Science Cannot Understand Man

34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

John 10

The Bible states that mankind is created in the image of God, whereas Aristotle defined man as a rational animal. The Bible says man is divine, and Aristotle says we are animals. The apparent conflict between these definitions was resolved by Aquinas, who said there was no conflict between the Bible (revelation) and Aristotle (reason). The image of God resides in human reason, according to Aquinas. Aristotle’s definition of man as a rational animal therefore captures both our divine and our apparently animal natures.

Godless scientists get this wrong. In thinking man is merely an animal they deny his divine nature as unscientific, immeasurable, unverifiable. But the absurd and necessary conclusions that flow from this assumption make it apparent that Aristotle, and the Bible, are correct.

The way we know things (epistemology) begins at the superficial, and attempts to delve at the core of what actually is (ontology). Sometimes scientists think they comprehend the entirety of something, even though they have only mapped out the surface of a thing, as is the case with humans.

Humans are animals, the scientists tell us. They have cut Aristotle’s definition in half, neatly cut God out of the picture, and left mankind bleeding on the floor. What is a human, fundamentally? What is his substance? The scientists have measured all of his quantities, categorized all of his qualities, and think they have comprehended man. But the substance of man, the core of man, cannot be measured, and so they are completely blind to it.

A tangential example of an important truth that cannot be verified is this: it is wrong to kill a baby. There is no scientific test that could prove that the statement, “It is wrong to kill a baby,” is true. It cannot be measured or tested. And so those who deny any truth that is not scientifically verifiable return to the savage pre-Abrahamic practice of human sacrifice to the gods of convenience and prosperity.

An example of missing the point of human nature comes from Sam Harris, who believes that men have no agency, no freedom of choice. According to Harris, we are material beings, and therefore all of our actions are predetermined. We do not act, we react, based on our brain chemistry. He argues that prison and punishments are barbaric, because crimes are merely manifestations of brain defects. We are inflicting pain on those who could not do otherwise. The just are as guilty as the violent offenders, in Harris’ worldview. The sheep and the goats both belong on the right hand of God. Or rather, God deserves to be crucified for daring to judge man.

This half definition of mankind makes the law of God either absurd or null. If men are merely animals, then “thou shalt not kill” applies to killing other animals. Eating becomes the height of barbarity (unsurprisingly, Harris touts the virtues of vegetarianism). The loss of the divine half of man’s definition allows the godless to shame and criticize men for eating, thus making a sin of existence. Vegans predict that history will look back on meat-eating as barbaric, because they do not believe that truth is timeless, and that God has put man above the animals. If all truth is scientific, truth is always up for revision, because it is based on the inductive (uncertain) method of science.

At the same time this mutilated definition removes guilt for murder. “Thou shalt not kill,” cannot possibly apply to humans, for we are mere animals. Killing a human is like killing a chicken, not blaspheming and desecrating the sacred image of God. Humans become just another animal to be managed like herds of cattle. The idea of “overpopulation” with it sinister and genocidal connotations, logically follows. The herd must be culled, and culling is not murder, but merely herd management. Humans are no longer the stewards of God, who have inherited the Earth from God to tend and care for it. No, humans are pests, and must be eradicated from the Earth, lest they contaminate it with their pollutions.

“Thou shalt not kill” becomes a contradiction and an absurdity. It condemns man for living and justifies his extermination.

But man is not merely an animal. All that he is cannot be measured or understood through the scientific process. The best of man’s nature was learned from revelation. In the beginning God created man in his own image. This we know. This we understand. It is a timeless truth that will never change. No matter how much the scientists tell us we are not responsible for our actions, that we are mere automatons, we feel the weight of our responsibility, we anticipate the judgement of God, and we experience the relief of God’s forgiveness when we repent.

There are two ways to learn the truth: reason, and revelation. One tells us that man is an animal. The other tells us that man is like God. They are both true. How Aristotle came to that conclusion, God knows.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s