Math And Religion Essay

“Why?” This is often the response I receive when I tell people that my major is mathematics. And if I’m being honest with myself, sometimes I ask myself the same question when I’m agonizingly studying for an abstract algebra test. But as I continue to study math, the answer to that question steadily becomes more clear – math necessarily relies on God and reveals truths of God. As my understanding of math deepens, my awe of God increases exponentially. However, many philosophical disciplines disagree with the relationship between mathematics and God, either because of their naturalistic worldviews or because they disregard math as a neutral subject that has no philosophical implications.
In order to analyze the differing beliefs concerning mathematics, an agreed-upon definition – or rather, description – of mathematics must be established. Merriam-Webster defines math as “the science of numbers and their operations, interrelations, combinations, generalizations, and abstractions and [the science] of space configurations and their structure, measurement, transformations, and generalizations.” This definition certainly includes what most people think about when they consider what math is – complex concepts that they hope never to have to

try to understand after they graduate from high school.
However, math is infinitely more than Merriam-Webster’s definition. Inherent in mathematics is the ability of the mind to grasp abstract concepts and to think logically and rationally. Additionally, everything that is seen in the world can be described to some extent by mathematical concepts. This has led many to describe math as the “underlying language of the universe.” Mathematics has also never ceased to exist – mathematicians do not create math, rather they discover math. Neither does any mathematics fail to be true before being discovered; math is absolutely consistent and has not evolved over time. Just as 1 + 1 = 2 has always held and will always hold, so the proven concepts of differential and integral calculus, of set and group theory, and of applications to physics will always hold.
Believing and unbelieving mathematicians alike agree on this description of mathematics. However, various philosophies fail to agree on explanations for all of the elements involved in mathematics. Specifically, the naturalistic worldview has much difficulty explaining the consistency of mathematics and the necessity of the mind, both of which are integral to mathematics. Again, we must begin by explaining naturalism. John Byl, a noted mathematician, physicist, and theologian, describes Naturalism as follows:
Naturalism seeks to explain all of reality in terms of purely natural processes and entities. As such, it almost always incorporates an evolutionary process wherein everything in the universe – even man – evolved from primitive, purposeless matter/energy. Consequently, man is viewed as a complex machine that ceases to exist once his material body dies. Rational norms and ethical standards are considered to be mere human inventions, with no objective authority (Byl, 17-18).

While much more could be said about naturalism, this definition concisely explains the most important fact, which is that naturalists believe nature is the ultimate reality, which completely removes the necessity of God.
As stated previously, the reasoning powers of the mind are essential to understanding abstract mathematical concepts. By definition, naturalism requires that the mind came to exist by completely natural processes. However, naturalism has some difficulty in explaining how the mind, which is obviously not a physical object, developed naturally. Jon Jacobs, professor of philosophy at Colgate University, claims that the mind is a natural byproduct and that mental processes are not completely unfathomable by nature and science. Jacobs asserts that the “study of [mental processes] is especially complicated because of the ways in which biochemical, physiological, social, developmental, and many other processes and events interact . . . [thus, the mind] operates in accordance with principles fundamentally like those that govern other natural phenomena” (Jacobs, section 3b). Unfortunately, he and many other naturalists fail to explain the science that links natural processes to the creation of the mind, but rather they choose to resign (by faith) to the “fact” that science proves the mind to be natural.
As advantageous as it would be for a naturalist to explain the mind by natural processes, reducing the operations of the mind to being governed in the same way as other natural phenomena not only disregards the intentionality of the mind (reasoning and exclusive feelings of belief, desire, fear, choice, etc.), but also fails to explain the ability to actually logically understand (rather than just think about) valid mathematical concepts. Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga notes that “naturalistic evolution gives us no reason to believe that our reasoning tells us the truth about the world. It just tells us what we need to believe in order to survive” (Byl 114). Therefore, humans would have no need for intentional feelings or complex mathematical thought, because those are not absolutely necessary for survival.
Similar to naturalism’s inadequate explanation of the existence of the mind, naturalism also fails to explain the existence of math, which, like the mind, is not a physical substance that evolved over time. Naturalism also cannot account for the consistency of mathematics (and the laws of logic which are foundational to math). According to John Byl, “if the ultimate reality is matter then there is no place for such things as non-physical, universal norms” (Byl 42). If this is the case, then the naturalist must find a way to reconcile the non-existence of universal norms with the idealism and consistency which they affirm in mathematics. Ironically, the logical law of non-contradiction (Not [A and not A]), meaning that a statement cannot be both true and false, shows the logical fallacy of Naturalism in its simultaneous denial and application of absolute truths.
The next view of mathematics that I would like to analyze is the idea that mathematics is a neutral subject. This notion could be held by believers or unbelievers, naturalists or creationists. While the neutrality of math is not necessarily a philosophical worldview, it does have great implications for the relationship between God and mathematics.
Merriam-Webster defines the word neutral as “not engaged on either side; specifically: not aligned with a political or ideological grouping.” Therefore, considering mathematics to be a neutral subject implies that math is not aligned with any certain system of ideas, whether that is naturalism, Christianity, or some other worldview.

