We are in the middle of a global revolution in what is termed "Information Age". The rapid advance of technology is transforming the way in which we think and live and the challenges a Christian faces are of unprecedented magnitude. New technologies - particularly the computer and the Internet - are becoming as basic as learning the alphabet, and help to 'down size' our work force. Companies now can exist as one-man corporations functioning from virtual offices working with virtual team mates! Although it may seem an exaggeration, in the words of Cosmos, the character in the motion picture 'Sneakers.' "This world is not run by weapons any more or energy or money. It's run by ones and zeros - little bits of data."
In such a developing scenario, Faith v/s Science questions remain as intellectual challenges for disciples of Christ. We might be tempted to doubt the trustworthiness and truthfulness of the Biblical revelation and may find ourselves having to hold a genuine faith along with higher academic pursuits. Will I have to commit intellectual suicide to believe the Bible? Can the Bible and science co-exist? You may be honestly wrestling with these issues and many others as well.
Let us consider the science versus faith debate in its proper perspective. I believe that there can be 'no final conflict' (as the late Dr. Francis Schaeffer put it) between Science and the Bible. It will not be possible to exhaustively deal with the wide gamut of concerns ranging from the Big-Bang cosmology at the macroscopic level to genetic engineering trends like the theoretical possibility of cloning human beings at the microscopic level. Yet I will attempt to strike a balance in approaching an issue as sensitive as this.

WARM-UP
The Bible is a book that is pre-scientific in time and non-scientific in purpose. It was never meant to be a textbook of science. While science is concerned with function and mechanism, the Scripture engages itself with purpose and meaning. Its goal is moral and its central theme is relationship. Biblical authors under the inspiration of God's Holy Spirit were revealing the development of salvation history through a four-point grid: Creation -Fall -Redemption -Consummation, which forms the cornerstone of the Christian worldview.
Science seeks cause and effect relationships in the universe primarily through empirical research, observation and experiment as its domain of science is space-time-matter. This is why science can give us only mechanisms that explain natural processes but never meaningfully explain the 'why' behind them! For instance, science may say that the universe originated by a Big-bang but it can never tell us why it originated in the first place. The Big-Being behind the Big-Bang cannot be precipitated in a laboratory through empirical method! C. S. Lewis put it so well: "The laws of motion do not set the billiard balls moving: they analyse the motion after something else had provided it." This should caution us against the trap of scientism which holds that the key to every observable reality is science.
It has now become fashionable to assume that science and theology as separate theatres of operation - science as the means of obtaining know-ledge through the senses, and theology as relating to faith and revelation. While science and the Bible do exist for different purposes they need not necessarily exist at cross purposes. Even though the Bible is non-scientific, it does not mean that it is unscientific - its primary focus is not a scientific explanation of the phenomena it describes! The age of the universe, the why and what of dinosaurs, or whether the earth was inhabited by hominids long ago are really fascinating questions. But they are not Biblical questions, since our faith or salvation do not depend on such information. God has chosen not to elaborate such subjects in the Bible for His purpose is very different. As Christians we are grateful that God disclosed Himself to us in Books: Nature and Scripture - through His created World and through His revealed Word. Theologians refer to this as general revelation and special revelation respectively. Science is the human interpretation of nature; likewise theology is the human interpretation of Scripture. Since Scripture and nature have both been authored and spoken into existence by the same God, both these 'books' can never contradict each other. But what could possibly contradict is science and theology, due to the fallible human understanding of the books that God has given us.
Now since science and theology can contradict each other (while scripture and nature will not, as proceeding from the same God), Christians and Scientists need to share a reciprocal responsibility in their respective academic disciplines. That is why a Christian scientist can combine faithfulness to the word of God and openness to scientific enterprise without putting them into water - tight compartments. If modern scientific theories suggest conclusions that threaten our understanding of God's revelation, we need to do our 'home work' with the two books.
It becomes important to recognize that science does not holistically address all human issues. It merely works in the domain of cause and effect, avoiding explanations for their reality. It is the hope today that all reality in this physical world will be explained in terms of mechanisms and God will have less and less territory to live in. But mechanisms are not everything. What about beauty, values, relationships etc. that do not fall under the domain of science? A sunset is not just electromagnetic radiation! Neither is a kiss an act of simple contact of two pairs of lips with reciprocal transmission of carbondioxide. No, all reality cannot be reduced to physics and chemistry.

