Is Science The Only Way To Know Truth? (Can Science Validate Christianity?)

 

            Mankind should always be grateful to science for its incredible foray into the multivarious facets of life. However, a claim that surfaces during religious discussions assert that science is the only way to know the truth.

            Scientism posits science as the only source of human knowledge.  

            So, is science the only way to know the truth? Can science validate Christianity?

            The answer is a definite ‘No.’ Here’s why...

            First, the truth claim that science is the only way to know the truth is self-refuting because this very claim cannot be validated by science.

            Second, science has its limits. Science writer and public speaker, Dr. Alex Berezow posits the limitation of science, “Science has nothing to say about ethics. If we were to follow science exactly as prescribed, we do things like eugenics. Science has nothing really to say about how we should treat other people. I am a religious person. I am a Christian. Science is the best secular source of knowledge that we have. If I want to know how humans evolved, I don’t go to the Bible, I go to science. But if I want to know why we are here and what we are supposed to do, then I go to religious texts, then I go to my priests. I think there are two non-overlapping magisteria—science, which is secular, and religion, which talks about the bigger questions: the whys, the questions kids ask, which are the hardest ones to answer.”¹

            Christian apologist J. Warner Wallace of Cold Case Christianity lists the many things that we know without the benefit of science:²

            1. Logical and Mathematical truths

            2. Metaphysical truths

            3. Moral and Ethical truths

            4. Aesthetic truths

            5. Historical truths

            Last but not the least, if science cannot validate religion, are they both mutually exclusive? Or is there a definite relationship between science and religion?

            It may not be appropriate to endorse the idea that science and religion reign over separate conceptual kingdoms – separate “magisteria.” The magisteria of science covers ‘empirical facts,’ whereas the magisteria of religion extends over the search for the spiritual meaning of our lives. These, according to Stephen J. Gould, are nonoverlapping. This is the principle of Non Overlapping Magisteria (NOMA).

            William Lane Craig explains how science and religion can mutually and fruitfully interact. This is the summary of his thesis:³

1. Religion furnishes the conceptual framework in which science can flourish.

2. Science can both falsify and verify claims of religion.

3. Science encounters metaphysical problems which religion can help to solve.

4. Religion can help to adjudicate between scientific theories.

5. Religion can augment the explanatory power of science.

6. Science can establish a premiss in an argument for a conclusion having religious significance.

Endnotes:

¹https://bigthink.com/design-for-good/on-journalists-junk-science-and-why-science-cant-discover-all-truth

²https://coldcasechristianity.com/writings/the-dangers-of-scientism-and-an-over-reliance-on-science/

³https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/science-theology/what-is-the-relation-between-science-and-religion/

Websites last accessed on 23^rd August 2021.