Neutrality would assert that everyone, regardless of beliefs, should view and practice mathematics the same way. While it is true that people of differing religions agree on proven mathematical concepts, a neutral view completely diminishes the implications of the absolute nature of mathematics and the implications of the astonishing fact that everything in the universe can be explained by

mathematics.
As a Christian, both the naturalist view and the neutral view of mathematics raise many questions in my mind (which I feel certain to be valid questions, rather than products of natural processes). But even to unbelievers and naturalists, these explanations should appear insufficient in the effort to explain the “why?” and “how?” of mathematics. Fortunately, a consistent, logical explanation of mathematics does exist. As I have continued to study mathematics, the truth of Colossians 1:16-17 has been constantly reinforced, that “by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, . . . and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” Only God could account for the creation of the universe (including the mind and the mathematics with which the universe was designed) and the consistency of mathematics.
Furthermore, Christianity gives explanation for humans’ ability to understand and study the math evident in the world. Alvin Plantinga states that “God creates human beings in His image, a crucial component of which is the ability to know worthwhile and important things about our world” (Plantinga 285). Similarly, Vern Poythress, a noted mathematician and philosopher, says that “it is because Christianity is true, because God is who he is, because man is the image of God, that the non-Christian [and Christian] knows anything” (Poythress, section 6).
Therefore, where naturalistic and neutral explanations fail to account for the implications inherent in the existence, the universal consistency, and the understanding of mathematics, Christianity provides very clear answers. God created and sustains mathematics and has allowed humans to study math in order to better understand Himself and His Creation. We should not be surprised that unbelievers suppress this view of mathematics, as Romans 1 informs us that unbelievers even in New Testament times “knew God, [but] glorified Him not as God . . . and their foolish heart[s were] darkened” (Romans 1:21).
Not only does Christianity provide the only consistent answers to the philosophical questions of math, but also mathematics provides significant insight into the God of Christianity. In addition to mathematics’ implication that God is the Creator and Sustainer of the world, the universality of math points to the fact that God is absolute, unchanging, and eternal. Further, the fact that most areas of mathematics are too complex for a majority of humans to comprehend highlights the transcendence of God. By contrast, the ability that we have to understand and enjoy some of mathematics and its applications in creation indicates that God is also immanent.
As a result of the strong relationship between God and mathematics, this necessarily affects the believers’ practice of math. Whether significantly gifted in mathematics or not, believers must pursue math with the goal of learning more about God by learning mathematics. In 1 Peter 3:15, believers are admonished to be “ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear.” While this most importantly refers to believers’ defense of doctrinal issues, the concept can also apply to other disciplines. Because of the philosophy inherent within mathematics, believers must be prepared both to defend their beliefs about mathematics and use mathematics to defend their beliefs.
Clearly, mathematics cannot be explained by natural processes and is the very antithesis of neutrality as it magnifies our supernatural Creator. As Paul Dirac, a quantum physicist, simply stated, “God is a mathematician of a very high order, and He used advanced mathematics in constructing the universe” (Dirac 53). Thus, the study of mathematics is actually a telescope peering into the mind of God. Christians must understand the significance of mathematics for more than the problem-solving skills it provides. Mathematics, by its very nature as an absolute discipline, is arguably the most effective study (apart from the study of our absolute God) to utilize in our spreading of the Gospel. So, that is the reason I am studying mathematics.