Polkinghorne- Science and Christianity are compatible

Question 1

Argument One

Answer 1

Explanation is needed for the fact that the world is intelligible. There is no survival value in the capacity for humans to make sense of the universe, The fact that we can suggests that this was part of God’s creative plan. Hume suggested that the universe naturally goes through cycles of order and chaos, and that this is a period of order that has nothing to do with God. but for Polkinghorne, Hume’s view is nothing more than speculation.
Multiverse theory suggests that the number of universes is potentially infinite, so some of them will appear ordered purely by chance without the need for God. Polkinghorne insists that there is no evidence that multiverse exists, so the argument against God fails. Also, the anthropic principle needs explaining. This refers to the incredibly precise fine-tuning of the elements in the universe that are absolutely essential at that particular degree or point for human life to exist.

‘The rational transparency and beauty of the universe are surely too remarkable to be treated as just happy accidents.’- John Polkinghorne, 51 Responses to Questions about God, Science and Belief.

Question 2

Argument Two

Answer 2

The idea of providence is at the heart of God’s relationship with the world and humankind.
- God creates, cares for, and sustains human life for a purpose.
- God does this in a way that humans cannot detect.
‘God does not fussily intervene to deliver is from all discomfort but neither is he the impotent beholder of cosmic history. Patiently, subtly, with finite respect for the creation he has to deal with, he is at work within the flexibility of its process.’- Polkinghorne, Science and Providence: God’s interaction with the world
COUNTER TO POLK: Critics would say this does not address the evidential problem of evils.

Question 3

Argument Three

Answer 3

Both religion and science are concerned with understanding and making sense of experience

• Religious experiences do require serious consideration
• The differences as seen in the different religions are due to cultural conditioning, but are nevertheless the same reality.
  COUNTER TO POLK: This could lead to the conclusion that the whole of Christianity is simply a culturally conditioned interpretation of religion, and its claims cannot be compared or assessed like scientific facts.

Question 4

Argument Four

Answer 4

The Bible gives evidence for Christian claims about Jesus that can be rationally examined just like a scientific theory can
- COUNTER TO POLK: Critics would say that a scientific theory arises after repeated experiments, claims about Jesus are made on one unrepeatable series of events said to be a unique revelation of God. Scientific theories are empirically based, whereas claims about Jesus are matters of belief.

Question 5

Argument Five

Answer 5

The claim that there is a God seems to be on that can be made on the basis of evidence and as such can be treated in the same way as scientific claim.
- Christianity is compatible with science, in that both are different ways of understanding reality.
- COUNTER TO POLK would argue that at best this argues for the existence of a God in the sense of deism as opposed to theism. The specific claims about Jesus, which makes Christianity the religion that it is, cannot have a scentific basis- they are based on belief.