Who says, "We don't need God ...?"

"We don't need God. Science is enough for us." This is what a lot of people think. Is science really an alternative to faith? If you think that science has made faith redundant, maybe you might want to think about this: How do we get from believing that everything came about by chance to building scientific study on the basis that there is regularity in the way things happen in our world? - By not following through the idea that everything happens by chance? It seems to me that there's a huge leap of faith involved in getting from "everything happens by chance" to faith in science.

Do you think that science is a better explanation than God for the beginning of the world? Does science not raise a lot more questions than any answers it might possibly give to us? I'm not suggesting that, if we have faith, we can dispense with science. What I am questioning is the idea that, if we have science, we can dispense with faith - the faith which begins with "In the beginning, God ..." (Genesis 1:1), the faith which takes us by way of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Saviour, on to the final revelation of the eternal God, who is "the Beginning and the End" (Revelation 21:6; 22:13).

Faith's critics may ask us, "How do you know all this?" Perhaps, we may be bold enough to suggest that the same question may be asked of science: "How do you know all this? Have you really closed the door on faith?" Let us learn from science - where it has something to teach us, but let's not assume that science is all that we need!