Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Science vs. Religion: The Heavyweight Match

This is a paper I wrote for college... twice.  The first time was for an English class which I took through a U.S. college while stationed in Europe in about 1992 or 93.  The second time, I used it as a framework to rewrite for a Humanities course, which was Introduction to Religion.  

Both times, I was attempting to reconcile the religion I was taught as a child, to make sense of the contradictions, the lack of logic or fact.  I was actually trying to support the belief with facts.  Perhaps a fool's errand, because some people of faith do not look for facts to support their belief.  I am primarily referring to Bible literalists, who take everything exactly as written and also use the words to REFUTE science. And some even stick to only one version of the Bible regardless of how many versions predate, for example, The King James version.

With my earlier version of this writing, the instructor liked my paper so much that she had me read it aloud to the class. I was embarrassed, but also flattered (and wanted a good grade!)  By the time I finished, I could tell the fundamentalists from the free-thinkers.  The fundies were all shaking their heads.

I still don't think this paper is "wrong" but I now find it difficult to reconcile the two camps.  I will likely write more about this in a future blog.

For now, here are my unedited thoughts from 8 years ago, and by extension, although rewritten, 20 years ago.  If these words help you, great. If not, either way you have a peek into my own theological journey.

(btw, the "Huston Smith" I refer to is the author of a book called Why Religion Matters which we read for class)


**********
Sam I. Am
Dr. MyTeacher
Humanities (Intro to Religion)
August 9, 2005

Science and Religion:  You Kids Play Nice!

