Last Thursday I had the privilege to join the talk by Rev. Prof. David Wilkinson. He had a 3-day series of talk and I joined the last one titled Communicating Faith in a Science-dominated World. There are so many things I learned from that talk. But here are three that I can remember off hand.
First, the conflict model of Science vs. Religion turns out to be relatively new as it has been used mostly in the last one hundred years. Before that, it is normal for leading scientist to believe in God. In fact, currently there is more and more young scientist that believe in God or at least in a higher power than human. So it is not true that science is always in conflict with religion. The reason this model is popular is because it is very simple. And it is probably the response of another extreme practice such as the leader of university or science society need to come from church leaders regardless of their actual scientific competency.
Second, it is possible to be both and instead of either or. We are often unconsciously encouraged to always think black or white, either this or that. For example, it is either we believe in 6 days of creation or we are an atheist. On the contrary, the literal 6 days of creation is only one of the many Christian views. So it is possible for one to believe both in God and some kinds of evolution. In fact, Darwin himself was a Christian according to the speaker.
Third, the church needs to affirm science instead of rejecting it. There are many dichotomies in the church such as ministry is holy while science is not. On the contrary, science is God’s vocation and calling for some. So it may not be good to over-emphasize full time ministry calling to young people while neglecting those who are called to be scientists and engineers.
Aside from those 3 points, the speaker also reminded us that he is not there to answer all questions. So remember, we cannot answer all questions. And in the first place, we are not called to answer all questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment