The Limits of Science

We live in a society where scientific and technological advances are breathtaking. And I think it is a safe bet to say that in the next twenty years we will see entirely new technologies emerging as scientific advances continues to march forward at warp speed. We, indeed, are witnessing things today that would have been considered science fiction fifty years ago. But are there limits to where science can take us? As far as going forward only time will tell. However, when it comes to explaining the origin of our universe, our planet, and life, science is indeed limited.

Apologist, Frank Turek shares the following insightful comment on the limits of science: “Science rightfully enjoys great prestige in our society. But it’s a mistake to believe that every question can be answered by that same kind of science. As mentioned earlier, knowing how nature operates is not the same as knowing how nature originated.”1

The reason why science has a limit when it comes to explaining the origins question is that the very way that science functions makes origin explanations almost impossible. Since the scientific method operates through observable and repeatable experimentation we can see why trying to explain the origin of the universe would fall outside the realm of science since origin questions by their very nature can’t be observed and repeated. Therefore, all theories about the origin of our universe, our planet, and life are at best mere speculations by scientists.

Let’s take the origin of life as an example. While science and medicine are great at explaining how the human body functions the best they can come up with is that evolution was the vehicle that explains how human life came on the scene. Yet as we have seen, in many of my past devotions on this subject, evolution is totally a speculative theory and has no evidence to support it. And when it comes to the origin of the first life evolution has no real explanation at all. I like how apologist Norman Geisler put it: “Natural selection may be able to explain the survival of a species, but it cannot explain the arrival of a species.”2

We know how important and useful science can be as long as it stays within its lane; which extends to answering the how questions. However, I believe, that when it comes to the question of the origin of our universe and life, science must bow, not to natural revelation but to special revelation – the Bible. The better question to ask is why do we have a universe and life and who created it. Science in both of these why and who questions is clearly out of its lane. We need special revelation to answer the why and who questions and thankfully the Bible has the answers to both.

Just as natural revelation – nature – tells us that there is a God, special revelation is needed to tell us we need a Savior because of sin. In the same way natural revelation shows us the beauty of the marvelous universe we inhabit, but special revelation is needed to tell us about the God who created it.

When science tries to perform the duties of both natural and special revelation by both describing how things work and how they came to be, it is in essence trying to play God. Without God revealing Himself through the Bible we would have no way of knowing how and why He created the universe and life. Thankfully, we know the answers to both questions. God lies outside of science, and so does His explanation of origins. Thus, science will never be in a position to answer the origins question because it is limited in its scope. But praise God we have the Bible to fill in the origin gaps!

---

1 Charlie H. Campbell, Apologetics Quotes (Carlsbad, California: The Always Be Ready Apologetics Ministry, 2020), p. 80.

2 Charlie H. Campbell, Apologetics Quotes (Carlsbad, California: The Always Be Ready Apologetics Ministry, 2020), p. 8.