Science and religion are two schools of thought which for some time have not been able to peacefully coexist, at least in modern times, and probably never.  Some examples from Western culture are the rejection of Copernicus’ and Galileo’s ideas about the structure of the universe, and more recently, the controversy surrounding Darwin’s theory of evolution.  This was hotly debated in the “Scopes Monkey Trial” in the early twentieth century, and to this day tempers flare and court cases are filed when ideologies clash.
I agree completely with Huston Smith when he assails scientism as the belief that science can answer all our questions and solve all our problems.  Smith places it as the floor of “the tunnel” metaphor he uses to describe our current dark ages and lack of spirituality.  This “ism” is only part of the problem, in my view.  The “ism” on the other side of the coin is religious dogmatism.
I am the product of a Christian family from Virginia; I attended Sunday school and church quite regularly as a child, and even spent parts of my summers at a local Bible camp.  My family primarily attended Presbyterian services, but we did sometimes switch, trying Baptist, Assembly of God and Methodist churches.  And the influence of the Southern Baptist church in that area can not be overstated!  I still recall listening as my grandmother tuned in to radio sermons and listening about “hellfire and brimstone” and wondering if that guy would ever stop to catch a breath!  I also fondly recall the set of Bible Story books by Arthur S. Maxwell my mother had, and when I visit my sister back there, I still like to flip through them.  And believe it or not, we had some missionaries who came to our school periodically in the 1970s and taught Bible lessons, long after the Supreme Court rulings in the 1960s.  (They used an easel with felt figures which stuck up there and then added or removed them, or even unveiled a new one to illustrate the story… I thought it was pretty cool!)
So by the time I hit my teen years, I was thoroughly indoctrinated in the stories of the Judeo-Christian Bible, mostly of the King James flavor.  However, this created an inevitable conflict, for I was also interested in science.  I read about dinosaurs, prehistoric men and the ice ages, volcanoes, earthquakes and was fascinated by the concept of plate tectonics in the fourth grade.  I also watched some of the last Apollo moon landings, and even had a toy astronaut with all the accessories when I was in first grade.  Therefore, once I learned the scientific theories behind what I was reading, it just didn’t fit with what I had been taught through all those religious methods.  I tended to embrace the scientism, and push religious dogmatism to the side.  In my mind, it was all or nothing, one camp or the other.  They couldn’t both have truth… could they?
Albert Einstein and about every physicist since him have worked toward a unified theory, a theory of everything.  This would tie together the laws of space, time, gravity, electromagnetism, radiation, and the other forces in the universe.  I’m no Einstein, but I think there can be many unifying things between science and religion, rather than the two camps always being at odds.  I intend to explore several issues from the Judeo-Christian Bible, offering ideas of how these seemingly supernatural events can be explained without suspending scientific rationality.  While I would like to explore the belief of other religions, I am not familiar enough with them and time does not permit me to study all of them.  But I think the method can be applied to any religion.
Where to begin?  I Might as well start at the beginning:  Genesis 1:1 states “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.”  A very simple statement, yet the explanation from science is “The Big Bang.”  According to this theory, all the matter and energy of the universe was condensed into a singularity, an infinitely dense point which contained everything.  Genesis 1:2 says, in part “And the earth was without form, and void…”  Void is defined as “nothing.”  If there was nothing, is it not conceivable that there were no laws of physics either?  Imagine a sudden energy burst, illimitable in proportion and of divine origin.  As the energy spread and cooled, it condensed into matter, and the future universe was set into motion.  And given that light was created by God before the sun, it fits with the sequence of events that led to the solar system later in time.  Modern cosmologists and physicists can explain events all the way back to within a fractional second of the Big Bang, but not before.  So how could such a point ever exist?  Maybe it didn’t!  Perhaps the burst was simply willed into existence by God.  There is even a school of belief that the universe is merely a thought in the mind of God, but that’s another topic.
Most who interpret the Bible literally believe all of creation to be only a few thousand years old.  I find this problematic, because I don’t believe God would have made the universe into some kind of puzzle problem for us to figure out, with the laws of science conflicting with reality.  Science shows that the universe is about 15 billion years old, so how to explain the difference?  Time is meaningless to God, and there are at least two passages in the Bible which state this.  Psalm 90:5 says “For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.” And 2 Peter 3:8 says “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.”  Therefore, if we take the “days” of creation as a metaphor, each one could represent millions or billions of years, and they wouldn’t even have to be of equal length.  Of course one could argue that the Biblical account is literal, and that God created the trees with rings, Adam and Eve with navels, and the earth filled with fossils.  But if so, this seems an unusual trick to play on the mind of man.
As for the emergence of life, a literal interpretation seems to show that life simply “sprouted” from the earth at God’s command.  However, this germination process could have taken “days” and followed natural laws of selective evolution.  Interestingly, man is created later, just as anthropologists say.  And when man is brought forth, the story has an interesting context:  God speaks using plural pronouns in Genesis 1:26, whereas in the other parts, He simply says “Let there be…”  So when He says “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…”  Was this the “royal” pronoun? If so, why wasn’t it used earlier?  Perhaps God was speaking to the animals, evolving man from them, but imparting him with a divine soul, or “the image of God.”  Another interesting thought comes from Daniel Quinn’s Ishmael.  In this book the gorilla philosopher suggests that Adam and Eve were not two people, but were a group of people who were not the beginning of man, but were the beginning of our culture.
