I was trained and excelled in science and considered that science revealed “all reality (by definition physical reality)” until age 35. However, I did not “believe in” science as a philosophy i.e. I did not believe that science led to any perspective on life that would change my social behavior. I knew there was a clear delineation between “good” and “evil” actions, and trusted that secular law codified long-recognized standards of behavior which damaged the underpinnings of an orderly and workable society.
In my 35th year, I was confronted with spirituality and came to believe in and worship the God of the Christian Bible, which includes the spiritual background of the “Old Testament” Hebrew Scriptures included in the Christian canons. This “conversion” did not mean that I became less adept with science, but more so.
As a Christian, I continue to believe scientific theories where supported by currently working sets of observations and conclusions which predict physical behavior arrived at through the scientific method. The Scientific Method entails conceiving an hypothesis, demonstrating its utility as a predictor of physical behavior in controllable, repeatable, and measurable circumstances by any and all third parties willing to repeat or improve the experiments. Any failure of later repeatable tests requires scrapping the hypothesis or accepting physical limitations upon it (e.g. Newtonian Mechanics beak down close to the speed of light).
I get very suspicious when contrarian “testers” must be approved by any advocacy group before their evidence may be published in mainline journals.
However, more than a few religious and secular zealots and criminals ignore, distort, and subvert the Scientific Method to spin myths (and frauds) about the nature, age, and causality of phenomena on the earth and in the universe. Many more are blinded by their self-interests and political factions, and unwilling to consider contrarian information. Such activity is not science.
The two religions: Darwinism and Christianity have been locked in a frightful dance through such ignorance.
However, Augustine of Hippo (considered by most Catholics and Evangelical Protestants as a top theologian) made a strong case for Christianity to avoid such controversies. His main argument concerned conflicts where a Biblical interpretation might be only one of several Biblical alternatives and the physical explanation might likewise be only one of multiple alternatives.
The bottom line was that Augustine urged Christians not to argue with “scientists” except where major faith issues are assaulted by scientific hypotheses for which evidence is weak.
Thanks for visiting,
R. E. J. Burke