This is a high calling and a holy challenge, but we must not back away from it.

If scientific practice is inconsistent with scientists' private religious views, then we just have inconsistency. What we do not have is science that is neutral with respect to religious belief.

  - Vern Poythress, Redeeming Science

...they exchanged to truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever!

  - Romans 1:25

All Christians working in the sciences are by definition religious. They profess to believe in God as Creator, Sovereign, Redeemer, and Lord. They do not put this belief on the shelf when they are working in their scientific vocation; however, they may appear at times to put it on hold.

This is the case if a Christian working in the sciences considers that, somehow, expressions of faith - such as remarking the beauty and wisdom of God observable in the patterns of science - are somehow not appropriate to that arena. He may well believe that what he sees in his work is evidence on every hand of the sovereignty, beauty, wisdom, and goodness of God, but he is reluctant to express this - whether in conversation or publication - or to bring his work in science to this conclusion - except, perhaps, within the safe confines of like-minded folk.

In this case we have what Vern Poythress would describe as an "inconsistency."

Unbelieving scientists are not inconsistent in their unbelief. They don't believe God has anything to do with science - or anything else - and so they feel no compunction about mentioning Him in connection with their work. They may be happy for their Christian colleagues to hold to their religious views, but they want none of it for themselves, and they feel no need to tolerate any such conversation within their disciplines.

That's not inconsistent, but it is disingenuous.

Unbelieving scientists are as much people of faith as their Christian colleagues. They have all kinds of views about the nature of the universe, the way things ought to be, the origins and purpose of life, the way to truth, and much more, but none of these are amenable to proof by the method they practice and which they insist is the only reliable means to truth.

These are tenets of faith, and while unbelieving scientists may be disingenuous in not admitting them, they are not inconsistent in practicing them.

As Christians who are interested in the sciences, this situation presents a twofold challenge: First, we need to challenge the unacknowledged religious beliefs of our unbelieving friends. And second, we need to insist that we should be as free to practice our religious views in the scientific arena as our unbelieving colleagues are, so that we begin to make a more concerted and consistent effort to connect our work with our most basic beliefs.

This is a high calling and a holy challenge, but we must not back away from it.

Let us instead look for help in pursuing both aspects of this challenge, for the nature of our peculiar religious faith requires it of us.

T. M. Moore

Senior Theologian and Historian