Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

“Science Must Ultimately Destroy Organized Religion”

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

This is the wisdom promulgated by the “new atheists” at a recent conference.

From the cnsnews.com article: “Science must ultimately destroy organized religion, according to some of the leading atheist writers and intellectuals who spoke at a recent atheist conference in Northern Virginia.”

They might as well dream of destroying humankind’s urge to eat.

Here’s the irony: Modern science is making belief in God ever more rational and reasonable, not destroying it. As a former atheist, I can say that science has made it possible for me to be an intellectually fulfilled Christian. I would be curious to know what the relative contemporary conversion rates are for atheist to theist as opposed to theist to atheist, especially on the basis of modern scientific discoveries.

In 1998 I read a book by Patrick Glynn, a Harvard Ph.D. who abandoned his atheism primarily as a result of evidence. The book is titled, “God: The Evidence — The Reconciliation of Faith and Reason in a Postsecular World.” Glynn comments: “The ‘death of God’ had been based on a fundamental misinterpretation of the nature of the universe, on a very partial and flawed picture that science had come up with by the late nineteenth century. Now that picture was being replaced by a new one, vastly more complex — and decisively more compatible with the notion that the universe had been designed by an intelligent Creator.”

Another irony is that Dawkins abandoned his faith on the basis of Darwinism, which turns out not to explain what he thinks it does. It is materialism/atheism that requires blind faith in the face of evidence, not theism.

Comments
Wasn't it Pascal who said "Un peu de science éloigne de Dieu, mais beaucoup y ramène" [A little science distances you from God, but a lot brings you back]? I'm reminded of an atheist who wrote a letter to the editor to a local paper recently, objecting to a previous letter in which someone said Christianity is 2,000 years old. The atheist said Christianity is in fact 1,700 years old and was invented by Constantine! Lots of people at both extremes want to rewrite the evidence not only in science but in history to suit their presuppositions. But as we move towards the middle, there are increasing numbers of people for whom the scientific evidence itself is awe-inspiring and leads to pondering of big questions about God and the nature of reality itself. I think this is truer in cosmology than in biology, though, because it is much clearer that there are questions cosmology touches on that science cannot answer than is the case in biology.ReligionProf
October 12, 2007
October
10
Oct
12
12
2007
07:48 PM
7
07
48
PM
PDT
It is interesting to note that the author of this piece wrote "Science must ultimately destroy organized religion" and "children must not be schooled in any faith", and these are not direct quotes from any of the speakers. Seems like someone is looking for a higher profile job at CNN.leo
October 12, 2007
October
10
Oct
12
12
2007
07:43 PM
7
07
43
PM
PDT
"I would be curious to know what the relative contemporary conversion rates are for atheist to theist as opposed to theist to atheist, especially on the basis of modern scientific discoveries." Beware of anecdotes, but for my part I can say that virtually all of the atheists I know (and I went to an overwhelmingly atheist college) cite Darwin as a major factor in their abandonment of religion. In contrast, virtually none of the Christians that I know even know who, e.g., Michael Behe is or what the scientific arguments against Darwinism are.Reed Orak
October 12, 2007
October
10
Oct
12
12
2007
07:31 PM
7
07
31
PM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply