Does the Bible Teach Science?

The late Oswald Chambers made a very pertinent remark: “If the Bible agreed with modern science, it would soon be out of date, because in the very nature of things modern science is bound to change”.

Never was there a truer or a more devastating statement. Science is always changing for the simple reason that a large part of science is not really science, but merely theory, not founded on fact. It was so even in ancient science, for Paul’s advice to young Timothy in his day was “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so-called” (1 Tim. 6:20). What shattering expressions—“profane and vain babblings” and “science falsely so-called”!

Science, if it be really science, cannot change for really ascertained knowledge must remain knowledge.

One thing is certain. God is the Author alike of true science and the Bible. Therefore there can be no contradiction between them, between creation and Divine revelation.

But does the Bible teach science? The answer is obvious. The Bible does not set out to teach science. It is the revelation of God in Christ, a Book with a spiritual testimony, of moral import. Yet at the same time anything in the Bible that refers to science is true. We shall see how the Bible sets forth scientific facts centuries before these were discovered by scientists. One is amazed as we see how here and there the Bible forestalled by long centuries the discoveries of the human mind. Let us give a few examples.

According to Greek and Roman philosophy, the heavens formed a solid vault over the earth. Aristotle, who flourished B.C. 384-322, described the heavens as “a sphere studded with stars”. The little girl who described the stars as gimlet holes through which the glory of heaven shone, was not far behind Aristotle in her idea.

Genesis 1, that incomparable description of original creation, and the reconstruction of the earth following on a supervening chaotic state, describes the heavens by the word, firmament. This as it stands would support the idea of the Greek and Roman philosophies for the word comes from Latin firmament, which has for its original meaning firm. But when the Hebrew word, translated firmament in our authorized version is examined, we find it would be correctly translated by the word, expanse. There could not be a better word to describe the illimitable space we know as the heavens. It was the great Lord Salisbury, no mean scientist, who described the word, ether, as a convenient term for hiding our ignorance. Who then guided the hand of Moses when he wrote the opening verses in Genesis 1? Surely it was Divine guidance, and nothing less.

The Egyptians taught that the earth was formed by the motion of air and the upward course of flame. But where did the air come from, and who or what gave to the flame its upward tendency? How was it that Moses at one stroke went back to the real origin of creation in the simple and yet sublime words of scripture, “In the beginning God created the heaven and earth” (Gen. 1:1)?

Moses of course was not present when the original creation occurred. How then could he describe what he had never seen, that is the at of creation: How puerile and unsatisfying is the Egyptian philosophy, how satisfying in its simple majesty is the account of creation in Genesis 1.

The Hindus taught that the earth was flat and triangular and composed of seven stories. This in turn was sustained on the heads of elephants, and the movements of the elephants produced earthquakes.

Even the early Fathers of the church taught philosophy only a little less foolish than that. Lactantius wrote, “The rotundity of the earth is a theory, which no one is ignorant enough to believe.” When we come to the Scriptures the rotundity of the earth is implied as forcibly as if stated in so many words.

We read, “On that night there shall be two men in one bed: the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left. Two women shall be grinding together: the one shall be taken and the other left. Two men shall be in the field; the one shall be taken and the other left” (Luke 17:34-36).

Here are two men in bed, night-time; two women grinding corn, breakfast-time; two men working in the field, day-time. How can one event find those it affects at one and the same time at different hours out of the twenty-four. Extend this statement, and the one event would find those it affects during every hour and minute of the twenty-four hours forming a complete day and night. That could only be if the earth were round and performed its diurnal motion of turning round its axis in relation to the sun once every twenty-four hours.

Even the astronomer Galileo (1564-1642) was threatened by the Romish Church with excommunication if he continued to assert that the earth revolved round the sun. It was looked upon as an insult by the Romish church that the earth should have a subservient place in relation to the sun. How is it that enshrined in the scriptures lay the truth of the rotundity of the earth, over fifteen long centuries before Galileo, and still longer before its truth found universal acceptance?

Lord Kelvin announced a great discovery which made a profound impression on the scientific world, viz.: that there is no precipitation of rain unless caused by electrical discharge. An interesting incident occurred in this direction, a good many years ago. A staff officer was lecturing on electricity to his brother officers. He alluded to this interesting discovery, and remarked that he had in his possession an ancient book, dating back over 3,000 years that anticipated this very discovery. His statement startled his audience not a little, and at the close of his lecture a crowd gathered round him asking for proof of his extraordinary statement.

He drew from underneath his tunic a pocket Bible, and read to his astonished hearers, “Who has divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning or thunder; to cause it to rain on the earth” (Job 38:26); “when He made a decree for the rain, and a way for the lightning or the thunder” (Job 28:26); “He causes the vapour ascend (evaporation, forming of clouds) from the ends of the earth; He makes lightnings for the rain” (Ps. 135:7); “He causes the vapours to ascend from the ends of the earth; He makes lightnings with rain” (Jer. 10:13; 57:16). His audience was much impressed. They might well be so.

Does not the narrative of how science is taught in the Bible many centuries before man by searching discovered these matters, not convince us of the Divine authorship of the Book, of its wonderful inspiration? And if that be so should it not lead us to a reverent and daily searching of this wonderful volume? And above all to a firm and full belief in its central message, that is the revelation of God in Christ, the atoning character of our Lord’s death, His resurrection, is ascension, His living ministry on high, His coming again? Everything in the blessed Book circles round and is subservient to this great central theme, even God in Christ, “the one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave Himself a ransom for all” (1 Tim. 2:5-6).

Miss this, and we miss all the meaning and blessing of the Scriptures.