I have been reading the Bible more often lately. Those Christians who are more staunch always tell others to go read the Bible, to go pray, whenever there is any problem, but sometimes I feel prayer does not really help, especially when I need concrete answers.
Perhaps that is where science comes in. Whatever that is religious is known to be gospel truths, but whatever theories proven by scientists of old are fundamental truths (of sorts). To most people who have no religion whatsoever, they will believe in science since that is where the answers to a lot of things are.
For instance, it is stated that God created man and woman. Children are God's gift to the couple, and whatever we are were moulded by God in His image. However, book learning teaches otherwise.
We were evolved from apes (in that case, why are the apes not evolving now? Can we then technically be considered a planet of the apes?). Under Darwin's Theory of Evolution, living things evolve in order to suit their environment and prevent extinction. Thus, most living things can be traced to common ancestors.
Humans and monkeys probably come from the same ancestors, just like dogs, foxes and wolves. Cats, tigers and leopards. Come to think of it, lizards are probably the new evolution from the ancient dinosaurs.
In that case, does it relate to science or religion? Were we conceived due to God's Will or were we conceived due to the simple process of fertilisation? So for women who have difficulty in conceiving, does it mean to say it is God that make it so?
I am not trying to blaspheme, but science and religion are very contradictory. Of course I do not go around preaching the Bible at anyone, but for those Christians who do, they often get doors slammed in their faces for trying to impose "nonsense" on non-believers.
But since days of old, science and religion had always been at war. That was why Galileo was put under house arrest for a large part of his life, simply because he was trying to explain Corpernicus' theory that the Sun is the centre of the Universe, and the Moon and Earth and other planets revolve around the Sun. Church elders in his time considered that a sacrilege and going against religious teachings, hence got him grounded.
Dan Brown's Angels And Demons also states the war between science and religion, and people who constantly fought against the Catholic churches were those very established people of science, like (supposedly) Galileo and Newton.
But comes the crux. Where did Science originate from anyway? How did science exist in the first place? Religion is when there is a God, or rather, people believe that there is a God. Religious wise, everything we see are God's creations. But what about Science? Who came out with the first scientific theory? Scientifically speaking, everything we see around us is matter.
For all anyone knows, believers would attribute knowledge and the origin of science to God as well. Thus, religion could well be the root of everything. I am not preaching anything here, but there have been many things which even science has never been able to explain, yet prayers have been known to achieve miracles.
Maybe just by being faithful and believing that all things are possible is already a hybrid of scientific and religious thinking. Perhaps faith is the bottom of everything. And this story I came across sums it up very well.
An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, The Almighty. He asks one of his new students to stand and.....
Prof: So you believe in God?
Student: Absolutely, sir.
Prof: Is God good?
Student: Sure.
Prof: Is God all-powerful?
Student: Yes.
Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm?
(Student is silent.)
Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fellow. Is God good?
Student: Yes.
Prof: Is Satan good?
Student: No.
Prof: Where does Satan come from?
Student: From...God...
Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student: Yes.
Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct?
Student: Yes.
Prof: So who created evil?
Student does not answer.
Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they?
Student: Yes, sir.
Prof: So, who created them?
Student has no answer.
Prof: Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God?
Student: No, sir.
Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God?
Student: No, sir.
Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?
Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.
Prof: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student: Yes.
Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student: Nothing. I only have my faith.
Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has.
Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Prof: Yes.
Student: And is there such a thing as cold?
Prof: Yes.
Student: No sir. There isn't.
(The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)
Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.
(There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)
Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?
Student: You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?
Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man?
Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how?
Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?
Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.
Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
(The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.)
Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?
(The class is in uproar.)
Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain?
(The class breaks out into laughter.)
Student: Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?
(The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.
Student: That is it sir... The link between man & God is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving & alive.
Perhaps that is where science comes in. Whatever that is religious is known to be gospel truths, but whatever theories proven by scientists of old are fundamental truths (of sorts). To most people who have no religion whatsoever, they will believe in science since that is where the answers to a lot of things are.
For instance, it is stated that God created man and woman. Children are God's gift to the couple, and whatever we are were moulded by God in His image. However, book learning teaches otherwise.
We were evolved from apes (in that case, why are the apes not evolving now? Can we then technically be considered a planet of the apes?). Under Darwin's Theory of Evolution, living things evolve in order to suit their environment and prevent extinction. Thus, most living things can be traced to common ancestors.
Humans and monkeys probably come from the same ancestors, just like dogs, foxes and wolves. Cats, tigers and leopards. Come to think of it, lizards are probably the new evolution from the ancient dinosaurs.
In that case, does it relate to science or religion? Were we conceived due to God's Will or were we conceived due to the simple process of fertilisation? So for women who have difficulty in conceiving, does it mean to say it is God that make it so?
I am not trying to blaspheme, but science and religion are very contradictory. Of course I do not go around preaching the Bible at anyone, but for those Christians who do, they often get doors slammed in their faces for trying to impose "nonsense" on non-believers.