CHRISTIAN CONTRIBUTION TO SCIENCE
Many people in our contemporary post-modern culture view the Christian faith as unscientific and, in the worst case, hold that it is even anti-scientific. Very often the level of conflict between a scientific theory and Biblical data is grossly exaggerated and the positive influence of the Christian world view on scientific progress is seldom acknowledged. For example, our high school text books teach Pascal's law but they present little of the scientist's motivation for the discovery, or his philosophical and very Christian presuppositions. I would like to argue that it was the Christian faith that provided an adequate backdrop for the birth of modern science.
As C. S. Lewis commented, "Men became scientists because they expected law in nature, and they expected law in nature because they believed in a legislator." It was the Christian insistence on the uniformity of nature which provided the essential basis for the scientific enterprise. R.Hooykaas says, "Metaphorically speaking, whereas the bodily ingredients of science have been Greek. It's vitamins and hormones were Biblical." Puritan scientists believed that the study of science was a sacred attempt to 'think God's thoughts after Him'. What is overlooked often is that science as an academic discipline has its own philosophy and history.
Many of us believe the false notion that science does not require faith of any sort. This is not true. Scientific methods work on two cardinal principles: Causality (Every effect has a cause ) and Uniformity (Nature behaves uniformly at any point of space and time). It is clear that for any honest empirical research methodology, these two principles are to be believed. To quote Hooykaas once again, "For the atheist uniformity is just an assumption, an article of faith. Even atheists have to believe in something!". Einstein once noted, "The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is so comprehensible." No wonder, a book written by a sensible author has to make sense!
The Christian founders of modern science who knew Psalm 19:1 very well understood that Scriptures stated that the 'heavens declared the glory of God'. They had a conceptual framework within which they could explore the mysteries He had created. In fact, to them this became an act of worship. I have often wondered why India as a land of intellectuals could not become the breeding ground of modern science. It is not surprising that modern science could not blossom and flourish in cultures like those of India, Greece or the Arab world due to their pantheistic understanding of the universe. These could not provide the conceptual climate for scientific enterprise. Due to our astrological approach to the heavens (as opposed to the heavens as God's workmanship), cyclical approach to time (in contrast to the linear model of Christian teaching) and, physical and metaphysical views that deify nature in someway or the other, scientific enterprise is stifled in our great land. A false worldview cannot provide the right framework for empirical research. It was only the Christian worldview that provided the adequate intellectual breeding ground for modern science to flourish. Therefore it should not surprise us that the founding fathers of modern science were devout Christians - Copernicus, Pascal, Kepler and Newton. For them their faith and profession intersected. For most of them faith was a product of their scientific studies and their motivation for further study was their faith! The philosophical pre-suppositions that are basic to any scientific endeavour include premises like 1) the existence of an objectively real world, 2) the comprehensibility of that world, 3) the reliability of human reason and 4) the reliability of human sense perception. It is interesting to note that the sub-structure on which the entire scientific edifice is erected are philosophical presuppositions that were part of Christian teaching. Thus modern science was conceived, born, developed and matured within the matrix of Christian theism.

APPROACHING SCIENCE RIGHTLY
Dr.Norman Geisler makes a very helpful distinction between primary and secondary causes. He uses the terms Origins and Operations to distinguish the two. It is now beyond doubt that the universe had a beginning (the Big Bang cosmological model of the universe is being recognised at present by the scientific community as the standard model) and needed a cause. This cause is the primary cause. Now, there are three types of phenomena.
1. Repeatable and Accessible - These can be examined and established by experiments in a lab: (e.g. Law of gravity) (Normality)
2. Rare phenomena/event: e.g. Life cycle of a star (Rarity)
3. Once for all events: e.g. The Big-Bang (Singularity)
The origin of universe is a past singularity - a non-repeatable event the scenario of which cannot be recreated today for experiments. The cause for such events are primary causes.
On the other hand, secondary causes explain how things work today. They deal with the ways in which things normally operate. Primary causes explain origins while secondary causes explain operations. Origins are singularities that happened in the past (and they don't happen today). Operations are normalities or regularities that occur in the present. Depending on the event being studied, science calls for different approaches. The studies on operations can be empirical (by observing regular occurrences) while the studies on singularities should be forensic (by collecting evidences). For the former, we could use a laboratory and for the latter, we might use a courtroom!
The focus of the Bible, especially in its opening chapters, is to give us the primary cause - for everything! We will get frustrated if we open our Bibles to look for secondary causes. That is chiefly the domain of space-time science where we encounter regularities, which can be explored through empirical research.
