LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2016, Page 199

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

IV. THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

Learning in War-Time,” Christian intellectuals have a special responsibility
here:
To be ignorant and simple now—not to be able to meet the
enemies on their own ground—would be to throw down our
weapons, and to betray our uneducated brethren who have,
under God, no defense but us against the intellectual attacks
of the heathen.27
So the goal of this report is to encourage more informed discussion and
dialogue between all parties, those with a science background and those without it, so that the Church is better equipped both to respond to challenges and
to encourage more young Christians to pursue scientific vocations.

An overview of the report
This report aims to serve as a constructive resource for thoughtful
Christian reflection on the complex questions arising from the intersection
of science, faith and Christian theology. Each of its five chapters provides
conceptual tools and examples that should aid Christians in forming a faithful response to these questions and, it is hoped, will encourage more young
people to pursue scientific careers in full knowledge of the nature and significance of the scientific vocation.
The opening chapter seeks to lay out the rich theological resources for
understanding the nature and purpose of science. Since science is a preeminent application of human reason, and faithful Christian scientists are also
called to reverence God’s Word, the chapter begins with a discussion of the
authority of Scripture and the proper role of reason. The argument is made
that in science and elsewhere, reason should serve as a servant of Christian
faith, rather than as a judge of it. The chapter moves to a consideration of
how God’s two books—the book of Scripture and the book of nature—relate
to one another. How do we give both books their due, while recognizing the
supreme authority of Scripture? Next, we explore the implications of the
doctrines of vocation and of the two kingdoms for science. This leads naturally into a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of various models for
Christian engagement with culture, and their implications for the work of a
scientist. The advantages of a “dialog” model over conflicting alternatives
are presented. Then we consider what it means to look at nature in a Christocentric way, and reflect on the implications of image of God theology and
other elements of Christian anthropology for the scientific task. The chapter
concludes by considering the many theological assumptions that encouraged
and guided the rise of modern science.

27
C. S. Lewis, “Learning in War-Time,” in The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses (New York:
Macmillan, 1965), 27–28.

Chapter 1 shows such a close and positive connection between Christian
theology and good science that it is important to explain why that connection
is not widely appreciated today. So chapter 2 focuses on the historical factors
leading to the contemporary perception that faith and theology have nothing
to do with scientific practice. That sad story begins with the attack on final
causes (purpose, design) in nature and the related decline of natural theology.
While natural theology may sometimes have gone too far by reading design
into nature that was not there, modern science has largely rejected design as a
valid scientific category, which prevents the scientist from ever inferring that
we inhabit a created world. This transition was encouraged by the rise of two
main ideas: the idea of autonomous reason (reason that no longer was seen
as a servant of the faith), and the idea of nature as an autonomous machine,
running on by itself, with no need for God. In this intellectual atmosphere,
many thinkers moved from orthodox Christianity to deism and even naturalism, the atheistic view that nature alone exists. Soon it seemed to many
that materialistic science alone provided reliable knowledge, while theology,
philosophy and ethics were all treated with suspicion. Side by side with
these ideological changes, science changed as a social institution. While science had been understood as a vocation of reading the book of nature, it was
reconceived as a modern profession with a methodology that excluded God’s
work from a scientific understanding of nature. The fallout of these momentous changes is seen in the unbiblical view of reality prevalent among many
young American Christians, the so-called “moralistic therapeutic deism”28
which keeps God distant from the natural world and our lives, undermining
the idea that science is a vocation.
Chapter 2 is a sobering portrayal of how different our intellectual world
today is from the era and thought-world of the scientific revolution, in which
faithful Christian scientists self-consciously applied theology to their work
and found God present everywhere in the world. Chapter 3 provides a
constructive response to the philosophical assumptions of our contemporary
perspective. It explains the philosophical basis of scientism and how its
arguments may be refuted. More positively, several reasons are given for
thinking that Christianity provides a superior foundation for science than
naturalism: Christian teaching explains why science is feasible, gives scientists the right balance of confidence and humility, restores a sense of meaning
in scientific work, explains the reliability of the human mind that is presupposed by science, and provides a strong moral motivation for going into
science.
A more difficult and specialized question is how Christians should read
specific portions of Scripture with apparent scientific import. This is the topic
of chapter 4, which sets out several Lutheran principles of interpretation and
28
Christian Smith and Melinda Denton, Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of
American Teenagers (New York: Oxford University Press, 2005).

