Science and the Bible
When they teach in college that science does not agree with the Bible, what can we say in reply?
It must be remembered that there are wide differences among great scientists as to the facts of nature, and the theories are constantly changing, so that such a statement is illogical. Our greatest Christian scientists claim that the Bible is not antagonistic to true science nor true science to the Bible. When we know science in its fulness then only can we see the wonderful harmony in God’s Word and the laws of nature. It must be remembered, however, that the Bible is not a scientific treatise. It is not concerned with proving its statements harmoniously with the discoveries of scientists, but to point the way to God.
Does not geology disprove the Bible account of creation?
Enough time is allowed between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 for all the geologic ages. The first creative act refers to the dateless past, and while a catastrophic judgment overthrew the primitive order, and all animal life perished, the traces of which remain as fossils, there is no conflict with the Word of God and geology, as the judgment upon that early creation need not affect that branch of science. Read Pember’s “Earth’s Earliest Ages.”
Does not science disprove the teaching that the rainbow was introduced after the Flood?
Undoubtedly the rainbow had appeared before the time of the Flood, but now Jehovah has given it a new meaning — it is to be the token of His covenant with Noah.
Is Drummond’s “Natural Law in the Spiritual World” a good book to use in teaching the Scriptures?
No. We are not called upon to harmonize science with the Word of God. The conclusions of science are ever changing, and in spite of this, the immutable laws of God are ever vindicating themselves. Drummond’s purpose was doubtless a good one, but many of his conclusions were purely speculative and therefore unreliable in teaching truth. We have but one authority for the truth, and we need not be afraid of God’s Word as it stands, whether we can see the harmony between it and nature or not. The harmony is there — time will reveal it.
George Adam Smith, the closest personal friend of Drummond, states in his life of Drummond that before his death he expressed regret for the publication of that book. If the author himself, in the presence of death, repudiated these teachings, we may be satisfied that they contain error. In fact, the book exactly reverses the Bible order: it is not natural law in the spiritual world, but spiritual law in the natural world. That is God’s order.
How could there “‘be light’? (Gen. 1:3) before the
sun was created?
To understand the first chapter of Genesis, it is necessary to bear in mind that verse 1 gives the fact of the original creation of the heavens and the earth. Between verses 1 and 2 there occurred, as is evident from Jeremiah 4:23-26; Isaiah 24:1; 45:18, the judgment upon the primitive creation which left it “without form and void.” In other words, chaos. In the verses which follow we have an account of the action of God in setting that chaos in order again to prepare it for the habitation of man. The work of the first day was to restore light to this chaos. The sun and moon had of course existed from the time of the primitive creation, but masses of vapor would hide the direct rays of the sun, and yet permit a diffused light. This phenomenon is of constant occurrence. We have many days when the sun does not appear at all and yet there is light. Precisely that condition was brought to pass on the first day. Later we have the statement that God made two great lights, etc. The word “made” there is not the Hebrew word for creation, but signifies rather the function of these lights, the work for which they were created, than their creation itself. This is included in the first verse — ‘“‘God created the heavens and the earth,”
the heavens, of course, implying the heavenly bodies. In verses 14-18 we have a statement of what they were created for.