Thus Genesis 1:1, the majestic opening verse of the Bible, is a powerful declaration which has equal implications for both theology and science. "In the beginning (Time) God created the heavens (Space) and the earth (Matter)." It was an Infinite-Personal God who created finite space-time continuum. In fact this verse provides the basis for causality - the cause for everything that is finite.

EXAMPLES OF HARMONY
We will now look at some of the specific verses in the Bible which are incredibly accurate 'scientific statements'. Whether it is the two foundational principles of Science, namely, causality and uniformity, the Laws of Thermodynamics, or evidences for finite universe, Scripture implicitly affirms these truths.
Genesis 1:1: Law of causality and finitude of the universe This verse declares that time, space and matter were created as a single act of God and hence it exists and functions as a continuum. The physical universe is a caused entity and hence it is finite. It is therefore legitimate to look for secondary causes in the space-time realm.
Genesis 2:2: First Law of Thermodynamics (Law of conservation of mass) ". . . God had finished the work . . ." This means that the total energy input He provided was finite. That is the reason why the total energy in the universe remains a constant.
Genesis 3:17,18:
Second Law of Thermodynamics (Law of universal decay) The universe is running out of useful energy. Entropy is on the increase. Output is always less than input. When mankind rebelled against the Creator, the law of decay was kick-started. The 2nd law is at work since the fall of man in Genesis 3.
Genesis 8:22:
Law of UniformityThe context is God's covenant with Noah immediately after the flood. Noah may have wondered whether the flood would have disturbed all regularities of the universe - after all the flood was a punishment. The promise God made was "As long as the earth endures . . . will never cease". We can thus expect uniform behaviour in nature without which all scientific exploration would come to a stand still.
Psalm 139: 13-16: Specified complex information in DNA Energy, time and chance alone cannot produce specified complexity. Intelligence and an ordering mechanism to specify the information content are also required. The complexity of information in the DNA points to the source of that information - a God who is Infinite, Personal and Relational.
Hebrews 11:3: Primary cause is outside space-time domain "... The universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible." This shows that the cause for the cosmos lies 'outside' it. If we look for causes inside it we would discover only secondary causes. No wonder science can neither disprove nor prove the existence of God (Primary cause). Nature itself is not natural! There is a supernatural cause for nature.
Scientific knowledge is touted as the key to understanding ourselves and our world. But history has shown us that this philosophy leads to hopeless despair. A clockwork universe cannot give us meaning and hope. The security that emerges out of our relationship with an Infinite-Personal- Relational God makes it possible for us to face the future with hope.
Discoveries in science should inspire us to see how they harmonise with God's revelation in the words of the Bible. It should be our firm conviction that since the same God who 'authored' the universe also inspired the writings of Scripture, a consistent message will flow through these two channels. In other words, Facts of Nature will not contradict Truths of the Bible. Only insufficient data of science or misinterpreted data of the Bible can result in problems. So it should be possible for us to integrate the Word and the World. As Christians we have a responsibility to re-examine the interpretations of both nature and Scripture so that we do not find an impossible conflict between living faith and scientific evidence.
Professor Stephen Hawking, one of the greatest theoretical physicists of our time, in his famous book, A Brief History of Time, suggests that, "if we discover a complete theory of science .. we would know the mind of God." We must disagree! It is not science that reveals the mind of God - the most it could do is to serve as a pointer. It is only the knowledge of Jesus Christ (The Son of God) and a study of the Bible (The Word of God) that could do so. We are indeed privileged to know the mind of God. This mind is one that looks beyond science and technology and offers us love and hope. It addresses the fundamental problem of sin and human rebellion against the Creator. The English astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle and his famous Sri Lankan associate Chandra Wickramsinghe referred to Arch-deacon William Paley's well known argument for a creator God by saying, "Really Paley is still in the tournament with a chance of being the ultimate winner!"
Many scientists do not recognise that they are dealing with God's revelation in nature (which is God's created world) when they do science. Many Liberal theologians too do not realise that they are handling God's revelation in Scripture (which is God's revealed Word) when they interpret the Bible. But the fact remains that both are exploring God's two primary channels of self-disclosure. They finally end up providing defective models on important questions! If both of them have no concern for revelation, it is left to us as Evangelical Christians who are trained in science to bridge this gulf. For that we need both good science and good faith!