In “God and science: Considering evolution through the eyes of faith” Dr. Jan F. Dudt, Professor of Biology at Grove City College and fellow for medical ethics with The Center for Vision and Values, provides insight into the manner in which Christians interpret evolution.
In his article, Dr. Dudt presents evolution as a concept that must be reconciled with the belief that everything was created by God. He attempts to do so by stating that Christians must accept that evolution “is nonetheless God’s process.” Throughout the article, Dr. Dudt recommends Christians to recognize that scientific findings “reveal God’s work, even when those discoveries are made by” nonbelievers. He articulates that non-believing scientists are able to understand the natural world, even if they lack the theological understanding of “God’s work.”
Although Dr. Dudt attempts to link scientific concepts with Christian beliefs earlier in his article, he explains that some “truths” are only supposed to be believed, as opposed to tested. He says that these truths are “spiritually discerned” and that scientific data ways in, but does not confirm them. He explicitly declares that “there is truth that does not need scientific confirmation.” Dr. Dudt presents the idea that it is acceptable to use science to the extent that it does not conflict with Christian beliefs.
A portion of the article is dedicated to explaining the point at which science should be disregarded. In his concluding paragraph, Dr. Dudt emphasizes that the use of science to portray a Christian idea presented in the Bible as false or to state that a miracle never happened, would be a misuse of science. This statement contradicts his earlier comment that recommends Christians to recognize scientific findings that “reveal God’s work”. Dr. Dudt is writing under his credentials as a professional biologist, but his article is promoting a Christian interpretation of the natural world.
Why is the use of scientific findings acceptable when they support Christian beliefs, but unacceptable when they contradict them?