God’s Not Dead, Chapter 2 – Religion and Science are Answering Different Questions (pt24)
RELIGION AND SCIENCE ARE ANSWERING DIFFERENT QUESTIONS
The late Stephen Jay Gould of Harvard spoke about faith and science being “non-overlapping magisteria.” This means they are two-distinct, equally valid spheres of existence.
“Science and religion are not mutually exclusive, [John] Polkinghorne argues. In fact, both are necessary to our understanding of the world. ‘Science asks how things happen. But there are questions of meaning and value and purpose which science does not address. Religion asks why.
This is quite a different stance than the author has taken in other parts of this book. He does not simply let religion explain the why questions, he asserts that the answers to the how questions are also answered by religion. It is curious that the author would use these quotes seeing as they don’t coincide with what he has been explaining. If religion only attempted to answer the why questions and kept out of the how of the world works the debates wouldn’t be as polarized. Science doesn’t attempt to answer the why questions, science doesn’t even acknowledge them.
There is no real conflict between science and God, but there is a conflict between naturalism and faith. Naturalism is the belief that all that exists is nature.
The conflict comes when one side oversteps their position. What experience do we have of anything super-natural, anything beyond nature? None, other than unfounded claims.
The author again brings up Albert Einstein. I agreed already that Einstein made many comments that may be construed as deistic but he made so many others that denounced that stance. In bringing up Einstein the author again changes what kind of god he is defending. Many parts of this book have been devoted to espouse the god of the Bible but quotes like these and many others are only effective for a deistic non-personal god. Flip flopping like this makes a debate and arguments hard to refute, it’s called moving the goalposts.