I have published my first article for the Milwaukee Examiner titled “Do we have options in the religion verses science debate?“.
If a single entity created the stars, planets, time, space, and life itself then science is the very study of that wonderful and potentially divine creation. Scientists of all sorts have the job of trying to understand the very things that the hand of the creator has created – from geologists, biologists, and psychologists to geneticists and quantum physicists. For some their scientific study and exploration can be an awe inspiring and faith affirming exercise. For others it can be a source and angst and internal conflict.
If science is the study of all that has been divinely created then why is it all too often at odds with religion? Throughout history scientists and visionaries such a s Copernicus and Galileo were afraid to speak their ‘heretical’ idea of (heliocentrism vs the predominant and church accepted geocentrism) or were even demanded to recant their views under threat of being burned at the stake. Even today’s modern evolutionary and geological scientist are under a similar, though less harmful, assault by a religious front.
Take evolution vs creation as a specific example of a modern science vs religion battleground. Evolutionary sciences has modern humanity (homo sapiens) as being approximately 40 thousand years old and the earth at several billion years old, while the counter religious movements have both at less than 10 thousand years. This is quite the significant disparity in age between the two views, and, in this enlightened age there is still much bitterness and vehemence in arguments against each other.
I wonder why this has to be. Why are some religions so afraid of scientific advancement and the furthering our understanding of this wonderful and potentially divine creation that has given us the miracle of life and free will?
For me, such bridge theories such as evolutionary creationism and biblical to geological correlations via Day-Age Creationism help to make sense of things and to bring science and religion together in a non-aggressive and logical manner.
Why could not the creator have created all of life with evolution as its impetus for change and existence? What exactly is a biblical day to a potentially omniscient and omnipotent creator who created time and matter itself? Does the creator live by our Earth centric view of time at 24 hours per day, which may be horribly arrogant of and presumptuous of us, or does this entity who created time itself have a more fluid day in the billions or hundreds of millions of years as geological evidence would have us believe? This is for you to decide with evolutionary creationism and Age-Day Creationism as a good middle ground.
- Topical Wikipedia Links
- Other Links
- Beliefs in the Earth’s age by old Earth creationists, young Earth creationists, and scientists (Religions Tolerance)
- Creation “Days”, The â€“ Literal or Figurative? (Christian Courier)
- Galileo and the Catholic Church (Coburg Atheist)
- Creation Time Line (Reasons to Believe)
- If Science is Right, is Genesis Wrong? (Loren and Deborah Haarsma, 1999)
1 thought on “I have published my first article for the Milwaukee Examiner: ‘Do we have options in the science vs religion debate?’”