News from Around the World

Every time we see an article on this, we have to check it out:

No one had seen other galaxies from the Hubble Telescope or the earth from a Space Shuttle. When Jesus healed in Galilee, No one had heard of the germ theory, or antibiotics, Or stem cell research, the double helix of DNA or the Human Genome project. When Paul wrote to the churches in Corinth and Ephesus, and Philippi, no one knew of CroMagnon, Neanderthal, Java Man or Louis Leakey’s Lucy. Biblical writers and Jesus-followers knew no conflict between science and religion. We might envy them. Today, major science/religion issues make news weekly, if not more often: stem cell research, genetic engineering, abortion, evolution/intelligent design, to name just a few. When scientific observations (whether they be of the solar system, or subatomic particles, animal behavior or cell physiology) meet religious faith (whether that be of the origin of the humankind, or end-of-life choices) fireworks spark in both fields and people get nervous. So, how do you and I who live in an advanced scientific culture sustain a religious faith whose history dates to a pre-scientific age? Scientists are asked the question and edge toward atheism. Theologians are asked the question and find refuge in fundamentalism. Politicians are asked the question and try to gain votes, choose the most widely acceptable Supreme Court Justices, and raise campaign funds. Poets write bad couplets like Scottish poet William McGonagall who wrote, “When faith and reason clash Let reason go to smash” OR “And, when faith and reason clash, ‘Tis faith that goes to smash.” But what helps us when it comes to practical living—what gets taught in public schools, who gets public funding, how we live a life of faithfulness before God? We enjoy jokes which cover up our existential angst: God is sitting in heaven when a scientist prays to Him, “God, we don’t need you anymore. Science has finally figured out a way to create life out of nothing. In other words, we can now do what you did in the “beginning.” “Oh, is that so? Tell Me…” replies God. “Well,” says the scientist, “we can take dirt and form it into the likeness of you and breathe life into it, thus creating man.” “Well, that’s interesting…show Me.” So the scientist bends down to the earth and starts to mold the soil. “No, no, no…” interrupts God, “Get your own dirt.” Dirt. When it comes to the question of evolution, that’s what it comes down to. Primordial mud. To find answers to life’s persistent questions, both Christians and anthropologists turn to dirt…for bones…or for the story of creation. This second creation account of Genesis 2 arises out of a different tradition than that in Genesis 1. It is simplified: no formless void and darkness, no creation “ex nihilo” out of nothing, no mention of days or time, no chorus of “it’s very good”. Creation is not complete: no animals as yet, no passing weather fronts to provide rain, no garden for food. The text suggests there is dry land, and underground springs which flood the land. From this barren environment, God scoops up, and then molds, (not creates, which is a different Hebrew word, but molds like clay) the adamah, (earth) into the “adam” the as yet genderless earthling. (Woman and man are differentiated later in the chapter; until then the word is generic for “human”.) Our bodies actually are composed of the same elements as in the earth and sea: Oxygen, and hydrogen, carbon, and nitrogen, calcium, phosphorus as well as trace amounts of zinc and copper and iron. We are of humble origins; some physicists will tell us that those elements came from exploding stars…we are made of recycled stardust! But the earthling made of earth’s clay was not complete! God inspirited it with God’s very breath, the breath of life, granting the earthling unique status among all other animals. Dirt and Deity. The Judeo-Christian faith tells us we are made of Dirt And Deity. Remembering that the Bible is no more a book of science than the Darwin’s Origin of the Species is of faith, I suggest we can affirm these statements from Genesis: God’s hand is evident in creation. Humankind alone is inspirited with the breath of God. Each human being is both spirit and matter, of earth and heaven. Our other text, from Psalm 8, which we sang earlier, suggests two additional affirmations: God’s awesome beauty and power manifests itself in the physical world. Humans stand in humble awe of their Creator, and their Creator’s care. The Presbyterian Church (USA) adds this statement for our consideration: “Neither Scripture, our Confession of Faith, nor our Catechisms, teach the Creation of man by the direct and immediate acts of God so as to exclude the possibility of evolution as a scientific theory.” Evolutionary theory in particular, scientific inquiry in general, need not be a threat to us. These affirmations in hand, how might we interface with scientific theories of our beginnings? Ian Barbour, theologian and physicist, observes four ways science and theology meet one another. They act in conflict, act independently, are in dialogue, or integrate. Imagine with me a school with four classrooms, physicists, biologists, anthropologists, scientists, and people of faith…we name them all theologians because they have been thinking about God. We enter the first classroom and are immediately overwhelmed by aggressive, noisy debate. CONFLICT! Passions run high. Think Scopes “Monkey Trial”, or school boards in Georgia arguing about which textbook science teachers will use. The media and those on the extremes of each field have fanned the flames to encourage conflict and an “I’m right, you’re wrong” attitude. Biblical literalists and fundamentalists clash in this room. The Biblical Literalists believe, for example, that the theory of evolution denies