Science or Christianity: Why Not Both?

     We see a common trend between scientists and theologians in the world today and it seems to be a competition of who is right and who is wrong.  This is a major issue because neither side will ever when because they are looking at two separate issues: the scientists are concerned with how and the theologians are concerned with why.  You can't argue against how with why any more than you can argue against why with how.  Imagine two parties examining a mouse trap and the first is studying how the mouse trap is built and how it works, whereas the second is studying why it was built in the first place.  Now lets assume that they come to a realization about how and why the mouse trap was built.  It was built with a block of wood, a spring, and some metal (there are obviously more details, but lets keep it simple) and when a plate is pushed down the spring releases the metal and it smashes into the wood.  The purpose of the mouse trap is to kill a mouse.  Now how ridiculous would it be for the first group to tell the second group that it is not meant to kill mice because it is wood, a spring, and some metal and it only clamps down when it is moved; it would be equally ridiculous for the second group to tell the first that it doesn't clamp down and kill the mice, it just kills them.  Do you see how ignorant this sounds?  This is an extreme example, but it is exactly what is going on today.  The scientists know for a fact that the earth is more than 6,000 years old, but they have no idea why it came to be in the first place and try to use how the earth is more than 6,000 years old to prove that God doesn't exist.  The theologians are just as bad; they try to tell scientists that the world has to be 6,000 years old because God created it.  Neither of these arguments make any sense, but you may say, "The Bible clearly shows that the world is 6,000 years old because Jesus lived 2,000 years ago, Adam lived 4,000 years before that and God says He created the world in 6 days in the Bible.  My response to that is that God does not say anything in the Bible.  The Bible is inspired by God, not spoken or written by God and the Bible even says so itself*.

"The purpose of the first chapters of the Book of Genesis is to reveal that the entire universe has a Creator-God - that it did not just happen to appear, as though by magic - and also, that the heavenly bodies and all of Creation are not “gods”, as was the belief of the numerous idolatrous nations that surrounded Israel at the time. The intention, therefore, of the divinely-inspired authors was not to project any kind of science but rather, a sublime theology, for which purpose they utilized the religious and scientific knowledge that existed at the time. One cannot therefore regard the (purely auxiliary) scientific world-images of the divinely-inspired authors’ times as “divinely-inspired images”; only the theological message of the Bible is considered divinely-inspired. That is the ONLY sector of the Holy Bible that can be called infallible, and not necessarily the scientific knowledge that has been utilized therein. We can therefore understand why the representatives of either side are not justified in their reactivation of situations and settings that had been contained over 100 years ago. Given the above, one discerns how Science actually betrays itself, if and when it strives to discover the uncreated God through physical means, because by doing so, it is going beyond the boundaries of its own research. But certainly Theology is also not obliged to accept each and every scientific theory that conflicts with the Christian world-theory on God and the world."**

     As we see in the quote above, the Bible is meant to contest the other creation stories of its time, not to tell us the exact historical account of how the world was created.  The fact is, no one was there other than  God when the world was created and the only things that the Bible has going for it in historical accounts are eye witnesses. These eye witness accounts are sometimes supported by other ancient texts, but there were no eye witnesses to the creation and therefore it is not a viable historical or scientific fact.  To quote the author again, "One cannot therefore regard the (purely auxiliary) scientific world-images of the divinely-inspired authors' time as 'divinely-inspired images'; only the theological message of the Bible is considered divinely inspired."  The "divinely-inspired images" of the authors were theological in their means, not scientific because science was not a concern of the Ancient Hebrews.  They didn't care how, but they cared about why.  Science and theology are meant to go hand in hand, not to contradict each other.

*2 Timothy 3:16 -- "16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"

** By Michael G. Houlis: A Theologian, professor, special associate of the Holy Metropolis of Syros  (http://www.oodegr.com/english/epistimi/sxesi3.htm)