My last column outlined points I made in a February 18 debate at Stevens about religion and science. My “opponent,” Oxford mathematician John Lennox, a Christian, sent me the following response, which was originally published on my Scientific American blog, “Cross-check,” in a slightly longer form. See also his website, johnlennox.org.
I was rather amused by the title of my debate with John Horgan, “Can Faith and Science Coexist?” In one sense the answer is obvious and has nothing to do with God. All scientists presuppose and therefore have faith in the rational intelligibility of the universe. But the title probably intended the word “faith” as shorthand for “faith in God.” Indeed, one of my main reasons for believing in God is that we can do science. The mathematical intelligibility of nature is evidence for a rational spirit behind the universe.
I sympathise with Horgan’s main objection to belief in God–the problem of evil and pain. It is the hardest problem for both of us. Yet for me it leads to God and not away from Him for several reasons. Firstly, at the intellectual level, if there is no God then I agree with thinkers from Dostoyevsky to Dawkins who say that there is no such thing as evil (e.g. Dawkins’ famous statement: “there is no good…no evil… no justice…DNA just is and we dance to its music”). Rather contradictory then to talk about a problem of evil at all.
Secondly, getting rid of God does not get rid of the suffering. In fact, it can make the pain worse since it gets rid of all ultimate hope and justice. The vast majority of people who have ever lived have suffered and not received justice in this life. Since, according to atheism, death is the end, then these people will never receive justice since there is no life to come.
Whether God could have made a world in which fire warmed but didn’t burn and there were no destructive earthquakes is difficult. After all, earthquakes are paradoxically essential for the maintenance of life. Certainly, God could have made a world in which there was no moral evil. But there would have been no humans in it–it would be a robotic world. The greatest God-given capacity we humans have is the capacity to love. It inevitably carries with it the capacity to hate. Hence the world presents us all with a mixed picture – beauty and barbed wire.
The question I ask is: granted that this is so, is there anywhere evidence of the existence of a God whom I can trust with this deep issue? Yes. At the heart of Christianity there is a cross. The central claim of Christianity is that Jesus Christ is God incarnate – which raises the question: what is God doing on a cross? At the very least that shows me that God has not remained distant from human suffering but has become part of it. Furthermore, Christ rose from the dead, which is a guarantee that there is to be a future judgement. This is a marvellous hope, because it means that our conscience is not an illusion, and those who terrorise, abuse, exploit, defame, and cause their fellow humans untold suffering will not get away with it. Atheism has no such hope–for it ultimate justice is an illusion.
Finally, none of us finds the idea of ultimate justice attractive because we are all flawed and have all messed up. The cross also speaks of a place where I can receive forgiveness and new life by repenting and trusting the one who died for me. Christianity competes with no other philosophy or religion since no one else offers me such a radical solution to my human problem.
Be First to Comment