proudly in front. Similarly, the scientific evidence for evolution inspires some Chris- tians to celebrate God’s ongoing and oft-surprising creativity, but it deeply offends others. The possibil- ity that blind determinism could rival the providence of God can unnerve, while the method of inquiry doesn’t strictly require either. Another offense is about human beings. For centuries humans regarded themselves to be distinct and above other animals and the material world. But evolution indi- cates full embedded-ness in nature. Unless one hears and believes that God is faithfully with us in our cre- ated, embedded state, one could sense that we might be abandoned animals cruelly subject to capricious forces.
Rivera: Some critiques of science are well deserved. Some scientists seem to practice what philosopher Mary Midgley calls an “omni-competent science.” This occurs when scientists aim to answer or provide explana- tion to more than what their science can deliver. Science then becomes a kind of “salvation” and know-it-all approach, including the possibility of redemption for human flaws and uncertainties.
Faith in science can be as mis- guided as believing that faith will answer questions about the phys- ics and biology of nature. Both
approaches are wrongheaded and cause confusion and unnecessary conflict.
Science, like faith itself, is a dis- tinctive way of looking at the struc- tures of the world and the human experience. Each works from a spe- cific vantage point. Given the com- plexities of the world in which we live, we need both science and faith as we negotiate how to live, from concerns with the merely mundane and the need to secure the means of survival to questions about meaning- ful existence.
In all of this I would like to avoid repeating the tired expression of a dichotomy between science and faith as if the former only dealt with facts and the latter only with val- ues or meaning. Scientific facts are necessarily value-laden (influenced by human beliefs and ideals) while faith, of whatever kind, needs to be informed by reliable knowledge about the world. Paradoxically, science has increased our confidence in under- standing the world, our selves included, as it also augments our awareness of human folly, especially when it comes to make use of those natural powers that are unleashed by our greater knowledge of things.
How should we distinguish but bring together scientific and theological knowledge?
Waldkoenig: If you don’t like some scientific finding you can re-test based upon more data, but data and scientific findings don’t care if you believe them or not. God, however, welcomes our belief. God gives, affirms and increases faith to draw us into deeper relationship with God. When we waste our belief on other things besides God, it is what the Bible called idolatry, and Jesus also called foolishness. Likewise, disbe- lief of some things that are not God can be foolish and even idolatrous, on par with misdirected belief. For example, if “disbelief” of global warming protects arrogance that humankind has a right to destroy anything that exists, it is a kind of idolatry standing in the way of true belief and devotion to God, as well as a foolish approach to God’s creation. Similarly, one’s “disbelief” of evolution can mask resistance to the humility inherent in being a created, finite animal. By separating scientific knowledge and theological insight, we can render to science plenty of critical thinking while our belief is with God.
Rivera: Both science and theology value experience. The problem is that too often we reduce admissible evi- dence to sense perception. This nar- rowing of the definition and meaning of experience has the tendency to privilege some ways of gathering information over others, to the detri- ment of the kind of wisdom that a conceptual broadening of the human experience of the world provides. Our experience includes not just the accumulation of data out of empirical perceptions, but also the reorientations of the inner life, in addition to the accumulated wisdom of communal life. Science offers a great deal of knowledge, but theology still depicts the reality of God, the realm of faith.
February 2013 19
SHUTTERSTOCK
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52