|   Log In

Christian Life

Is Science Standing in Your Way of Seeing God?

Okay, disclosure! I’m not a scientist. Does that mean I don’t have the credentials to write about science versus God? I don’t think so. Because I don’t think that you have to be a scientist to know that God exists. Scientists have yet to prove that God doesn’t exist, and when it comes to subjects like evolution, well, we’re still waiting for the proof that the ape evolved into man. There’s still a gap. A missing piece. That’s why evolution is just a theory and not a fact.

Still, even though science can’t prove God doesn’t exist, and even though science can’t answer questions such as “If nothing comes from nothing, then how can there have been a big bang?” there are millions of atheists. Worse, there are still those Christians who continue to wrestle with the existence of God.

But the truth is, science proves God’s existence. Even in its lack of discovery, it has proven that only He could have created this amazing, complex universe. Think about these truths:

  1. Science proves that there’s a God. Because science can’t create something out of nothing, it could not possibly have created the universe. Therefore, an un-created Being that has always existed must have created it. 1 Corinthians 2:7 reads, “Rather, we speak God’s wisdom, mysterious, hidden, which God predetermined before the ages for our glory.” This is just one of many examples of scripture that reminds us that God’s existence spans beyond time and that He was not created.
  2. Science cannot create life. Science can take existing life created by God and experiment on that, whether it be with plant, animal or man’s seed, but science can’t create a seed. God did. Nor can science put life into a body or bring a fully dead man back to life. Guess what? God did!
  3. Science cannot create a conscience. It can’t create intellect, reason or emotions. It can try to mimic some of these things with the design of super robot experiments, but it can’t create them to an exact match with that of man.
  4. Scientists are learning more and more that there is a God as they make new discoveries. Psalm 111:2 reads, “Great are the works of the LORD, studied by all who delight in them.” As scientists work to find cures for illnesses or understand how some things work, they are learning how amazingly fine-tuned our world is. Everything about it was made in such a way that it creates and sustains life perfectly. Everything works so well together that only a Being with knowledge and understanding could have designed it. To assume that the universe was created by accident is harder to comprehend than it being created by a God.
  5. The universe is just too complex to be an accident. This follows along with number 4, but from our perspective. Ecclesiastes 1:5-7 reads, “The wind blows to the south and goes around to the north; around and around goes the wind, and on its circuits the wind returns. All streams run to the sea, but the sea is not full; to the place where the streams flow, there they flow again.” I mean, you just have to look at life to realize that it had to have been designed. The natural order of everything is so sophisticated, it’s blatant proof that an Almighty Designer was behind all of it.
  6. The Bible tells us so. Scripture explains it all. Where science fails to answer, the Bible fills in the gaps. Genesis explains how the world was created and the rest of scripture explains why. If you don’t believe Genesis, then come up with something that makes sense. Scientists can’t.
  7. Many scientists are themselves believers. What does that tell you? Science is not an enemy of God. It shouldn’t blind you from seeing Him. If anything, it should lead you to Him.

Now, if you’re interested in the deep argument between science and God, but in a more interesting way than a boring academic lecture, then watch the movie God’s Not Dead. Below are a couple of classroom scenes in the movie that touch upon the science-versus-God argument.

Ladies, do you allow science to get in the way of seeing God?


You must be logged in to post a comment.


  1. Moira Linn

    Posted by Moira Linn on May 31, 2015 at 15:03

    I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is. Science is a process for observing the world and making conclusions based upon evidence, like a puzzle. If you had a puzzle, but the box picture (the Bible or any other religious text) looked different than how the picture was showing up, you couldn’t try to force the pieces the way you want them to be. At some point you have to ignore the box, because eventually you’re going to have a picture that fits every piece and looks different than the box picture. That’s how science works. You ignore the box and figure it out for yourself.

  2. mrpacker0531

    Posted by mrpacker0531 on May 31, 2015 at 11:46

    Also, being a theory is a scientific term which does NOT indicate whether the science behind evolution is true or false. Within the scientific community, gravity is still a theory.

  3. mrpacker0531

    Posted by mrpacker0531 on May 31, 2015 at 11:44

    I have studied biochemistry at one Christian and two secular universities. Although my scientific background is not in evolutionary science, I have studied evolution a lot more than the average jill. I have a HUGE problem with how the author of this article equated evolution with the theory of ape evolving into man. One species becoming another is called “speciation” NOT evolution. The theory of evolution is the observation that, over spans of time, allelic frequencies within populations change in order for that population to become more fit. Alleles are types of genes which come in pairs and determine all of an organisms phenotype and genotype, or physical and genetic makeup. Evolutionary fitness is the ability of an organism to reproduce successfully. Evolution, although a theory, is true and observable. For example, during the industrial revolution in Europe, many species of brightly colored moths became brown and soot colored over several generations since the new coloring acted as camouflage and protected them from predators, giving them the opportunity to reproduce. The definition of a species is a group of organisms that are able to successfully reproduce. Although genetics tells us that apes and humans share a common ancestor which existed approximately 10 million years ago, no respectable scientist believes that humans evolved from apes.