But since days of old, science and religion had always been at war. That was why Galileo was put under house arrest for a large part of his life, simply because he was trying to explain Corpernicus' theory that the Sun is the centre of the Universe, and the Moon and Earth and other planets revolve around the Sun. Church elders in his time considered that a sacrilege and going against religious teachings, hence got him grounded.
Dan Brown's Angels And Demons also states the war between science and religion, and people who constantly fought against the Catholic churches were those very established people of science, like (supposedly) Galileo and Newton.
But comes the crux. Where did Science originate from anyway? How did science exist in the first place? Religion is when there is a God, or rather, people believe that there is a God. Religious wise, everything we see are God's creations. But what about Science? Who came out with the first scientific theory? Scientifically speaking, everything we see around us is matter.
For all anyone knows, believers would attribute knowledge and the origin of science to God as well. Thus, religion could well be the root of everything. I am not preaching anything here, but there have been many things which even science has never been able to explain, yet prayers have been known to achieve miracles.
Maybe just by being faithful and believing that all things are possible is already a hybrid of scientific and religious thinking. Perhaps faith is the bottom of everything. And this story I came across sums it up very well.
An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, The Almighty. He asks one of his new students to stand and.....
Prof: So you believe in God?
Student: Absolutely, sir.
Prof: Is God good?
Student: Sure.
Prof: Is God all-powerful?
Student: Yes.
Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm?
(Student is silent.)
Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fellow. Is God good?
Student: Yes.
Prof: Is Satan good?
Student: No.
Prof: Where does Satan come from?
Student: From...God...
Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student: Yes.
Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct?
Student: Yes.
Prof: So who created evil?
Student does not answer.
Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they?
Student: Yes, sir.
Prof: So, who created them?
Student has no answer.
Prof: Science says you have 5 senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God?
Student: No, sir.
Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God?
Student: No, sir.
Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter?
Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't.
Prof: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student: Yes.
Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?
Student: Nothing. I only have my faith.
Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has.
Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Prof: Yes.
Student: And is there such a thing as cold?
Prof: Yes.
Student: No sir. There isn't.
(The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.)
Student: Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.
(There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.)
Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness?
Student: You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?
Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man?
Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how?
Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?
Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.
Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?
(The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.)
Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?
(The class is in uproar.)
Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain?
(The class breaks out into laughter.)
Student: Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?
(The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son.
Student: That is it sir... The link between man & God is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving & alive.
2 comments:
Science and religion are not in conflict or mutually exclusive. It is something that only exists in the minds of those religious who believe in sola scriptura - that everything which is necessary is found only in the Bible. This was put forward by Martin Luther.
For the Catholic Church, there is no problem. The problem lies in performing or using science (from the Latin scio meaning to know) immorally.
Now, you argue (or someone will) didn't the Catholic Church censure Galileo? Yes. And it has apoligized for that. However, Galileo's circumstance was unique and must be understood in its correct historical perspective. Copernicus had promulgated the idea of heliocentricity 80 years prior and was not censured. He was afraid to publish his ideas because of backlash from philosophers (scientists of the day - it was much broader in scope than it is now). It was at the encouragement of the Church that he published. The only caveat was that he put the disclaimer that it was only a theory in the preface of his work - which he did. Eighty years later, Galileo argued vehemently and obsurately to remove the preface and call it fact. There were two problems: (1) there was no proof - it took Newton's explanation of gravity to provide one piller and Bessel's observation of parallax in the early 19th century to provide the other pillar necessary to move it from theory to fact; (2) the Churhc was in a terrible turmoil, Luther and the Calvanists were schisaming from the Churh, they were accusing the Church of all manner of things, including the teaching and suport of the non-scriptural notion of heliocentricity. Unfortunately, in this atmosphere, Galileo did not fair well. Did you know, that at this time, the Church gave asylum to Kepler (who did more to refine heliocentricity than Galileo) at this time? Kepler was a Lutheran.
I view the Bible as a record of the Jewish experience of God rather than the literal word of God. It is one part of our experience of God. Oral tradition, customs, revelations (private or public), teching, philosophical exploration, etc are all other parts of our faith.
People try to limit God to their vision of Him, rather than letting God be Who He Is.
I do believe in evolution, it makes sense. How human creation fits into it is a good question and deserves a good answer. What sets humans apart from the rest of creation is that we have souls in the image of God. Would anyone argue that God has a corporeal form like us? Yet, the Bible says we are created in God's image. Jesus was God become man. He assumed our form and image.
We are perfect images of God. We possess the power of creation. What God has made good, let no one call unclean. Yet, our world is filled with uncleanliness and evil. Were did it come from? From us. We created it, because we are perfect in God's image imbued with the power of creation. (My point of view on this).
And yeah, this is Richard again.
Very profound, but thanks! At least now I understand a lot more (I think)!
Post a Comment