Scientific discovery seems to widen the chasm between reason and faith. A scientific mind can remain religious. But, religion must start to make extra room for scientific observations. This often translates into gradually shedding unproven claims about how God governs our universe.
Copernicus and Galileo experienced their difficulties because of the prevailing understanding of nature. The understanding of nature was controlled by religious leaders of their day. As a result, Copernicus and Galileo nudged the hand of God upon publishing their discoveries; they both gently backed God's sovereign hand away from his own creation. And worse, these men also nudged at the self proclaimed infallibility of God's clergy. Why? Because their observations were in conflict with religious thought. These scientists became heretics.
Issac Newton was perhaps the glue that made the discoveries of Copernicus and Galileo finally stick. Also, some historians argue that the true discipline of science wasn't born until Newton's papers on Optiks and the Laws of Motion were published. But when Newton introduced his discoveries, he seemed willing to give God credit for whatever he found. Newton mentions God's influence in his primary work, the Principia, and is quoted by sources saying things like:
Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion. God governs all things and knows all that is or can be done.
So, Newton did not fully abandon his religious mind in the face of great scientific discovery.
But as time went along, Chemistry, Physics, Biology, and Psychology began to develop into their own stand-alone fields of study. And with more and more scientific discoveries from each filed, reason was making a regular habit of nudging the hand of God and his clergy a little further out of the picture of creation.
So, today, when we hear about a child being born with 12 fingers and 12 toes, should we wonder why God allowed this? Why did God let such a thing to happen? Yet, biology helps us understand better how this happened. Genetics shows us that this child was likely to inherit this physical anomaly because his decedents were known to have a higher incidence of extra fingers and toes. The newborn's father admitted this characteristic was prevalent in his family.
Personally, I don't blame God for this. Would you? Nor would I mock and ostracize this child for being different. All good natured people will accept his differences and hope that he has a relatively normal life.
But what do we say about God when he allows people to develop Multiple Sclerosis, now that scientists are discovering that vitamin D deficiency is correlated with this disease? Can we blame God for the way the MS gene behaves when vitamin D is deficient? MS can possibly be prevented or cured with a better understanding of how vitamin D works in pregnant mothers and in developing children. Did God deliberately keep us ignorant of this new found fact? And why didn't God also let us know that stem cell therapy could improve MS patients?
Or, do we simply start praising God for his benevolence, since he's given us these wonderful new discoveries?
Why praise? I admitted to not blaming God for these things, but not because I accept his "higher" and "mysterious" ways.
Instead, I don't blame God because I see his hand being pushed further out of the picture.
Therefore, I don't have much praise for God, either.
Showing posts with label copernicus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label copernicus. Show all posts
Thursday, February 5, 2009
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
On the Evolution of Evolution
Wow -- I've taken some time to really soak in the significance of the theory of evolution.
Here are some things I've come across lately which I think are note worthy.
Well, I can't even do justice to all that I've read recently . . . so here are some sources that can better say what I ever could:
The Evolutionary Search for our Perfect Past : This article doesn't seem to mention it, but it is a great overall synopsis of the articles found in the January issue of Scientific American. If you can't devote the time to the Scientific American issue, this NY Times article will provide some worthy highlights.
Key Gene Linked to Blood Pressure Identified : Just in case you thought genetics was a joke.
Scientific American Magazine : January 2009 Issue : If you have any questions or doubts about evolution, skim through this magazine. Maybe all your questions won't get answered, but you'll be hard pressed to maintain your doubts.
Atheism Explained : a book by David Ramsay Steele. I'm not completely finished reading it yet, but it has a very interesting chapter on evolution. While evolution doesn't disprove God in his view (and in mine, too), we can no longer hold to the traditional view of the classical Judeo-Christian model of God. For many believers, such a notion is blasphemous and atheist enough to disapprove vehemently of evolution -- in spite of the overwhelming evidence for it.
Here are some things I've come across lately which I think are note worthy.
The 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth is in this February (2009). His book, On the Origin of Species will also make it's 150th anniversary this year. This is significant because the overall theory that Darwin proposed concerning natural selection is still sound and only gathers more evidence after 150 years of scrutiny. Other facets of biology expand because of evolution -- and in turn, other facets of biology improve upon Darwin's original theory.
The scientific community at large is gearing up to pay tribute to Darwin. His findings are considered to be in rank with Copernicus, Newton, Galileo, and Einstein, according to many scientists.