  4. rainbowuni

    Posted by rainbowuni on September 27, 2014 at 20:30

    “Evolution is just a theory.” http://notjustatheory.com/

    “Science can’t prove God doesn’t exist.” Science also can’t prove that the Flying Spaghetti Monster doesn’t exist, nor can it prove unicorns, leprechauns, or fairies don’t exist. Do you believe in them?

    1. Science does not prove that there is a God. Science doesn’t prove that something cannot come from nothing, and science doesn’t prove that the universe came from nothing. Not knowing ≠ nothing, and putting God in to the “gaps” in science only allows for God to get smaller as we discover more about the world we live in, so it’s something I wouldn’t recommend doing.

    2. “Science can’t create life, but Thor did. Only Thor can create life.”
    Science can’t create life due to the fact that the physical conditions of the Earth 4 billion years ago were different than they are now. Much different. Besides, there’s still a lot of things science can’t do: create God, test for God, prove God, prove that something can exist eternally without having been created…
    Also on this topic, science has come very close to creating life, if that counts for anything to you: http://www.livescience.com/3214-life-created-lab.html

    3. “Therefore, Shiva.”
    Again, plugging God into gaps is not a good way to “prove” God.
    Consciousness itself is a pretty complex topic, something that scientists are still studying. The fact that they’re still studying today does not mean that they won’t have a major discovery tomorrow—or next week, next month, next year, or in a hundred years.
    The difference between science and saying “God did it” is science works to find more information, and to get more knowledge about everything in our world—whether that information leads to God or not—where as simply saying “God did it, and we can never understand why or how, nor should we try to question it” is a pretty lame, cop-out answer, and it’s not at all an explanation.

    4. Earth might sustain life, not perfectly by any standard, but sufficiently. Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune and Pluto, however…. Let’s just say they aren’t as “fine-tuned” as Earth. Why? There are billions of stars in our universe, and yet, only a fraction of them have Earth-like, “fine-tuned” rocks orbiting them. (they’re still out there, don’t get me wrong, and that alone is a question in itself: why would God create such a vast universe for only us? And if there’s more than just us, why does he care so much about what we eat (mostly in the Old Testament) or who we marry?)
    If the universe was fine-tuned for human life, why would scientists need to find cures for so many illnesses that effectively kill thousands of humans each year?
    Scientists aren’t learning that there is a god any more than they’re learning that any one is true over the hundreds of other possibilities there are—the God of the bible, in the exact way you interpret it—is not the only possibility, and when put up against all other possibilities, the odds are not in your/its favor.

    5. Some children are “accidents,” but does this mean that they aren’t complex life forms?
    If I accidentally crashed my car, and the windshield shattered, making thousands of small glass pieces land in various places inside and outside the car around the site of the accident, the probability that I could crash my car again, in the same place, and have glass pieces land in the exact same spots again is pretty small. A lot of complexities go into the placement of the glass shards. Physics makes the fact that the windshield shattered and pieces of glass landed around the car an obvious and predictable event—and it might have been an accident that I crashed my car, but, to me, the complexity of the exact placement of windshield pieces is no less than the complexity of the universe (but it all makes more sense when you apply physics).

    6. Again, the God of the gaps argument isn’t that great, unless you want your god to continually shrink and become smaller. Science has also disproved pieces of the bible—for example: “The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth” (Daniel 4:11) –this says that there’s a tree that is visible from anywhere on Earth….is there really a tree in Australia that is visible from the United States? Would it even be possible? It’s definitely something I’d like to see if it was.

    7. Many scientists are Muslims, therefore Allah is real. Peace be upon him.
    Many scientists are also atheists/non-religious. Science is not an enemy of God, I agree with you there, but it does prove a few things in the bible to be not true, or at least unlikely (for example, light before the sun). Science doesn’t work to prove or disprove God–or any god or gods, for that matter–but it works to find evidence and an explanation for the things in our lives, whether those explanations fit in with any thousand-year-old religious texts or not.

    God’s Not Dead—a lot of atheists have problems with this movie. Let’s clear a few things up: atheists (most of them, anyway) are not big meanie-heads with no ethical or moral principles (or whatever you may think), they don’t hate God (you can’t hate something you don’t believe in), and they are usually anything but the way they’re portrayed in the movie.

