The Limits Of Science
Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI
Biblical Authority Ministries, May 15, 2026 (Donate)
Letter, unedited:
In response to
“Dinosaurs and the Bible”
I do not intend this
as an attack on any of you, I simply wish to comment on many of the flawed
accusations you throw at “evolutionary scientists” Evolution is not a
belief...it is a fact. Religion is a belief. While good science offers us a way
to study the natural world and our surroundings in an objective imperical
way...religion is a great partner (not alternative) to explaining our lives
spiritually. There is no need to attack evolution as false when the most well
acclaimed scientists and associations such as the National Academy of Science
is doing nothing to dismantle the foundations of religion. And the reason for
that is because science is not able to enter the realm of the meta-physical and
anyone who says they can is not practicing science. There is no conflict
between science and religion. period. I would appreciate that you read more
literature and get your information from less biased sources. Science will
never be able to explain empirically religion. And on the other foot religion
is not science and creationism is not science because it is not based on
scientific fact. If you do not “believe” in evolution you should do some
research on anti-biotic resistence and let me know how to explain what happens.
I won’t hold my breath.
F.E.
Response:
With kindness, please see my comments below.
I do not intend this
as an attack on any of you, I simply wish to comment on many of the flawed
accusations you throw at “evolutionary scientists”
Such as? What accusations are you referring to and where are
the references?
Evolution is not a
belief...it is a fact. Religion is a belief.
Considering that evolution
is a subset of the religion
of humanism as clearly outlined in Humanist Manifestos, this puts
you in a predicament. How can evolution be a belief and not a belief at the
same time and reference? This violates basic logic and is a contradictions.
But more importantly, your definitions are skewed. Religion
is a system of practices based on beliefs about the world and the past. Evolution
is a framework about the past that can never be repeated or tested and must be
accepted by interpretation and authority. That is, by all measures, a belief.
It also seems that you labor under the misconception that
beliefs cannot be facts. So, if someone believes that computers exist, does
that negate the existence of computers being a fact? Who determines what is
“factual” and what is not? If something violates the laws of nature that we
know but is accepted by most people, does that make it factual or not?
(Evolutionary belief violates some basic
laws of nature.)
Christians accept fact because they believe in an objective
Creator who does not lie. Where, then, does the humanist find a basis for fact?
While good science
offers us a way to study the natural world and our surroundings
Creationists agree here, and this methodology was developed
by a creationist named Francis Bacon. But note that good science is observable
and repeatable—unlike evolution and its historical postulates.
in an objective
imperical way
But for objectiveness to be valid requires a correct
worldview with which to interpret empirical facts. There are two worldviews
competing here. Science is a useful tool for examining the universe, but humans
are not objective.
We all have basic foundational concepts through which we
interpret evidence—some
starting with the Bible and some assuming naturalism. Few realize that the
evolutionary/humanistic worldview must borrow from the biblical worldview to
even begin its case. So, this undermines an evolutionary position right from
the start.
Also, empiricism (that all truth claims must be obtained by
experience), is self-refuting as that alleged truth claim cannot be
experienced! In other words, empiricism can never be proven empirically.
...religion is a
great partner (not alternative) to explaining our lives spiritually.
Creationists would agree as well, as correct religion is
foundational to looking at any aspect of the world around us. Your argument
here is self-refuting. That is, you define science naturalistically and
then claim that naturalism and supernaturalism (religion) are partners. This is
impossible, as naturalism does not allow supernatural beings or causes and
supernaturalism requires them.
On the other hand, science
(as in, observational science) is truly a partner in understanding the
world—when we begin with God’s Word, since science is predicated on
Christianity. So, for good science to even be a possibility is further
confirmation of the truth of the Bible.
There is no need to
attack evolution as false
But it is false. It contradicts Scripture in Genesis
and Christ Himself and leads many astray from the truth of Scripture:
“But
from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’” (Mark
10:6, NKJV).
See also Genesis 1 and Exodus 20:11. Also,
Christians are commanded to demolish these false arguments:
We
destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God,
and take every thought captive to obey Christ, (2 Corinthians 10:5; ESV).
Third, we are warned not to succumb to such false beliefs:
Beware
lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the
tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not
according to Christ. (Colossians 2:8,
NKJV).
when the most well
acclaimed scientists and associations such as the National Academy of Science
is doing nothing to dismantle the foundations of religion.
First, this is the fallacy of appeal to majority. The
majority of Germans at WWII either allowed or participated in the persecution
of the Jews—but this doesn’t make it right.
Second, the NAS has aligned itself with the religion of
humanism and has a history of attacking the truthfulness of the Bible. They
promote the religion of secular humanism and naturalistic philosophies that
deny the power of God through numerous articles and publications. This is
hardly “nothing.” In addition, the president of the NAS openly recommends a
leading humanist organization called the NCSE.[1]
And the reason for
that is because science is not able to enter the realm of the meta-physical and
anyone who says they can is not practicing science.
And yet, evolutionists claim to transcend the metaphysical
millions of years in the past to know for a “fact” what happened? This means
evolutionists are not practicing science according to their claimed worldview.
Scientific methodology cannot repeat the past. Evolutionary thinking is
unrepeatable historical science, not operational science.
