Religion and Science
5. Religion and Science
~ 73 ~
question by studying the different parts of the
engine and their movements, we shall arrive at the
conclusion that the movement of the wheels is an
extension of the functioning of the locomotive’s
mechanism. But would we be justified in believing
that the
reason
for their movement is the engine and
its various parts? Obviously, we would not. We
should first have to consider the respective roles of
the engineer who designed the engine and the
engine driver who set it in motion. Without their
instrumentality, the engine could neither exist, nor
move. The engine and its parts are not then the final
reality. The final reality is the
mind,
which has
brought the engine into existence, and runs it at
will. A Christian scholar, Cecil Boyce Hamann, has
aptly said: “Nature does not explain, she is herself
in need of explanation.” This is because, as he puts
it, nature is a fact, not an explanation.
Let us consider, for example, how a chick comes
into this world. In embryo, it develops inside the
smooth, hard shell of an egg, then it emerges when
the shell breaks up. How does it come about that
the shell breaks up at the right moment and the
fledgling, which is no more than a small lump of
