While in Australia recently, I received a letter from an old friend. The letter asked if there could be some leeway for the findings of science, especially concerning the Bible teaching of the six literal, consecutive, twenty-four-hour days of creation about six thousand years ago. He included a very carefully crafted article in which he pled for his Seventh-day Adventist scientist friends to accept the apparent scientific evidence for a much older world and thus reinterpret Genesis chapters 1-9.
This was not new. The real question is: Can we believe that the Bible is the basis of our faith concerning salvation while also recognizing that the Bible may not always be scientifically sound? My answer is an emphatic, “No!” “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” 2 Timothy 3:16. Some seem to think that evidence for the “big bang” theory, for example, is not strong enough to cause Christians to waver from other literal understandings of the Bible. But my friend was also concerned that if we defend Bible stories as literal (such as the miracles of Christ), many young people trained in the knowledge of “science” would turn away from the Seventh-day Adventist faith, possibly from Christianity itself, because these stories could not be validated by science.
Copernicus, Galileo and others discovered that the earth was not the center of the universe, but that our solar system revolves around the sun. This fact was strongly opposed by the Roman Church during the 17th century. Galileo was brought before the Inquisition and sentenced to house arrest for the last eight years of his life for holding such heretical views.
The Catholic Church tried to use certain scriptures to buttress their opposition to Galileo. In frustration he proposed that astronomy should not be judged by the Bible, but should depend upon observation. That view means Scripture should be interpreted to support the scientific evidence. Inspiration makes some interesting comments:
“Science is ever discovering new wonders, but she brings from her research nothing that, rightly understood, conflicts with divine revelation.” Education, p. 128.
“Inferences erroneously drawn from facts observed in nature have, however, led to supposed conflict between science and revelation, and in an effort to restore harmony, interpretations of Scripture have been adopted that undermine and destroy the force of the word of God.” Ibid.
Notice these important principles:
1) Science, properly understood, and the Bible are in complete harmony.
2) There is no inconsistency between science and the Bible.
3) The book of nature and the book of Revelation shed light upon each other.
Science can often change quickly and radically under further investigation. But the Bible does not change. Therefore, “The Bible is not to be tested by men’s ideas of science, but science is to be brought to the test of the unerring standard.” Counsels to Parents, Teachers and Students, p. 425. Many times, we have to wait for science to catch up to the Bible.
In the next Hartland Ministry Report, we will look at a few predictions of Ellen White that were thought to be erroneous and see if science has caught up.
God bless you.
