In the sixties, there seemed to be nothing science could not fix. We landed on the moon, but it turns out science cannot fix humanity’s core problem.
Perhaps we should start by asking: Can science solve any problem? Surprisingly, the answer is “No”!
Science can not solve all of our problems. While scientific understanding can help battle things like disease, hunger, and poverty when applied properly, it does not do so completely and automatically.
~ Science Questions with Surprising Answers, “How can science solve all of our problems?“, italics theirs
If you are a child of the sixties and seventies, you realize that this is a stark admission, and it is one that runs counter to years of educational thought that if we only knew the answer we could solve all of the world’s problems. However, it turns out that science alone cannot solve humanity’s problems.
The article goes on to say that knowledge is important, but action based upon that knowledge is required. Science can offer a pill, but if you do not take it, then you might not be cured.
Further down in the article, we can read:
Take world hunger, for example. There is currently enough food produced on the earth every year to comfortably feed every single person. The world produces about 700 trillion grams of rice each year. With seven billion people on the planet, 365 days in the year, and about 40 grams per typical serving of rice, there is enough rice on the planet to feed every single last person seven servings of rice every day. And this is just rice….
Poverty and food scarcity can be caused by many things. One thing the article points out is that tyrants often use hunger as a weapon to control people. In addition to reasons the article gives, wars cause suffering, poverty and food scarcity as well.
The article makes the claim that wars cannot be solved by science. Wars are a result of clashing human wants and desires (cf. Jas 4:1-3). Not only is this a matter of human wants, but science cannot even tell you what you should desire. That is outside of the realm of science.
That is because science, for all the good it brings us, does not have moral authority over the human heart. It cannot. Indeed, the goal of science is, rather, to be objective.
…We have made progress against many diseases and maladies that do much to increase our lifespan and comfort. Nevertheless, we still have war, oppression, hatred, bigotry, crime, overpopulation, poverty, and unnecessary destruction of the environment. These are not problems that can be solved by technology alone, since they require improving human behavior….
~ Responsible Thinking, “Solving Social Problems“
In short, human beings have a heart issue. Who of us is not familiar with Jer 17:9?
Why did God bring the flood in Noah’s day? A few reasons are given, but one in particular sums up all the others:
5 And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
~ Ge 6:5
Not only were they violent, not only did they practice evil, but they thought evil continually! Human beings have a heart problem!
The Corruption of Science
Of course, scientists themselves are human beings, and that means they too have a heart problem. That is why, as the thinking of people become more and more twisted in the end times, even science itself shows that it is not as pure as it is very often presented. In fact, it more and more has become more superstition and science fiction than real science in recent decades.
A large part of the problem is trying to puzzle out the world and the universe without God in the picture. This is the opposite of what science used to be. There once was a time when science, the arts and literature were there to discover and inspire praise of God. The arts often tried to glorify God and His creation. Science did not dispute that God created the universe, but rather it set out to discover how God created and sustains it all.
Obviously, science does not delve into the supernatural. After all, chasing after supernatural events does not serve the main purpose of discovering natural laws, the ones we deal with every day. By definition, the supernatural is not what is being studied.
This is both science’s greatest strength and its greatest weakness. Studying in this manner magnifies natural law — how God intended things to work. However, when too much emphasis is placed upon putting God out of the picture, there is a vacuum. Vacuums love to be filled, and if it is not filled with truth, then it will be filled with falsehood and perhaps even utter nonsense.
When a politician stands up and says global warming is a “fact” and that “science proves” that human beings are the cause, we are looking at dogma, not real science. Global warming is a theory. It may be supported by some facts, but there are also other facts that dispute it.
When people say something is “just a theory”, the arrogant love to scoff. However, if they are truly honest, they will admit in the end that theories are not facts, theories can and often must change, and that scientific thought has to change over time as more data becomes available. And, yet, they will continue to treat their dogma as fact.
Scientific American published not so long ago an article where the title pretty much shows how far down the road of lunacy we have gone: “Are We Living in a Computer Simulation?” This truly is about as off-the-rails as it gets. Almost as bad is the notion that Earth was somehow “seeded” by life cells traveling through space. Never mind that anything that fragile would have burned up in the atmosphere; after all, we cannot let the laws of nature dictate science, can we?
Growing up during the Cold War, environmentalists raised the alarm of a “nuclear winter” should anything happen. A decade or so back, we heard about “global warming”. Now it is “climate change” just in case we change our minds again.
And, what if the Earth warmed up? So what? Didn’t dinosaurs roam the planet once upon a time? Obviously, being reptiles, they needed warm climates to survive. A woolly mammoth was discovered in a block of ice from the Ice Age. Hmmmm, sounds like climate change was going on long before human beings got involved!
Obviously, I am not preaching that it is OK to pollute the Earth and squander our resources. However, neither should anyone advocate running around yelling that the sky is falling, especially upon questionable “facts”.
However, the biggest lie is foisted upon our youth when they are “educated”, ie, brain-washed, into thinking they are nothing more than evolved animals, incapable of controlling their emotions and, esp, sexual desires, with no hope for the future except a few years of living, then disease, then death (assuming they don’t get killed along the way), and then nothing ever more forever. They are robbed of any hope or responsibility beyond the few years they will spend alive upon this planet. Is there any wonder that many of them turn to violent crime, because in the end what does it really matter?
Even if science had all of the answers, and it certainly does not, human beings would still have to do something about it. They would have to change their hearts. Even scientists get caught up in un-scientific ideas, rather than dealing with provable facts. Science, like so many areas of our society, has become infected with bad dogmas because our hearts are corrupt and deceitful.
A deceitful heart means one that lies. It does not deal with the truth, even when supposedly science is looking for truth. The human heart must be cured first, and science cannot fix that.
Besides, even if science could fix the heart, who would be the one to decide what to change and how? Even then, the decision would be up to another human being afflicted with a deceitful heart.