception that there was a conflict between our Christian beliefs and science. Quite the opposite, I was raised to trust the Bible and also see scientific inquiry as an innately good thing.

Essentials

As Christians, there are essentials to our faith that have scientific ramifications. We believe in a God who created everything out of nothing. We believe that God became flesh. We believe that Jesus rose again from the dead. These essentials draw a line in our understanding of scientific inquiry and discovery.

But we need to be careful that we don’t expand our list of essentials, and thus create unnecessary lines in the sand. In other words, we need to understand what are intramural debates and what are extramural debates.

Two Scenarios

Why does this matter? Two scenarios reveal the weakness of saying that Christian belief cannot include evolution.

The first scenario is of a young woman who has grown up in an evangelical church and learned that the only possible interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 is through the lens of a literal six-day creation. Any other interpretation places one firmly on the path of unbelief.

That young woman heads to their local university only to be confronted at every turn with professors in nearly every field who not only argue for evolution, they assume it. If we have created a fork in the road for this 18-year-old where she either choose to remain a Christian and fight nearly every one of her professors or believe her professors and depart from her childhood faith.

I believe this is an unnecessary fork in the road. Such dogmatism potentially leads young men and women to abandon their faith over a non-essential issue. How discouraging.

The second scenario is a Christian who holds to the necessity of a literal six-day creation in conversation with an educated unbelieving interlocutor. There is a spiritual interest on behalf of the unbeliever. They’re thirsting for more and are intrigued by who Jesus is and what he did. But then evolution comes up. The conversation about becoming a Christian will inevitably gravitate to this topic as it’s one that the unbelieving person is more familiar with. If there are two hurdles to belief (evolution and Jesus), they are likely to stay on the topic they feel they know more about (a natural instinct).

And here is the rub: now this evangelistic conversation is a debate about creation and not a discussion about Jesus. The Christian will first need to convince the unbeliever of a literal six-day creation before moving to Christ's identity. That seems like an unnecessary barrier to faith. And it looks like an inversion of the order of belief both in terms of necessity and logic.

An Encouragement

Let me reiterate that the intention of this post isn’t to advocate for any position regarding the creation of the world, other than that God himself is the Creator. I hope to encourage Christians to reclaim God’s mandate as leaders in the arena of science. That isn’t an encouragement to capitulate to the sacred cow of secular science, but rather to be thoughtful, humble, and clear on this vital issue.  

[i] Steven Pinker, Enlightenment Now (Penguin, 2018) p. 390.

[ii] Glen Scrivener, The Air We Breathe, (The Good Book Company, 2022) p. 136.

[iii] https://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html

[iv] https://relevantmagazine.com/god/9-groundbreaking-scientists-who-happened-be-christians/

[v] https://answersingenesis.org/theistic-evolution/can-evolutionist-be-creationist/

[vi] Ken Ham. https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2016/04/public-schools-are-visiting-ken-hams-creation-museum.html.

You May Also Appreciate:

What Should You Rethink?

Photo by ThisisEngineering on Unsplash