Basis for Faith
In my continued exasperation in the realm of those who argue over the issue of intelligent design, I have come across two interesting figures; George Coyne, the Vatican's top astronomer; and Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn of Austria. Both are men from the Catholic Church, and both have taken interesting stances on the ID debate, at least from a believer's perspective.
Coyne argues that ID isn't science, an interesting argument that never seems to get backed up by much in the way of actual argumentation. Schoenborn goes even further, stating that the Biblical theory of creation cannot be a scientific one.
Now why bring up a couple of prominent religious figures into the ID issue? Not to poke holes in the evolution argument (they do that on their own), but to ask the question, "what do we base our faith on?"
The reason I ask this is this; if we base our faith, even regarding something that relates to science; if we allow modern or current scientific theories to impact our faith, we have a very unstable baisi for our faith. In the same way I would even argue that at times citing science to prove certain areas of scripture to be true can be dangerous. If science today proves something true, then tommorrow if scientists change their mind and decide it is not true, do I follow suite and change my mind as well? This makes for a very shaky foundation for faith. Seldom however, does science ever disporve scripoture.
Consider: in the early 1990's there had been no previously discovered evidence to the historicity of King David. However, in the mid 90's a tabelet mentioning the "house of David" was unearthed, giving archiologists their first likely evidence that David was a real king. For the Christian who believes that scripture is the word of God and infallible, there was never a question.
Likewise; science has changed in so many things in the past 100 years, that it would be more than a little foolhardy to assume that scientists now know all that there is to know regarding creation or anything else in the Bible. Does the fact that popular science and the Bible disagree on things meant hat here is nothing scientific about the Bible?
Well, in a sense yes; in that there are no formulas and no explanations for how God created such fascinating things as whales, macaws and dung beetles. But in other ways, the Bible is strongly supportive of much science. Much of the book of Leviticus could be defined as a survival guide for desert living for the next forty years. Things such as infectious diseases and spreading mold were dealt with in effective ways that several centuries later could have prevented the bubonic plague from ravaging Europe.
In wonder then, if as popular science again changes it's mind, if Coyne and Schoenborn will change their views as well. How can we claim to believe in a god who exists in the Bible as a loving, compassionate god; and yet fail to recognize that god as being creator and redeemer. When we leave out aspects of God's nature that make Him God, we turn God into god, and He becomes nothing more to our minds than another religious idea. We cannot presume to throw out those parts of God, orHis word that do not fit with our presuppositions of who He is. There is only one true characteristic of God, and that is God.
Coyne argues that ID isn't science, an interesting argument that never seems to get backed up by much in the way of actual argumentation. Schoenborn goes even further, stating that the Biblical theory of creation cannot be a scientific one.
Now why bring up a couple of prominent religious figures into the ID issue? Not to poke holes in the evolution argument (they do that on their own), but to ask the question, "what do we base our faith on?"
The reason I ask this is this; if we base our faith, even regarding something that relates to science; if we allow modern or current scientific theories to impact our faith, we have a very unstable baisi for our faith. In the same way I would even argue that at times citing science to prove certain areas of scripture to be true can be dangerous. If science today proves something true, then tommorrow if scientists change their mind and decide it is not true, do I follow suite and change my mind as well? This makes for a very shaky foundation for faith. Seldom however, does science ever disporve scripoture.
Consider: in the early 1990's there had been no previously discovered evidence to the historicity of King David. However, in the mid 90's a tabelet mentioning the "house of David" was unearthed, giving archiologists their first likely evidence that David was a real king. For the Christian who believes that scripture is the word of God and infallible, there was never a question.
Likewise; science has changed in so many things in the past 100 years, that it would be more than a little foolhardy to assume that scientists now know all that there is to know regarding creation or anything else in the Bible. Does the fact that popular science and the Bible disagree on things meant hat here is nothing scientific about the Bible?
Well, in a sense yes; in that there are no formulas and no explanations for how God created such fascinating things as whales, macaws and dung beetles. But in other ways, the Bible is strongly supportive of much science. Much of the book of Leviticus could be defined as a survival guide for desert living for the next forty years. Things such as infectious diseases and spreading mold were dealt with in effective ways that several centuries later could have prevented the bubonic plague from ravaging Europe.
In wonder then, if as popular science again changes it's mind, if Coyne and Schoenborn will change their views as well. How can we claim to believe in a god who exists in the Bible as a loving, compassionate god; and yet fail to recognize that god as being creator and redeemer. When we leave out aspects of God's nature that make Him God, we turn God into god, and He becomes nothing more to our minds than another religious idea. We cannot presume to throw out those parts of God, orHis word that do not fit with our presuppositions of who He is. There is only one true characteristic of God, and that is God.
posted by dohmnal at 11:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home