Atheist's Attacks

Answering Humanist's Accusations Against the Bible

Christian Resources

Is Science Superior?

Time for truth! Christianity is the foundation science was built on.

THE HUMANIST'S CLAIM IS: And Humanists esteem highly those who study this world and provide a better understanding of it. Unlike the theologians who focus on influencing supposed supernatural powers, persons using a scientific outlook have enabled great progress to be made in reducing misery and increasing happiness.

The question at the top of the page is, "Does the Bible teach false science?" That's a valid question and on the next few pages we'll be looking at claims that the science in the Bible is not accurate.

But, shouldn't we also look at the other side of the coin? Is what humanist teach about Christianity true or false? And the answer is: some of what they teach about Christianity is false. The above claim, quoted directly from the humanist web site, shows astounding ignorance about Christianity. Of course, we know that -- as scripture teaches -- humanists are unable to understand the Bible... they are blind guides leading the blind.

What's the problem? The statement that "theologians focus on influencing supposed supernatural powers." That simply is not true. Christian theologians study God (through scripture) so as to know God better and so that, by knowing Him better, we can be more closely become like our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Yes, we do pray... even theologians pray... if prayer is what the humanist is referring to. But, the objective of prayer is not "influencing supernatural powers." That's a description of what the Greeks and Romans (and other ancient cultures) felt they had to do. Their "gods" were capricious, arbitrary, and uncaring when it came to humanity. Their fictional gods supposedly needed to be conjoled, bribed, tricked, begged, or in some other way convinced to do what some human wanted them to do. And you still never knew for sure what they would do.

What Is The Purpose of Prayer?

Prayer has one purpose only... to glorify God. I'll let John MacArthur explain as he talks about the Lord's prayer in a November 1979 sermon:

Everything in this prayer, beloved, seeks to glorify God, seeks to lift up his name, seeks to exalt his holiness. And I would just tell you right now that’s the purpose of all prayer. If you think prayer is for you, you’ve missed the point.

His glory is the issue. So when you pray get it in mind you’re not informing God, he already knows everything. You’re not forcing God, you’re not badgering God, you’re not irritating him, you’re not conning him. What you’re doing is submitting to his sovereignty.

And that’s the affirmation of the disciples’ prayer. That’s the way we want to look at it. It begins with, “Our Father who art in heaven,” adoring God. It ends with, “For thine is the kingdom, the power, the glory forever,” adoring God again. In the middle, everything in it is about God.

“Our Father who art in heaven,” that’s God’s paternity. “Hallowed be thy name,” that’s God’s priority. “Thy kingdom come,” that’s God’s program. “Thy will be done,” that’s God’s purpose. “Give us this day our daily bread,” that’s God’s provision. And, “forgive us our debts,” that’s God’s pardon. “And lead us not into temptation,” that’s God’s protection. And, “thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory forever,” that’s God’s preeminence. And all prayer, Jesus is saying, is not to stand in the streets, and the corners of the streets to pray to be heard by men, to get glory for yourself, but all prayer is by absolute contrast to bring glory to God.

Quoted from the sermon: The Purpose of Prayer by John MacArthur.

So you see, to make the statement he has made, the humanist has no understanding of this aspect of Christianity nor of Biblical prayer. But, what about the claim that "persons using a scientific outlook have enabled great progress?"

I've written about this on previous pages, here for example. But, let's take a look at it from another angle: the fact that the rise of science could not have happened without Christianity. The following is based on information in an article by Eric V. Snow, titled:

Christianity: A Cause of Modern Science?

This historiography of science has still to face up honestly to the problem of why three great ancient cultures (China, India, and Egypt) display, independently of one another, a similar pattern vis-a-vis science. The pattern is the stillbirth of science in each of them in spite of the availability of talents, social organization, and peace—the standard explanatory devices furnished by all-knowing sociologies of science on which that historiography relies ever more heavily. - Stanley Jaki, The Savior of Science (Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway, 1988), page 35

The hard facts of history, as found in the writings of Duhem, Jaki, and Merton, destroy the common claim of evolutionists that Christianity and science are necessarily incompatible. Much like how German sociologist Max Weber attributed the rise of capitalism to Protestantism's values, Merton's thesis maintains that the values of English Puritanism promoted scientific work. More significantly, Duhem and Jaki's research insists that the philosophical beliefs of Christianity had to drive out the anti-scientific conceptions of paganism in order for science to be born. Far from man's mind, the beliefs of the Bible ultimately freed him from the pagan dogmas that prevented the expression of his reason through a self-sustaining science. - Eric V. Snow, "Christianity: A Cause of Modern Science

It was the Bible that freed people from pagan dogma and led to the rise of science and the scientific method in Europe. So, while the humanist is right, advances in science resulted in huge benefits for people, those advances were only possible because of the foundation provided by Christianity.

Conclusion: Humanists are not telling the complete story. They leave out the fact that it was Christianity that provided the foundation upon which modern science and the scientific method were built.

The next humanist claim: The Bible teaches a Stationary Earth as the Center of the Universe

An erroneous Bible teaching caused Christian theologians to oppose Galileo’s proof that the earth rotates on its axis and revolves around the sun. In the sixteenth century, Copernicus proposed this theory about the double motion of the earth. In the following century, Galileo’s telescope proved that Copernicus had been right.

To oppose the Copernican doctrine and show that the earth remains stationary while the sun moves around it, the Catholic Church pointed to the tenth chapter of the book of Joshua [according to Andrew White]. There we are told that Joshua, in order to have a longer period of daylight in which to carry out the Lord’s command to slaughter the Amorites, ordered the sun to stand still – not the earth.

Is this true? Does the Bible teach the earth was stationary and at the center of the universe? Click here to get the answer.