To Know

======

From the time of man's first appearance on earth, one of his most fundamental desires has been to know. Adam's first task was to give each animal the name by which it would be known, and sin entered the world through Eve's wish to know as God knew. Throughout history, mankind has wavered along this division between what can and cannot be known, often mistaking the one for the other. Much of the early portion of Genesis deals with this fitful development of human knowledge, emphasized in Cain's descendants who came both to know and to teach architecture, music and crafts (Gen. 4:16-22), culminating with the desire not only to know but to be known in the building of the Tower of Babel (Gen. 11:4).

True science and what Paul referred to as "science falsely so-called" (1 Tim. 6:20 KJV) have continued their uneasy waltz ever since, science legitimately laboring to fulfill our stewardly mandate to subdue the Earth and have dominion over it (Gen. 1:28) against the mocking pantomime which proudly claims to "know" what it does not understand. The claim of "sure knowledge" has long been recognized as a characteristic of false science, for true science always leaves room for further, and occasionally conflicting, understanding which might improve, or even refute, the results of previous observation. Where scientific charletans might make bold assertions, true science advances hypotheses and adopts theories.

Yet for both, the underlying principle is the same -- a search for the best explanation of that which is sensed -- seen. heard, etc. -- and measured.

Historically, this model developed into the concept of "keeping appearances," not in the sense of false show but rather as an interpretation or model which described that which appeared to be true. The Greeks developed many such models, some of which were superseded in their own times, others of which lasted well into and past the middle ages, and others which remain with us today. Among the most influential of these models was the astronomy of Ptolemy, which built on the observations and theories of such previous scientists as Aristotle and Hipparchus. Ptolemy's models explained what could be seen -- "kept appearances" -- to the extent that the positions of stars and planets and even the occurrance of eclipses could be predicted with remarkable accuracy. Pragmatically, Ptolemy's astronomy "worked," yet true science understood it not as sure knowledge but as a good working hypothesis. When Galileo, much later, presented a better model based largely on better observations, the resistance he met was primarily centered not on the fact that he had in essense overturned much of Ptolemaic astronomy, but on his insistance that his astronomy was not just a better theory but was instead settled truth -- that he did not merely believe he had the correct interpretation, but that he "knew" it to be so. Later science, especially since Einstein, has justified the reticence of those who encouraged Galileo to adopt a more humble attitude, for while most of his astronomy and cosmology still fit the observed facts, still "keep appearances," in some things he has been proved wrong.

We live today in a world which has all but forgotten the humility required of true science. Especially in the fields of biology and climatology, bold claims of "knowledge" are asserted as though nothing more remains to be discovered or accounted for. In biology, the rash and unquestioning support of general evolution has leto many embarassments, such as the frequent discovery of species "known" to have evolved out of existence in the distant past. But there is nothing humorous in the offspring of evolutionism, both in the restrictions it has placed on true scientific inquiry and in the artificial evolutionism of the eugenics movement, the murderous progenitor of the German Holocaust, of "ethnic cleansing," of abortion, euthenasia and so much more of the culture of death. Climatology, once the science of weather, is now slinking into the same dark territory, claiming certain knowledge of that which it is at a loss to accurately predict. The worldwide cult of Global Warming has done more to restrict true science than anything ever shown of Galileo's opponents, enlisting public policy to its cause where scientific proof is lacking, enacting oppressive policies against those who contradict it, and threatening to plunge the world into a new dark age of superstition and chaos on the basis of what it claims to "know." "Science falsely so-called" is upon us.

Observation and the honest inquiry of legitimate science can do much to aid us in understanding, carrying the humble but serious along that path of the cultural mandate. As our confessions explain, the "book" of nature can teach us much. True knowledge, however, is the province of God, and must depend on our faith in Him and His Word. We can never truly know nature and science until we truly know God in Christ.

"For I know that my Redeemer lives, And He shall stand at last on the earth; And after my skin is destroyed, this I know, That in my flesh I shall see God ..." (Job 19:25-26)

========

Gary Fisher