Emotions can run high in the debate between religion and science.
Just take a look at the high-profile campaign in the United States to
teach 'Intelligent Design' in schools. But is conflict inevitable?
Those
who believe that the origin of human existence is a spiritual Life
Source are aware however that science firmly favours Darwin's
evolutionary theory, which is based on natural selection and chance
factors in reproduction. Survival of the fittest means all human beings
together with all animal life have descended from some one primordial
form. Science it seems has no room for spiritual ideas such as a
purposeful human creation.
The Darwinian view has easily seen off
the creationists, who to my mind have failed to notice the allegorical
nature of the Genesis story. By this I mean that the story of the
beginning of the world and the Garden of Eden is not a physics and
biology lesson but rather a psycho-spiritual one.
Some modern
theologians see the first few chapters in Genesis as a symbolic
representation of the origin and dynamic development of the human psyche
and its consciousness in relation to its Source; an ageless model of
each of us created in the image and likeness of God. Thus arguably the
Garden of Eden is a picture of the state of trust in and obedience to
God and the fall of humanity into reliance on self-intelligence and
self-orientation.
To my way of thinking the Bible as a whole, if
inwardly understood, shows the spiritual journey of humanity returning
to a state of innocence. We have a tree of life in the first book
Genesis and in the last book Revelation, both I think representing the
reality seen through the depths of one's spirit. Understanding about
life
"coming from a God-given rationality, structured yet full of vitality and dynamism." (Helen Brown)
According
to this view trust in the Source is not one based on ignorance but is
one with rational understanding - no blind faith but rather a realistic
perception about meaning and purpose that takes into account all our
understanding about life as a whole.
Are not more people these
days rejecting the traditional superstitions and dogmas of religion? Are
people more likely to want their spiritual intuition to be confirmed by
rational discussion? Only the creationist will assume scripture is
always literally true. I am arguing that people want answers to life's
issues informed by scientific education and the reasoning of common
sense, as well as by spiritual knowledge and insight.
When
theological doctrines such as creationism are seen to lack realistic
sense, then I guess religion will start to be side-lined by those who
use their rational minds.
Likewise when scientific theoretical
concepts appear unlinked to the results of research then even to
scientists they will seem more like fantasy than reality.
I wonder
if you would agree with the following statement? In its naturalistic
explanations and focus on the question 'how?' science deals with the
level of thinking of the external rational mind, whereas, religion, with
its focus on meaning and the question 'why?', appeals to the inner
rational mind.
In other words when rationally presented, perhaps
both science and religion are useful for communicating different aspects
of human knowledge and understanding: science for the outer,
time-related, natural life and religion for the inner timeless spiritual
life.
Does trouble not arise when some theologians or some
scientists believe they know it all? Religion got it wrong in the past
about the earth being at the centre of the solar system and today
creationists claim the world was made in seven days despite all the
evidence of science to the contrary.
I notice that likewise some
scientists claim that random processes created human life rather than
any creative design. Is this not because there can be no scientific
instruments to observe purpose and meaning? And because science is
limited by its assumption that knowledge is limited to natural things
like fossils and genes? I can't imagine how there might be any
scientific proof that science is the only means of acquiring valid
knowledge.
Despite the victory of Darwinism over creationism, it
is hard to see how adaption from something like a single cell through
natural selection can give an account for the development of human
self-reflection, courage, honesty, ethical insight, ideology, altruism,
and resistance to temptation. This is not to deny the truth about the
facts of nature that science can reveal but to acknowledge the deeper
side of human life revealed inwardly to those of a spiritual bent. To my
mind, human consciousness derives from the human soul absent in other
forms of life.
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God
who has endowed us with sense, reason and intellect has intended us to
forgo their use." Galileo Galilei (1600-1670)
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein (1879-1955)
0 comments:
Post a Comment