The magazine Scientific American has dedicated the January issue to the evolution of the evolution theory. This issue is full of fascinating articles to read which really give light to the full implication of evolution's theories and clears up many misconceptions and misunderstandings.
Genetics is seriously tied to evolution -- as I've said recently in another post. Genes control all sorts of things such as the level of lactose tolerance one has, to heart issues, and mental health. The passing on of genes plays a large role in how a species evolves and buds off to new classes of life.Also, lately I wonder how much of the information from genetics and evolution can help us with our heath -- in practical every day situations such as diet, exercise, and achieving ideal weight. Maybe going back to our ancestry will provide understanding of what we need to eat. The NY Times article alludes to this. Maybe the obesity explosion we see has little to do with laziness, slothfulness, or lack of self control. Maybe our "modern" processed foods are not suited to our genetic makeup. Couple that problem with sitting at a desk all day and wham o! -- you're over weight.
Well, I can't even do justice to all that I've read recently . . . so here are some sources that can better say what I ever could:
The Evolutionary Search for our Perfect Past : This article doesn't seem to mention it, but it is a great overall synopsis of the articles found in the January issue of Scientific American. If you can't devote the time to the Scientific American issue, this NY Times article will provide some worthy highlights.
Key Gene Linked to Blood Pressure Identified : Just in case you thought genetics was a joke.
Scientific American Magazine : January 2009 Issue : If you have any questions or doubts about evolution, skim through this magazine. Maybe all your questions won't get answered, but you'll be hard pressed to maintain your doubts.
Atheism Explained : a book by David Ramsay Steele. I'm not completely finished reading it yet, but it has a very interesting chapter on evolution. While evolution doesn't disprove God in his view (and in mine, too), we can no longer hold to the traditional view of the classical Judeo-Christian model of God. For many believers, such a notion is blasphemous and atheist enough to disapprove vehemently of evolution -- in spite of the overwhelming evidence for it.
Monday, January 12, 2009
History Repeats Itself
Nicolaus Copernicus wrote a book entitled On the Revolutions of Heavenly Bodies which stated that the Earth revolved around the sun and was not the center of the universe.
His book was banned by the Catholic Church.
Galileo Galilei agreed with Copernicus and wrote a book entitled Dialogue Concerning Two Chief World Systems which compared old views of the cosmos versus the Copernicus view. This book advocated and supported the Copernicus model of the world.
Galileo was taken before an inquisition and placed on house arrest for the last years of his life. He was forced to renounce his scientific findings and was labeled a heretic by the Catholic Church.
Today, various states have legislators who are trying to draft and legalize disclaimers on the flaps of public school text books that mention the theory of Evolution.
Again, someone wants to keep scientific findings quiet.
Opponents of Evolution claim that the science is bad. That's not really why they oppose evolution though.
Opponents against Copernicus and Galileo made the same claims.
But again, that's not really why they opposed these two great astronomers of the past.
Copernicus and Galileo had sound scientific observation on their side.
Their opponents -- the Bible.
Guess who finally give in and change their minds.
Hopefully, everything will come full circle and history will again, repeat itself.
Why do I say this? Because, like Copernicus and Galileo -- Darwin has sound science on his side, too.
His book was banned by the Catholic Church.
Galileo Galilei agreed with Copernicus and wrote a book entitled Dialogue Concerning Two Chief World Systems which compared old views of the cosmos versus the Copernicus view. This book advocated and supported the Copernicus model of the world.
Galileo was taken before an inquisition and placed on house arrest for the last years of his life. He was forced to renounce his scientific findings and was labeled a heretic by the Catholic Church.
Today, various states have legislators who are trying to draft and legalize disclaimers on the flaps of public school text books that mention the theory of Evolution.
Again, someone wants to keep scientific findings quiet.
Opponents of Evolution claim that the science is bad. That's not really why they oppose evolution though.
Opponents against Copernicus and Galileo made the same claims.
But again, that's not really why they opposed these two great astronomers of the past.
Copernicus and Galileo had sound scientific observation on their side.
Their opponents -- the Bible.
Guess who finally give in and change their minds.
Hopefully, everything will come full circle and history will again, repeat itself.
Why do I say this? Because, like Copernicus and Galileo -- Darwin has sound science on his side, too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
