The heavens declare the glory of God ...Atheist-evolutionist Jerry Coyne disagrees, of course.
All of this is to say that, not only is there no inherent conflict between science and Christianity, but the Christian worldview actually motivates and supports the scientific enterprise.
Instead of addressing the theology, look at this argument:
Some believe that science is a superior alternative to faith. But if we peer a little deeper, we see that the scientific method actually requires a great deal of faith before it can even get off the ground. For example, here are five axioms that every scientist (often unconsciously) believes:One could say that they are not really articles of faith, because scientists would abandon them if they turned out to be false. Okay, fine.
The entire physical universe obeys certain laws and these laws do not change with time.
Our observations provide accurate information about reality.
The laws of logic yield truth.
The human mind recognizes the laws of logic and can apply them correctly.
Truth ought to be pursued.
None of these can be proved by science; they must be assumed in order to do any science at all. They are articles of faith.
* The world is real, and not a simulation. There are some scholars who have proposed the simulation hypothesis, and maybe some of them believe in it. But productive scientists do not go for this nonsense.
* Logical reasoning. If you discover some physical truth, then the mathematical and logical consequences are also truths.
* Causality. Events depend on the past light cone, and nothing else.
* Free will. Scientists have the freedom to design experiments that test hypotheses.
* No superdeterminism or many-worlds or any of these other theories that are so contrary to science.
Maybe scientists ought to be more explicit about these axioms. More and more I see scientists casually reject one of them, without acknowledging the disastrous consequences.