13

14

applies them to a number of examples. In the process, advice is given on how
to find the right balance between respect for God’s Word and humility in the
sometimes difficult task of rightly interpreting it. In particular, the chapter
considers how best to avoid two extremes: creating unnecessary conflicts
between science and Scripture, and slavishly accommodating Scripture to
the latest scientific fads. The overarching goal must be to see Christ in the
Scripture and to so read it that the saving message of the Gospel is always at
the center.

Chapter I

Finally, the last chapter offers some guidance and practical applications
and promotes further discussion for several vocational groups. How should
Christian students of science respond to ideas that create challenges for their
faith? How might Christian teachers present controversial ideas in the most
constructive fashion? What factors may help Christian scientific investigators
themselves to retain a strong sense of vocation and to integrate their faith
with their work? And how should non-scientific Christian laity respond to
the many claims made on behalf of science, some of which go far beyond
what the data are saying? In each case, examples are given that may provide
models for subsequent discussion. Let us pray that the ensuing conversations
aid all of us in seeing that it is in Christ that all things hold together.

199

Theological Foundations
1. Introduction
Science and Christian Theology both present themselves as sources of
knowledge. Fundamentally, questions about knowledge—epistemological
questions29— are questions of authority. Do we think that observation and
reason are the most authoritative sources for reliable belief? Or do we accept
that Scripture is the final word? If science appears to conflict with the Bible,
how do we adjudicate the dispute? To answer these questions, we must first
consider the authority of Scripture and the proper role of reason, including
scientific reason,30 for a Christian believer (section 2). Next, a closely related
question concerns the best way to relate nature and the Bible. Going back
at least as far as Augustine (354–430), it has been common for theologians
to say that God has revealed Himself in two books, the book of God’s Word
(Scripture, or special revelation), and the book of nature (creation, or general
revelation).31 Are these two sources equally authoritative or does one source
take precedence over the other? If the latter, does that allow due respect for
the contributions of the subordinate source? It is important to think through
how the two books interrelate (section 3).
Once these foundational epistemological issues have been addressed, we
can consider their implications for the life of the Christian scientist, for the
relationship between Christianity and culture, for the nature of creation, and
for the nature of humanity. What does it mean to see science as a vocation,
and not merely a profession (section 4)? If we consider the various models
29
Epistemology means “theory of knowledge.” It is both an established branch of philosophy
and a critical element of the methodology of many disciplines, including science and theology.
Both of the latter disciplines make knowledge claims and address the question, “How can we
know?”
30
Scientific reason adds to standard reason principles of empirical investigation, such as the
inductive method and procedures for testing scientific theories against the data and each other.
31
Rebutting the Manicheans and arguing that nature was essentially good despite its fallen condition, Augustine said “But had you begun with looking on the book of nature as the
production of the Creator of all … you would not have been led into these impious follies
and blasphemous fancies with which, in your ignorance of what evil really is, you heap all
evils upon God” (Contra Faustum Manichaeum 32.20 in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series
I, Vol. 4, ed. Philip Schaff [Grand Rapids: Christian Classics Ethereal Library], 583, available
at: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf104.pdf). Origen had anticipated this view by maintaining that the natural world is full of symbols, suggesting a text that might be read. See Peter
Harrison, “The Bible and the Emergence of Modern Science,” Science and Christian Belief 18:2
(2006): 115–132, 118, available at: https://www.scienceandchristianbelief.org/articles/Harrison
-article-18-2.pdf.

15

16

2016 Convention Workbook