Let’s face it: there has never been a single experiment run
over millions years—not even one—nor is this possible. Where is the science
here? And scientists look for “God spots” on the brain and alternate universes
to explain away how finely tuned our universe is, and the “evolutionary
history” of religion. All of these are attempts to explain the metaphysical
aspects of the universe (poorly) using naturalistic assumptions.
There is no conflict
between science and religion. period.
You would be surprised to know that we agree, but I suggest
you have tried to use a bait-and-switch fallacy here by calling science
“evolution.” Evolution is not science. We all have the same science. The
difference is the worldview by which we interpret scientific facts.
I would appreciate
that you read more literature and get your information from less biased
sources.
This is the pretended neutrality fallacy. You are assuming
that you and other humanists are less biased, i.e., neutral, all the while
trying to argue for the evolutionary worldview. By “less biased,” do you mean
scientific sources that agree with naturalism? We do, in fact, get a great deal
of our news and information from mainstream journals and media sources. One of
our goals is to reveal that there is no neutrality and that there are
underlying assumptions upon which such papers and articles are written.
“He
who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters. (Luke 11:23, NKJV).
God makes it clear in His Word there is no such thing as
neutrality. You are either for Christ or against Him. I want to encourage you
to reconsider the claims of Christ and what it means to be saved.
Science will never be
able to explain empirically religion.
Science doesn’t explain things; this is the fallacy of
reification. Science is a methodology to determine observable and repeatable
facts and is predicated on biblical Christianity. In other words, it would be
impossible to do science without the Bible being true. Secular
humanistic-believing scientists may try to explain things within their story
but “science” doesn’t explain things.
And on the other foot
religion is not science
With this statement, you have no choice but to agree that
interrelated religions like humanism, naturalism, and evolutionism are not
science. Additionally, belief in the One true God of the Bible who is logical
and cannot lie means that scientific inquiry makes sense.
Science is possible because the universe exhibits
uniformity. There is no reason to divorce exploring the world around us from
the eye-witness account of the Creator and Sustainer of all things.
and creationism is
not science because it is not based on scientific fact.
Science in its strictest sense means knowledge. Creation and
evolution have little to do with scientific facts because we all have the same
scientific facts! Creation and evolution are both subsets of religions;
biblical Christianity and secular humanism, respectively.
The worldview of biblical Christianity, from which creation
comes, is the same worldview by which science is possible. I suspect that what
you mean is that creation science is not based on naturalistic assumptions
about how the universe and life came to be. In that case, you’re correct. Facts
are not in debate.
If you do not
“believe” in evolution you should do some research on anti-biotic resistence
and let me know how to explain what happens. I won’t hold my breath.
Perhaps if you did some
research, you’d see that we’ve shown how antibiotic resistance fails the
test as evidence for evolution (see Antibiotic
Resistance of Bacteria: An Example of Evolution in Action?[2]
and Is Natural Selection the Same Thing as Evolution?[3]).
Here’s an example: how is H. pylori changing into
defective H. pylori support for the general theory of evolution? First,
the resistance is moving in the wrong direction for evolution (losses), and
second, changing these bacteria into the same bacteria is not evolution!
I want to encourage you to reconsider your faith in the
evolutionary worldview. That philosophy is a dead end logically, morally,
scientifically, and obviously religiously. I encourage you to re-consider the
claims of the Bible, particularly Christ because that is what it is all
about—we are all sinners and all have fallen short—even me.
But by the grace of God, Jesus Christ, the infinite Son of
God, took the infinite punishment from an infinite God, to make
a way of salvation. Jesus is calling all people everywhere to repent. The
Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is
longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should
come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). It doesn’t matter how many steps
you’ve taken in the wrong direct, it is only one step back.
With kindness in Christ.
Bodie
Bodie Hodge, Ken
Ham's son in law, has been an apologist defending 6-day creation and opposing
evolution since 1998. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as
a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers
News. He was also head of the Oversight Council.
Bodie
launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal
website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken
on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and
universities. He is married with four children.
Mr. Hodge earned a
Bachelor and Master of Science degrees from Southern Illinois University at
Carbondale (SIUC). Then he taught at SIUC for a couple of years as a
Visiting Instructor teaching all levels of undergraduate engineering and
running a materials lab and a CAD lab. He did research on advanced ceramic
materials to develop a new method of production of titanium diboride with a
grant from Lockheed Martin. He worked as a Test Engineer for Caterpillar,
Inc., prior to entering full-time ministry.
His love of science
was coupled with a love of history, philosophy, and theology. For about one
year of his life, Bodie was editing and updating a theological, historical, and
scientific dictionary/encyclopedia for AI use and training. Mr. Hodge has over
25 years of experience in writing, speaking and researching in these fields.
Originally at Answers in Genesis; Edited;
Republished by permission.
[1]
nasonline.org/site/PageServer?pagename=NEWS_letter_president_03042005_BA_evolution.
[2]
Antibiotic Resistance of Bacteria: An Example of Evolution in Action?, Dr.
Georgia Purdom, July 10, 2007, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n3/antibiotic-resistance-of-bacteria.
[3]
New Answers Book 1, Ken Ham, Gen. Ed., Chapter by Dr. Purdom entitled: Is
Natural Selection the Same Thing as Evolution?, Master Books, Green Forest, AK,
2006.
