Summary Statements - 3 of X - Math, Laws, Proof, Purpose, & Facts
The mathematical way of describing God's normal working in creation is not explicitly stated in the Bible. The mathematical method of approaching God's working in creation must therefore be used very carefully. Let us celebrate its usefulness, but always make sure we undertand what assumptions are being made.
There are no mathematical “laws” of nature, if by such “laws” we mean that God MUST always do things the same way ALL of the time. Such “laws” are useful descriptions of how God normally works. The theories that describe/assert such “laws” can and should be for good (the dominion mandate).
There is no such thing as “proof” that a given scientific (mathematical) theory is true (i.e., problem of induction). Even the so-called “law” of gravity cannot be proven to be true – meaning that God must ALWAYS work this way (e.g., Jesus walked on water, the axehead floated, etc.). This would take away from God's sovereignty and free will (contingency). However, we should be appreciative that God normally works in a faithful way, and use these mathematical theories for the glory of God and the good of His Church and mankind (C. Brown, Miracles and the Critical Mind, G Clark, The Philosophy of Science).
Most scientific theories have mathematical formulations. Per Popper, these mathematical hypotheses do not claim that anything exists in nature/creation which corresponds to it (this is not necessarily true of the associated scientists, though). It erects a fictitious mathematical world behind that of the appearances, but without the claim that this world exists. It is to be regarded as only a mathematical hypothesis, and not as anything really existing in nature. (Popper, Conjectures and Refutations, pg. 169, Polanyi).
The modern scientific way of describing “how” things work has resulted in two critical changes in how reality is viewed by the Western world: a) it has removed purpose from the realm of explanation (the focus now is on the efficient cause of something), and b) it has resulted in the scientific explanation of things to be viewed as “facts” and “objective” knowledge - understood typically to be “truth” - and which is available to all people. All other knowledge is viewed as subjective knowledge (values, morals, religion). (see Newbigin, Proper Confidence, Chapters 2, 3, and 4)
Even though a Biblical worldview was responsible for providing the essential presuppositions for the creation of modern science (see above), once that view took hold and permeated throughout Western world, it, sadly, eventually resulted in the removal of God from the scientific realm. This was the unfortunate eventual result of the working out of the ideas of Descartes/Enlightenment thinking/Age of Reason.
Questions to be answered:
Are there mathematical “laws” of nature that God must follow?
What is “proof'“?
Has modern science removed “purpose” from the realm of explanation? How?
Does modern science reveal “facts”? What are “facts”?
What is “objective” knowledge?
What is “subjective” knowledge?
What assumptions about God and His creation enabled the development of modern science?
Other questions ….