    Sorry for the long post…just had to say something..

  5. May All Your Bacon Burn

    Posted by May All Your Bacon Burn on September 25, 2014 at 19:31

    In the two years I spent in biotechnology, I found there were a lot of parallels between what is written in the Bible and what is in the typical textbook. Of course, it takes a bit of a creative mind to see a few of them, and a bit of willingness to see beyond point blank.

    A good example is in Genesis, where it says everything was made of dust. This is basic, and doesn’t go into evolution, which would then let in the elephant of Evolutionist Christianity vs Non, Literal vs Symbolic, etc.

    So, back to dust. I’ve had so many people stop me right there, saying “obviously we weren’t made from dust. We were made from atoms, and dust is not atoms and I absolutely refuse to believe that my body was created from the dirt on this ground” etc, etc. The concept of the “atom” in a scientific standpoint wasn’t even established until the 19th century. The Greeks used it as a philosophical term before that, but it still wasn’t quite to that degree before the 19th century. Poor Abraham probably wouldn’t understand God if he said “everything is made of microscopic particles that are so minuscule that not even you can see them”. I don’t know about you, but I would be so confused that I probably wouldn’t listen to everything else he had to say. Or maybe he /did/ say “everything is made of microscopic particles that are so minuscule that not even you can see them”, but as the story got passed further and further down the line before getting written down it was summed up as being “dust”. I wouldn’t blame anyone for doing that either. “Hm. So small we can’t see it? I don’t know of anything like that, but dust is pretty small, and you have to be looking for it to see it. Let’s go with that”. Of course, we don’t know what actually happened since we weren’t there, and only have the Bible as a guide.

    There are a lot of examples like that throughout Genesis alone. “I just can’t believe all of this could be made out of nothing”. “Oh no, really? Then a miracle explosion within a vastless galaxy of emptiness makes a whole lot of sense?” The list would go on forever, or at least make a 20 page text brick. The way I see it, God could have easily put more into it than what is stated. But if he told us every single detail, we’d have a book of Genesis that is three times larger than the actual Bible, and most people would be too intimidated to read it (I’d hate to see how long a section would be in those “Read the Bible in a Year” books, too). Instead, he got to the point, and he gave us just enough information so that we understood what happened.

    Which goes into my final portion–in all actuality, as much “understanding” as the scientific community makes us think we’re reaching, we’re really far from it. We weren’t meant to learn everything in the universe, and when we think we’re getting close there’s a huge bucket of worms just waiting to be opened. And science is constantly changing. In my second year of biotech, we had to relearn a number of things because procedures changed between when my Junior teacher was in the field and when my Senior teacher was. And think about where science started, when the Earth was a flat strip the center of the universe, meat gave life to flies, and it was assumed that men had a limited amount of sperm and women had an infinite amount of eggs. Things haven’t changed, but the theories about these things have. After all, it’s just a study of the world, not exactly an absolute factual basis of it. The stuff we have right now lines up pretty well with the Bible. It may continue that way, it might not–it doesn’t matter, because it’s just a study of trying to understand things, and when it comes to understanding we still have a long, long way to go.

    (Sorry for the textblock).

  6. patientlywaitingforGodsplan

    Posted by patientlywaitingforGodsplan on September 25, 2014 at 16:03

    Honestly, I agree that this article is a bit confusing. I think what you are trying to refute is the evolutionary theory and all of that, not science in general. I do like how you included the God’s Not Dead reference. Because there are many actual scientists who are in fact creationists and have made significant contributions to scientific study (Isaac Newton, Galileo, Copernicus, etc.), I feel that you are picking at the wrong thing.

  7. Project Inspired

    Posted by Meemsy on September 24, 2014 at 20:30

    I am a bit lost. While these are valid points, I think that saying SCIENCE cannot do something does not make sense. Science is not a tangible object or being that can or cannot do something. Science is a concept used to explain our universe. I just think it is a bit unclear when you say science cannot create life. You are right. Science CANNOT create life. No body claims that science created anything. Science is what we use to make sense of the universe.

    I believe that science and religion should be something we can correlate. There is no use in trying to disprove each other. Instead we should use science to help further our understanding of the universe God has created for us.

  8. rebecca-eve

    Posted by rebecca-eve on September 23, 2014 at 18:03

    Absolutely not. The more I learn about the cosmos, the more I can see His Hand in everything.

    • Project Inspired

      Posted by JesusFreak3278 on September 26, 2014 at 17:41

      I totally agree. I watched a sermon on YouTube once about the galaxies and universe. When you start to try to fathom how you could have something as tiny as an atom to something as huge as a galaxy that is thousands, even millions of light years away… You can’t fathom it. No “accident” could have created such things.