If we acknowledge God when He reveals material and natural reality to us, we can say we have knowledge. However, when we fail to acknowledge God, we can’t have precise, accurate, and absolutely certain knowledge of truth. In that case, we’re blind, incapable of rational thought. This brute-beast mind drives naturalistic, materialistic science.
“Although it is reliable and durable, scientific knowledge is neither set in concrete nor perfect. Rather, it is subject to change in the light of new evidence or new interpretation of existing evidence. Because of its tentative nature, we cannot claim ‘absolute truth’ in science. The tentative nature of scientific knowledge also means that laws and theories may change.” ~ sciencelearn.org
“Different scientists can interpret the same datasets differently. How can this conflict happen? Scientists do strive to be objective, but it is just not possible to make truly objective observations and interpretations without any bias. A scientist’s mind is not a blank slate. Individual scientists have their prior knowledge, theoretical beliefs, experiences, cultural background, training, expectations and biases, each of which will affect their observations and conclusions.” ~ sciencelearn.org
“Science is pragmatic. Theories are judged by a single criterion – do they work? Their origin does not matter. They may be inferred, or invented, or dreamed. Until they are tested they are merely working hypotheses; in other words, they are plausible interpretations of data already available. Ingenious men can and do invent many theories to account for a given set of data.” ~ cs.cmu.edu
“. . . science is necessarily restricted to one aspect of the universe – the objective world of phenomena. It deals with probable knowledge only, its methods are empirical, its philosophy is pragmatic. The scientist explores the world of phenomena by successive approximations. He works in an atmosphere of probabilities; he knows that his data are never precise, and that his theories must always be rested.” ~ cs.cmu.edu
In sharing snippets like this, they’re always out of the context of the entire book. With this one, someone may say, “Wait a minute. You’re thinking you’re infallible.” However, that’s not how divine leading works. As we walk in the Spirit, the Holy Spirit makes us humble. He takes away our pride. The key to discerning God’s voice from all others is thankfulness and glorifying God rather than self. The mark of those who depend on their own understanding is that they aren’t thanking God for any revelation, and they’re glorifying their own intellects.
When we become aware of the fact that all truth, wisdom, knowledge, understanding, and righteousness come from God, we also become aware that we know in part. We realize that God will be continually correcting us. Indeed, we begin to see the similarity between true science and true divine revelation. And since true science is one of the ways that God reveals reality to His people, we would expect that similarity. If we were infallible, there would be no need for God to lead us.
However, when Christians think that they have everything figured out and they follow doctrines rather than Christ, they become dogmatic about those doctrines. They won’t accept correction from the Holy Spirit even when the Holy Spirit brings that correction through a brother or sister in Christ.
The bottom line is that we wait before the Lord in humility. We don’t get over-confident. Even our most treasured beliefs are subject to correction or expansion by the Holy Spirit. Then, when we read the Scripture, a verse will come alive to us. The Holy Spirit will speak to us through that verse, and we may find that we have to change a part of our former interpretation to accommodate this new revelation. However, we don’t try to work out that change on our own. We pray about it. We talk to other Christians we know and let the Holy Spirit move in our discussion, not trying to figure things out but acknowledging God in the process. We pray about those things we don’t understand rather than trying to develop our own little pet theories that we defend through debates and infighting.
Have you read this book yet?