Science (and Religion) Beyond Evolution

I chuckled when I read Tom LeBlanc’s letter in the Projo (which Marc mentions in the previous post). The idea that the Theory of Evolution can accord with religious faith in God is only “groundbreaking” from the perspective of scientists. If the Judeo-Christian conception of God is more or less correct, then it must be the case that any science discovered to be true will accord with His existence.
This discussion brings to mind a series of six long essays that I wrote in response to physicist Frank Tipler’s The Physics of Immortality. (Here’s part one of the series.) The concepts are abstract, and the writing is rough. And I sometimes wasn’t sufficiently clear when I was speculating about “if this, then that” and when I was saying “certainly this,” but that’s mostly because I was rushing to throw the ideas into words before discontinuing my online Just Thinking column.
Not surprisingly, given that I’m a Catholic Christian convert, the underlying idea is that even the most out-there of scientific ideas, to the extent that they are truly compatible with the world in which we live, are compatible with God, generally, and Christian revelation, specifically. I don’t think the topic necessarily accords with the specific mission of Anchor Rising, but it’s certainly one to which I intend to return when circumstances allow.
ADDENDUM:
I should note that the topic that I don’t think accords with the mission of Anchor Rising is the tracing of religion into out-there science — not the level of discussion in which Marc has engaged. That’s clearly apropos to our goals, here.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Marc Comtois
16 years ago

Nice point concerning the fact that the “revelation” that religion and science can be complimentary so often occurs on the scientific side. Wish I’d brought it up!

Tom LeBlanc
Tom LeBlanc
16 years ago

Glad I gave you a chuckle! 😉
You’re absolutely right that this is hardly a new concept. But given the typically polarized debate surrounding this topic, the idea indeed DOES seem groundbreaking today, which is why I somewhat imperfectly described it as such. This is particularly true in scientistific circles, as you noted. Fortunately, Ken Miller serves as a voice of rationality in the scientific world, where others try to use science to somehow “disprove God.” Anyway, thanks for the interesting articles here! I’m surprised to see that anyone paid attention to my letter!
-Tom LeBlanc

Show your support for Anchor Rising with a 25-cent-per-day subscription.