An article by Tony Watkins on Angels and Demons, directed by Ron Howard and based on the novel by Dan Brown. [...]
|
|||
|
Number four in the Talking About series created problems for us in trying to find the right subtitle. The Playing God bit was easy, but trying to summarise the area of interest in just a very few words was tricky. The ‘ethics in medicine’ part is straightforward enough – looking at issues relating to [...] Writing anything on creation and evolution within these pages feels akin to sticking a sign on my back reading, ‘Kick me!’ I’m exposing myself to attack from one side or another – or maybe from every side! What drives me to stick my head above the parapet is a couple of strong convictions. First, I am absolutely convinced that Christians who disagree should be discussing the issues in a loving, gentle, humble way rather than attacking each other. It seems to me that attacking each other is becoming more common as the debate becomes more polarised. My second conviction is that by focusing on controversy, we are missing significant opportunities to communicate the good news of Jesus Christ in a world which desperately needs to hear it. So here are ten things you need to know about the creation/evolution debate. Wherever you’re coming from on this issue, I would encourage you not to instantly write off things you disagree with, but give them some more thought. If we’re ever going to sort this issue out it seems to me that we have to approach the questions more open-mindedly than perhaps we’ve ever done before. [...] I’ve just watched the film Gattaca for the second time. It’s written and directed by a New Zealander, Andrew Niccol who also penned another of last year’s big box-office hits, The Truman Show. This is a man to watch out for – these two films are two of the most intelligent and thought-provoking I’ve seen in a long time. Gattaca is set in the “not-too-distant-future” and opens with a quotation from the Bible, Ecclesiastes 7:13 which says, “Consider what God has done: Who can straighten what he has made crooked?” The film tells how our civilisation may one day attempt to do this. As soon as the hero, Vincent, is born, his DNA is analysed and his future capabilities are predicted – including the fact that he has a 99% chance of dying of a heart disorder when he is 30 years old. As a result, he is condemned to a life of menial labour. However, Vincent (Ethan Hawke) has a dream – to get to Gattaca Space Academy and join space missions. Through sheer determination – and the use of someone else’s very superior DNA which he buys illegally – he manages to achieve his ambition. This is a world in which “normal” children are genetically engineered to be free of significant diseases and social hindrances such as left-handedness. Those born by “old-fashioned” methods (i.e. not by IVF) are significantly inferior – they are designated “In-valid” and are the scum of society. No longer is discrimination on the basis of race or gender – it has become a science based on analysing someone’s genetic code. What’s so disturbing about Gattaca is that this frightening scenario is not beyond the bounds of possibility. When Andrew Niccol was asked why he wrote this film, he replied, “My genes made me do it. I don’t know when I first thought of it, but you can open a newspaper today, and I’m certain that you’ll read something about a new gene, and it became inescapable for me as a story idea.” It sometimes seems that hardly a day passes without the media reporting some new discovery in genetics. Again and again we hear that scientists claim to have isolated a gene for a certain disease. Increasingly we are told that aspects of our personality can be attributed to our DNA. Just last year we heard about genetic connections for lust, being a good parent and religious inclination and several others. Insurance companies want to increase the amount of genetic testing they carry out in order to identify high-risk applicants for life-insurance. We are already getting to the point where our society is attempting to define us by our DNA. This is an issue that raises extremely difficult ethical issues. The Human Genome Project (a vast undertaking to identify every human gene) is ahead of schedule and has already led to major steps forward in diagnosing and treating a number of diseases. It’s something for which we should all be grateful. But how far should we go? Should life-insurance companies have the right to know about our susceptibility to heart disease? When does treatment become meddling? How do we prevent ourselves reaching a situation where discrimination on the basis of genes is normal? One of my concerns is that there is not enough debate going on about the ethics of genetics research – but the research continues at full speed. It is important for Christians to get up to speed on these issues and make sure that we have something to say – to our friends if not at a wider level. Otherwise things will move on regardless. [...] What does Genesis 1 say to us today? The writer of Genesis would have been very aware of various creation stories believed by the surrounding pagan nations in the Ancient Near East. Those of the superpowers – Babylon, Assyria and Egypt – would have been very influential on the whole region. It was vital that Israel had a right understanding of God and his creation. Genesis 1:1 – 2:3 knocks many of these pagan myths on the head. [...] What is the purpose of Genesis 1? I said in the previous article that we are mistaken to go to Genesis 1 with a scientific agenda – to ask scientific questions about the age of the earth and so on – because that’s not what Genesis 1 is for. It’s purpose is theological not scientific. It is interested in meanings and relationships not mechanisms. So we should be expecting to see Genesis addressing questions that would have been asked by people in the Ancient Near East back when it was written. The same questions are, in fact, still being asked by people today – although in very different terms. But before we can get to those big answers to big questions, we must get to grips with Genesis 1 and find out more about it. This is a basic principle of all good Bible study. When we come to any passage of Scripture, the question burning in our minds is, ‘How is this relevant to me in my world?’ But before we can answer that question we must ask a more fundamental one – ‘What was God’s original intention in this passage?’ Or, if you like, ‘How was this relevant to the people who first heard or read this in their world?’ The first thing we must do is to see Genesis 1 in context – both its context within Genesis (and the whole Bible) and its historical context. This is called the literary-cultural approach to biblical interpretation. So, how can we answer that fundamental question, ‘What was God’s original intention in this passage?’ [...] How do we understand Genesis 1? So far in this series we have seen two reasons for the apparent conflict between science and faith. First, science and the Bible have different agendas (‘how?’ versus ‘why?’). Second, the issues are not as clear-cut as people on both sides like to think. As a result, the debate tends to be viewed in very polarised terms. Either God created everything in six twenty-four hour days, or the universe and life came into existence by chance and have steadily evolved. Polarisation is a mistake There are at least three reasons why this polarisation is a mistake. [...] What really matters in the science-Christianity debate? Planet Earth may have had its 6000th birthday in the last few years. In 1650, Archbishop James Ussher calculated its age by adding up the ages of people and reigns of kings in the Old Testament. He concluded (conveniently) that Creation had happened 4000 years before Jesus’s birth. This gave a date of 4004 BC – a scholar named Joseph Scaliger had already noticed that Herod had died by 1 AD,1 so Jesus must have actually been born in 4 BC at the latest. Ussher even somehow narrowed it down to 9 am on 23 October, although, he said, the action must have started around 6 pm on the previous evening. On 20 October 1996, The Observer carried an article ridiculing Ussher’s calculation, by Mark Ridley, an Oxford zoologist. And rightly so. Ussher counted in such a way as to get 4000 years between the creation and incarnation because of a Jewish tradition that the earth would last 6000 years made up of three 2000-year phases. The Messiah’s coming must usher in the third and final 2000 year period, so the world would end on 23 October 1996 – or perhaps at 6pm the evening before. [...] Can we be so sure of what we think we know? In the previous article we looked at one reason for the apparent conflict between science and faith: they have different approaches. Science is concerned to understand the space-time world of matter and energy. It wants to know how things work. Christian faith is concerned to understand more than that. The Bible shows us that there is far more to this world than simply what’s physical: there is a supernatural, spiritual dimension to life. There is a Creator who brought the universe into being and who wants a relationship with the creatures he’s made. There are real angels and a real devil. There really is spiritual warfare (Ephesians 6). [...] Do science and Christianity conflict? Most people don’t think about science and faith. If they do, the first thing that comes to their minds is conflict. To most people they are irreconcilable enemies – and science is the undisputed victor. The ‘science has disproved the Bible’ kind of response is common when discussing Christian things with people. In the student world, the problem is worse among arts students. Interestingly, science and engineering students far outnumber arts students in many Christian Unions. But, in those bastions of objectivity, the science faculties, there are plenty who feel the same – even if they don’t put it it quite so bluntly. They think science is intellectually superior and that religion is a load of unsubstantiated, subjective claptrap. There are many Christians, too, who see Christianity and science as being at war. For them, if there is conflict, it’s the science that is wrong. [...] |
|||
|
Copyright © Tony Watkins 1994-2012 - All Rights Reserved Social Media icons by jwloh, used under a Creative Commons licence Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa |
|||