I came across another interesting example from Genesis by accident a few years ago that has stuck in my mind.  While reading a book about snakes which one of my kids borrowed from the library, there was a section about pythons which said they were descended from prehistoric lizards that lived alongside the dinosaurs.  They still have remnants of the bone structure where their legs used to be.  I remember being told that serpents walked on legs prior to the “forbidden fruit” incident in the Bible, and Genesis 3:14 says “And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou has done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life…”  Perhaps the serpent was punished for tricking Eve into eating from the forbidden tree?
Other symbolism in the Bible fits with widely accepted history.   The exile of Adam and Eve from Eden might represent the switch from being hunter-gatherers to the establishment of agriculture.  To this day, primitive tribes have more leisure time than those of us in the so-called “better” modern world, so might switching from their way of life have been paradise lost?  And when Cain slew Abel, the metaphor could be farmers taking over from herders and nomads, fighting and killing them when necessary.
Moving on from creation, another amazing story from the Bible which nearly all in the Western world are familiar with is the story of Noah’s flood.  Recent research has revealed evidence of a catastrophic flood which inundated the Black Sea approximately 7,600 years ago.  The narrow passage connecting it to the Mediterranean was closed off during the last ice age, and it was a freshwater lake with a level several hundred feet below its current elevation.  Sunken riverbeds have been observed, and Dr. Robert Ballard, who discovered the Titanic, has found possible evidence of settlements alongside these rivers.  At some point, melting ice caps resulted in rising sea levels around the globe, and the natural dam separating the Black Sea from saltwater was breached.  The ensuing torrent is estimated to have been hundreds of times the size of Niagara Falls, and filled the Black Sea within a few months.  In the process, thousands of people were displaced, tens of thousands of square miles of farmland were lost, and mass starvation may have ensued.  Add the stench and possible disease from rotting freshwater fish killed by saltwater, and you may very well have a disaster of Biblical proportions.
Many older religions have stories of a catastrophic flood, particularly those of Mesopotamian origin, but the one with the most parallels is from the Epic of Gilgamesh.  It mirrors Noah’s flood in many ways, from the flood itself, the boat built to preserve life, and the birds sent out to search for land.  According to scholars, these stories predate the Bible by hundreds or even thousands of years.  Might they all have the same ancient origin?
Of course, conservative readers of the Bible say the story is true just as told.  While reading various web sites for this paper, I came across an interesting theory of how plate tectonics played a part in the flood.  In a nutshell, it outlines how the continents were one, just as science states, and as they split up water sprang from the deep.  There were no mountains yet, so the earth was easily covered.  The Grand Canyon and other great geological features were carved during this period, and the subsequent uplift of mountains and sinking of the ocean floor allowed the floodwaters to subside, and Noah’s ark came to rest on a mountain.  Majoring in Geology, I find this interesting, but difficult to believe unless God is once again playing a trick on our minds with the observed evidence versus the story.  It is worth learning more about, but once again, that is another topic!
As we move forward in the Bible, another very famous set of miracles take place during the Exodus from Egypt.  The plagues sent to convince the Pharaoh to free the Jews might have a basis in nature.
The first plague was the Nile turning to blood.  This has been known to happen in modern times when a polluting agent causes an algae bloom.  These toxic algae would kill all the fish, frogs (the second plague) would leave the river and marshes, and die in the heat.  The fish and frogs rotting would likely result in gnats and flies (third and fourth plagues) and perhaps spread disease killing livestock (fifth plague).  The toxins might have caused the people to develop rashes and boils (sixth plague), since they were dependent on the Nile waters for life.
But what source of the polluting agent?  One theory I found on the internet proposes the explosion of the volcanic island of Santorini around 1,600 BCE resulted in massive ash fallout over Egypt.  Deposits of ash from this event have been found in the Nile delta region, and this type of fallout is known to impact weather.  So hail and darkness (seventh and ninth plagues) might have been a consequence.  Locusts (eighth plague) are a relatively common occurrence in Africa, so one does not have to stretch the imagination to embrace this.  The final plague, the death of the firstborn in Egypt, may have been a consequence of the disease mentioned earlier, or starvation made worse by locusts.
During the ensuing flight from Egypt, the King James version of the Bible states that Moses led the Jews through the Red Sea.  However, according to many sources, the original Hebrew “yam suph” was mistranslated and means “Reed Sea.” Many scholars point to the Bitter Lakes of the Suez Canal area as this body of water.  Computer models have shown that the strong winds of the region can cause bodies of water to “slosh” to one side for a period of time, and some report having witnessed this phenomenon.  And Exodus 14:21 says, in part, “and the Lord caused the sea to go back by a strong east wind all that night, and made the sea dry land, and the waters were divided.”  And once this east wind subsided, the water would return to its original location.  Pity anyone caught in this pseudo-tsunami!
There are many other miracles in the Bible, and I’m sure just as many in other religious texts.   Many scientists and researchers have offered theories for these events, some plausible, some not.  Some have stated that God did not cause these miracles, but how can they prove it?  The explanations I have used may seem to lean in this direction, but it is not my intent.  This would be scientism, pure and simple.  I believe that if God created the world, He also created the laws of physics and nature which it obeys.  So is it not unreasonable to theorize that He might work within His own laws to achieve the goals?  I leave open the possibility for the hand of God to have worked in this manner.  Otherwise, how would Moses have known when to challenge the Pharaoh, or when it was safe for the Israelites to cross the sea?  And Noah’s flood could have been caused by God, perhaps even to punish those living around the Black Sea.

What I have written is from only one religious perspective, only ideas, and not intended to be exclusive of others.  But if more common ground between science and religion could be found, I think more people might be inclined to embrace spirituality in some form.  And, as a lesson, if all people could learn the good from religion and focus on what we have in common instead of our differences, the world would be an infinitely better place.

\\\\\\\\\\ Well, that's the end of my ancient text! //////////

And that pretty much sums up the way it often ends...


And on that note, this is the end of this post!

No comments:

Post a Comment