January 21, 2005
-
SCIENCE AND RELIGION
RELIGIOUS CONTEMPT AND HOT BUTTONS
I was just listening to one of my favorite radio programs; Talk of the Nation-Science Friday on National Public Radio. The topic was the teaching of evolution in public schools. There were three guests, one from the scientific community, one from the religious community, and one who was a writer with a rather interesting viewpoint. What really struck me was the level of contempt that the scientist had for religion. I could see actual “hate rays” coming out of my car radio.
The religious leader asked the scientist why he dismissed religion so completely and the scientist replied that science determines what is fact by what it can quantify. He went on to say that if you are attempting to determine if religion is harmful or helpful that you can easily quantify the negative impact of religion. However, it is almost impossible to quantify the positive impact of religion. You can note that more people have been killed in the name of religion throughout history than for any other reason. You can also note that while religion attempts to be “inclusive” it is actually the most divisive element on the planet. Since the positive aspects of religion are more often measured by the personal impact that religion has had on the life of an individual, it is virtually impossible to quantify.
As Christians, we might find this offensive but we can’t deny its truth. We don’t want to admit that our religious heritage is sometimes tainted by evil. I’m no longer a Southern Baptist, but since I attended a Southern Baptist College and Seminary and served on the staffs of six different Southern Baptist Churches, I can certainly claim a Southern Baptist heritage. One of the historical facts that always cracks me up when I hear Southern Baptists going on and on about the superiority of their denomination is how that particular denomination came to be. The truth is that Southern Baptists pulled away from other Baptist Groups in the mid 1800’s over the issue of slavery. We wanted to keep our slaves because we thought it was our God given right (and of course there was the added bonus of being able to rape the female slaves.)
Southern Baptists have long since repented of that horrible position, but it’s an historical marker that is easy to point too. It’s much more difficult to point to lives being changed for the better simply because faith is much more intangible and personal.
So the scientist obviously has a point, but it’s also apparent that his hot button was pushed and that his contempt of religion really isn’t useful. Everyone has hot buttons. One of mine is when someone tells me that “God told them something”, or that they got a “Word from God.” The reason this is such a hot button for me is that when I was in the ministry and someone came into my office, sat down, and began a sentence with “God told me,” 90% of the time it meant they were getting ready to f#*k me over and didn’t have the balls to take responsibility for their own actions. (Gosh, do I sound bitter?) So I have to admit, that when that hot button is pushed I’m as guilty of religious contempt as the scientist was.
Was the religious leader any better? No, he demonstrated just as much contempt for the scientist’s views, and therefore was just as guilty. The position that intrigued me, however, was that of the writer’s. He used the following analogy as it related to the discussion of evolution. He said “Imagine that you are boiling a pot of water on the stove. You can explain why the water is boiling in a couple of ways. You can note that the molecules in the water are excited and are bumping against each other. This would be the scientific explanation. You could also state that the reason the water is boiling is because you wanted to make a cup of tea.”
In his analogy the concepts of science and the concept of a “larger influence” exist side by side in complete harmony. This is where the truth most likely lies.
The religious community does not benefit itself by demonstrating contempt for science, and the scientific community does not benefit itself by demonstrating contempt for religion. We all need to put our hot buttons aside and keep and open mind.
Comments (2)
It sounds there like the scientist didn’t really have his scientist hat on straight.
While he’s very right about the empirical nature of science, and more than right about the terrible terrible things that religion has been a vanguard of in our world history, he does seem to ignore an emerging (and quite sound) psychology of religion that demonstrates some interpersonal boons. The question, from an empirical standpoint, is still open to debate as to whether the interpersonal benefits of organized religion outweigh the catastrophies that have been aided by it – but I’ll let other’s debate over that for now.
I’m currently deeply involved in some studies on Christianity and the Holocaust, a fascinating and sobering topic from a “scientific” historical standpoint. There is no denying that organized religion in most cases aided the Nazis on their “other war” against the Jewish race. But we, as Christians, often attempt to ignore the darker side of our history. I think it’s absolutely necessary that we confront it, claim some responsibility for it, and stand ever-vigilant that it never, ever happens again.
Hi Mark… you always say something to make me THINK!!! That’s sooo dangerous. I think folks focus to much on religion and not enough on SALVATION!!!