Faith & Science


In naturalism, material is all that exists.  Therefore we should be able to eventually discover everything about everything (given enough time). 


In spiritualism, “spirit” is all that exists.  The material is just illusion.  One cannot know the spiritual without transcending the material.  In an odd twist of spiritualism, author Whitley Strieber attempts to describe spiritualism in terms of naturalism. 

“… scientists who considered the soul a ‘supernatural’ idea and so stayed away from any study of it.  But there was no supernatural, there were only phenomena that had been understood, quantified, and measured, and phenomena that had not.  That the patterns induced in fields of electrons by changing conditions in a body would persist after death and become a sort of plasma, conscious and richly aware of its memories, had never been imagined.  It had been assumed, if it was thought about at all, that any electromagnetic activity in the nervous system simply ceased when the body died.”

2012, Whitley Strieber, 2007


In dualism or supernaturalism, both material and spirit exist.  Dualism allows for the reality of both material and spiritual and something/someone outside “the box.”  Even acknowledging “the box” is a confession that we cannot know everything (anything outside “the box”) without help from a supernatural being, Himself outside “the box” and Creator of “the box.”



"How can you possibly believe in God?" asked an incredulous psychiatrist.


Behind his question lay a world view, popularly thought to be the scientific world view, that faith is unnecessary-that all of reality is in principle knowable by logic and experiment. From the Enlightenment until the 1930s it was a world view that seemed justified. Then Kurt Gödel proved and published a theorem which stated, in effect, that within the framework of any self-consistent (non-contradictory) non-trivial set of axioms (logical rules assumed to be true) it is possible to state propositions whose truth or falsehood is undecidable in principle. In other words, there will always be truths which cannot be proved or deduced, even within the confines of the mathematics, the "Queen of the Sciences."


Now this theorem applies to the science generally, because science seeks to explain the world by means of a collection of self-consistent theories, which are subject to possible disproof by experiments. Any self-consistent theory can be axiomatized, which means that it is subject to Gödel's Theorem. Any inconsistent theory is unsatisfying to scientists (even though it may be quite useful), because experience has shown us that inconsistencies usually indicate regimes in which the theory breaks down. Such theories are eventually replaced by more consistent ones, and we are back at Gödel's Theorem. Thus, the idea that we can necessarily "know it all" through the scientific method is dead, and has been dead for the better part of a century.



Does logic need faith? 


Journal of Creation 20(2), Aug 2006, 123–127



Kurt Gödel was the mathematician who wrote the famous incompleteness theorem in 1931 that proved that within every consistent formal system there are undecidable propositions, and the consistency of the system cannot be proved within the system. In other words, a mathematical system can’t determine its own consistency, and it must have propositions that can neither be proved nor disproved with the system. Propositions such as these are the axioms of the system whose truth must be assumed. That is, we believe the axioms to be true. Well, isn’t this another way of describing faith?



What is Truth?