Dr. Al Mohler explains that Dawkins isn't attempting to convince believers that they should no longer believe in God. "To the contrary," he says, "Dawkins is attempting a very different cultural and political move. He wants to make respect for belief in God socially unacceptable."Those of us in the biological sciences have know this for years. The argument essentially comes down to: science = good and true, religion = bad (or a harmless fairy tale) and false.
Sam Harris is the other evangelist for atheism that has garnered a lot of attention.
There was once a time when apologetics (defense of Christian faith) type of organizations believed they could try to convince those outside of Christianity to consider faith. I think their mission now is going to be more defensive in trying to help Christians who are tottering on their faith to hold firm against the onslaught of opposition from an increasingly secular society.
As a molecular biologist, I think most of us in the sciences, when push comes to shove, recognize that science doesn't have all the answers. Science is a wonderful tool to figure certain things out; however, most of us know there are things we believe to be true that are beyond the reach of science. Love is one example. Notions of good and evil are another. Even the conversation of whether or not there is a god cuts both ways: god is a crutch we invented for some survival benefit or our hunger for a god (of some shape or form) suggests that there is actually a god just as hunger for food tells us there is something called food.
But in the final analysis, aside from recognizing the limits of science, there is the question of the transformation that religion when done right can accomplish.
I've been reading Yancey's latest book on Prayer and he had this quote that I marked and dog-earred the page (p. 125):
Wherever Christian missionaries have traveled they have left behind a trail of hospitals, clinics, orphanages, and schools. To preach God without the kingdom is no better than to preach the kingdom without God.As a Christian, my prayer is that I would combine both clear thinking with good character.
UPDATE: This topic of scientists objecting to religion is clearly in the air. Here is a post over at Mere Comments in regard to a NYT item on a conference on science and religion.
1 comment:
I read the excerpt you referenced in your article. What they do not understand is - Science = the Study of God's Laws.
I am always astounded that scientist can study God's laws (gravity, physics, time, condensation, motion, mechanics, evolution) and not see the Creator of these laws.
Even Einstein's law proved that their is something after death. Matter can be changed into energy and energy into matter - but neither can be destroyed.
String theory proves the existence of a spirit. For instance- the Bible states that when Jesus returns to earth even the rocks will sing. Well - how could that be possible without string theory? The rock's strings will vibrate at such a speed as to be audible.
If you look for God in nature, you will find him. If you shut your mind to his existence - he will remain hidden. It is the choice of each individual.
May God bless you.
Post a Comment