the existence of a deity: it must be jettisoned or proved in error. On the other hand, the scientists defend a philosophy that matter is the only reality in the universe and argue that evolution is completely incompatible with any religious belief inclusive of a Higher Being. Fundamentalist scientists and fundamentalist people of faith put on face masks and protective jackets and go at it like fencers, parlaying forward, back, thrust, touché! The good news is that we need not stay and bear this attack. Exhausted by the conflict, we move on to the next classroom. Immediately we see an entirely different attitude: All the scientists are in one corner talking amongst themselves. All the religious advocates are in another. Occasionally they look over and smile at the other group. They have decided to maintain independence. Both sides have their own ways of “knowing”, (science through observation and testing of hypotheses and formulating theories, and faith through divine revelation in scripture, history, personal experience). In this worldview, scientific theory is taught in schools; matters of faith are taught and tended in church and home. The constitutionally mandated separation of Church and State requires it. Occasionally a visitor from the Conflict Room enters and stirs things up by suggesting that classically religious beliefs (Creationism or Intelligent Design) are actually scientific theory, but for the most part, there is peace. Science and religion would no more engage in this room than, say, Colin Powell would consult with Star Trek’s Captain Kirk We see merits in what’s happening in this classroom. It’s easier to live in, less stressful, even happy. We look at each other and nod. Maybe this is the solution. But the tour is not over. The next room is the Dialogue Room. Two lines of chairs sit in the middle of the room, one line of scientists, another line of theologians and people of faith. Each is clear about what they believe and know. They are comparing methods, and asking questions of one another in attempt to bridge differences and gain input in areas lacking in clarity. Anthropologists are conversing with theologians around the idea that at a certain time in history, suddenly the fossil record shows that humans intentionally buried their dead. What does this mean to the theologians? Has there been an evolution of the spirit? The author of a new book, Spook, engages a scientist and a preacher about the weight and existence of the soul. A bizarre book, but at least there is dialogue. On the walls of this room we read the rules. “Every opinion is valid. Everyone has a chance to talk.” We do not see the likes of Pat Robertson. In this room, science can speak with religion about what the history of the universe has been like and how life developed on Earth. Faith may suggest in response that God preceded evolutionary process, established the rules of physics, or biochemistry, reminding their dialogue partner that science need not deny the that the world is God’s creation. It’s tempting to remain here, but there is one more classroom, the Room of Integration. On the walls we notice quotations from the past when science and religion cooperated. “Nothing would ‘rejoice’ me more than that my science should be used for the purpose of demonstrating the existence of a deity.” Sir Isaac Newton. “Science is not only the surest path to knowing God, it is the only path.” Maimonides. “No doubt God could have produced a ready made world with a snap of the divine fingers, but the Creator chose to do something cleverer than that!” English Clergyman Charles Kingsley. The interaction in the room looks like the Meet and Mingle café. Everyone is mingling about, occasionally pairing up for deeper engagement because in here, scientists and religious folk do not see themselves as enemies, but rather as partners in search of the truth. Theologians do not attempt to be scientists, suggesting they can prove their beliefs and scientists do not dabble ignorantly in Biblical interpretation—unless they have been cross-trained. . You hear a physicist discussing his recent graduation from a theological seminary with a seminary professor who also has a PhD in physics. What a contrast to the first classroom! You wonder what would happen if you shared some of your religious beliefs here…both with the other people of faith, and with the scientists: God’s hand is evident in creation. Humankind alone is inspirited with the breath of God. Each human being is both spirit and matter, of earth and heaven. God’s awesome beauty and power manifests itself in the physical world. Humans stand in humble awe of their Creator, and their Creator’s care. We have walked through imaginary, external rooms, but conversations and conflicts about science and faith are internal as well; our minds fight with our spirits; our life of faith dialogues with our intellectual acceptance of scientific theory. At times we push evolution into one corner, and our faith into another. There is more than one way to resolve this dissonance! As for me, Biblical faith tells me that God molded humanity into being. Science theorizes how, over what period of time; I am intrigued by both! If the heavens are declaring God’s glory, why not learn from scientists about how, whether or not they themselves believe in a Creator? Do we have ancestors who climbed trees, walked on all fours, had pea size brains? Did the universe begin with a Bang? I’m reasonably convinced by those theories, but whether or not they can be proven, I know God’s hand molded me and keeps on molding me, that God’s Spirit is within this physical body, so similar to other animals. I shall still praise God for the beauty of a fall day, and the playful whimsy of Chimpanzee, the twinkling of the stars on a crisp dark night and that I am made of stardust.