God-fearing Scientists
Already as a child I had a visceral reaction to that wand. It seemed like whenever I asked too many detailed questions about contradictory things in the bible, I was told “well, God’s ways are mysterious.” Why didn’t God intervene in the Holocaust? Mystery wand waving: he probably had a good reason but as lowly humans can’t understand it. How can he let all this cruel stuff happen? More wand waving. I finally decided that God is either a total jerk or died in anguish over the horrible stuff we’re doing to his creation. Or, well, he just doesn’t exist.
Collins uses the wand when he talks about trying to figure out what the bible means. He rejects simple literal interpretation (at least that!) pointing out that the two creation stories, for example, contradict each other. Both of them are also contradicted by scientific evidence. But, no fear, we got the wand. We just don’t understand the meaning of Genesis! In Collins’ words: “why should we today insist that we know what it means, particularly when the interpretation chosen contradicts a wide variety of data that God has given us the chance to discover through science.” Phew! That was a close one: God gave us data that contradicts the story we think he also gave us. Both can’t be true, so we must just not get the story. Maybe a “day” means a few million years. Maybe. Or maybe it just doesn’t make sense because it was written by human beings several thousand years ago who had no clue about how it really happened. Now we have lots of data that helps us explain how things happened, so we don’t need that outdated story anymore. No God is needed for that explanation and the contradiction is resolved without causing a headache.
Yet, the puzzle remains: Why do these scientists, who I consider smarter than I am, cling to their Christian faith? It just doesn’t make any sense to me (and I don’t think that is a matter of intelligence)! I could understand if they’d say something like “I know it’s all made up. There isn’t really a god but there’s just something about going to church, about the rituals and the community, that I find very helpful in my life.” I can understand that. I get lost with those mental acrobatics that seem just such obvious self-deceptions that I cannot comprehend how someone can make those somersaults and keep a straight face. Maybe it’s an evolutionary adaptation of biologists…
Share this post with others:
I would say that a sufficient explanation would require a little more than a few posts on this forum.
And yes, I am surprised that more people don’t state their position with a detailed explanation, but this does not mean I feel the need to do so. It is a challenge to have a fair discussion on a forum, and any issue such as the one mentioned would benefit from closer communication. I do believe that anyone with a sincere interest in someone elses view will approach them to talk about it. This is because I make that personal approach when I feel that desire to enquire further.
Warren, you wrote, “why people who have asked these questions and found answers don’t put them forward more readily in such forums as we find here.” Yes, why don’t you put forth your answer on the question “why does God allow suffering”?
There seem to be many contradictions within confined passages of Biblical text. however, it would be dangerous to suggest that they are contradictions without taking the book as a whole. Many apparent contradictions are answered by further reading of surrounding verses, chapters and other books. Context alone can answer so many apparent inconsistencies. e.g. why does God allow suffering for example. I’m surprised how frequently this point is raised (quite reasonably) and yet is rarely countered directly from the source. It is not hard to find a response and answer to this valid question from the Bible. Whether or not you believe in the answer or not is another matter, but a reasoned response is to be found there.
This is common to many criticisms that are levelled against Biblical accounts and leads me to believe that people tend to make the criticism and then let it settle in their mind as though it were indisputable. Which is fine, but again that leads me to question why people who have asked these questions and found answers don’t put them forward more readily in such forums as we find here. At this point, I would also stress that the answers I describe are not to do with “inscrutable will” or “mystery”, but cross referenced, well supported Biblical testimony. In fact, many who follow the Catholic Faith actually object to the use of reason in answering such issues, viewing faith as a gift. Well, I don’t know why we have been endowed with a degree of intelligence if we are not supposed to use it in searching out truth and falsehood.
One of the problems I see, though, with using this definition would be that we might stop exploring. Science happens at the margins of our knowledge. If we simply move things into religion that we don’t yet know, we would not find answers. Even when we change your definition to “can’t know,” it might be a show-stopper. I agree with you that science would have a hard time answering things like meaning questions. Science is good with answering how questions (i.e., how did this happen) but not why questions. So, maybe that’s the delineation of knowledge between science and religion.
There’s a definition of religion I really like. Religion is how we think about what we don’t know. Looked at that way, there’s nothing incompatible about religion and science. Science is how we think about what we know,and can know – religion is how we think about what we don’t and can’t know. The great sceintists who were blessed with perspective and humility know that science is scratching the surface of reality. And while it gives answers, it does not give meaning. There are historical reasons why science and religion are antagonistic in the early 21st century. but it certainly doesn’t need to be the case – and probably won’t remain so.