Just read a very interesting article on the search for God in the Universe over at The Independent. There are plenty of articles out there that address the challenge of combining theology and science, but this is a particularly good example, addressing the various approaches and difficulties in just enough depth for an informative layman's article of reasonable length. There are also some reader comments that are worth checking out.
It's an intriguing ongoing debate. While I would consider myself an atheist - or, at least, a skeptical agnostic - I see no reason whatsoever why a scientist cannot also be religious. While the above article focusses on Christian scientists (not to be confused with Christian Scientists), there is no reason not to discuss the nature of objective, empirical science when applied to practicing Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, et al. I certainly find it impossible to correlate a rational view of the Universe with a literal interpretation of the Bible, or of any religious text. The twin creation stories of Genesis (for there are two, rather clumsily cobbled together - it's easy to see the join) are patently absurd, stories of an ancient people that have no place today beyond historical and mythological study. It's quite terrifying that there are still many, many schools in th United States that refuse to teach Darwinian evolution but which preach Biblical Creationism as fact.
And yet, there's nothing to stop a scientist from believing in a created Universe, or prevent a Christian, Muslim or Jew from accepting the tenets of empirical science. A literal interpretation of Old Testament stories is out of the question, but there is still room for a more developed, modern view of these religions, which many people worldwide ascribe to. I know less about pantheistic faiths, such as Hinduism, so cannot really comment on how compatible these would be with such an approach, although I'd be very interested to learn. Animistic faiths, still followed by many tribal groups throughout Asia, Africa, Oceania and the Americas, are in many ways highly compatible, worshipping, essentially, the laws of nature.
Personally, I find it difficult to believe in the Christian God, for the simple reason that the Universe, in all its complexity and splendour, is evidently not perfect, and I fail to see how an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God could create a flawed creation, filled with suffering and basic errors. Too many children are boon with terrible, agonising genetic diseases for me to ever accept such a belief. However, that doesn't preclude the possibility of some form of Creator God.
It's an intriguing ongoing debate. While I would consider myself an atheist - or, at least, a skeptical agnostic - I see no reason whatsoever why a scientist cannot also be religious. While the above article focusses on Christian scientists (not to be confused with Christian Scientists), there is no reason not to discuss the nature of objective, empirical science when applied to practicing Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, et al. I certainly find it impossible to correlate a rational view of the Universe with a literal interpretation of the Bible, or of any religious text. The twin creation stories of Genesis (for there are two, rather clumsily cobbled together - it's easy to see the join) are patently absurd, stories of an ancient people that have no place today beyond historical and mythological study. It's quite terrifying that there are still many, many schools in th United States that refuse to teach Darwinian evolution but which preach Biblical Creationism as fact.
And yet, there's nothing to stop a scientist from believing in a created Universe, or prevent a Christian, Muslim or Jew from accepting the tenets of empirical science. A literal interpretation of Old Testament stories is out of the question, but there is still room for a more developed, modern view of these religions, which many people worldwide ascribe to. I know less about pantheistic faiths, such as Hinduism, so cannot really comment on how compatible these would be with such an approach, although I'd be very interested to learn. Animistic faiths, still followed by many tribal groups throughout Asia, Africa, Oceania and the Americas, are in many ways highly compatible, worshipping, essentially, the laws of nature.
Personally, I find it difficult to believe in the Christian God, for the simple reason that the Universe, in all its complexity and splendour, is evidently not perfect, and I fail to see how an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God could create a flawed creation, filled with suffering and basic errors. Too many children are boon with terrible, agonising genetic diseases for me to ever accept such a belief. However, that doesn't preclude the possibility of some form of Creator God.
