|
|
| This, of course, sets up the contrast between Berndt's position that one accepts the Creation event "first by faith (revelation), and only then . . . by naturalistic science" (p. 15). This contrast pits one "belief system" against another, and the primary distinction between them, of course, is accepting the True faith. Berndt's main objection to scientific classification is that is contradicts biblical priorities, some of which, he says, are not about physical form at all (p. 23).
Second, Berndt misconstrues the practice of "Modern Taxonomy" as grouping "life on the basis of physical similarity from the general . . . to the specific"
(p. 23). Contemporary taxonomy is not just "naming" and "grouping", but rather a discipline devoted to extracting underlying relationships among organisms - even some organisms that appear quite dissimilar physically." |
|
I like to read reviews and sometimes study books like this. They provide another views to things I am thinking about. Seeing alternative points of view helps ground my thoughts in a better reality. At the same time, I recognize there are many whose faith is not strong, and can be shattered when they are faced with the incomplete and biased data (particularly historical and sociological data) scientists often work with. In my mind the solution is to create a safety net, an electronic village of believers, where folks can discuss concerns about new and even anti-religious material which challenges their faith. Cardinals, Bishops, Elders, Priests, Teachers, Deacons, Swamis, Mullah's , Guru's, and other religious leaders have traditionally taken on this role. As information becomes more freely available and accessed via the web and electronic databases, and as complexity grows, it seems there needs to be the equivalent of an electronic safe house, a place where folks can go to have questions answered, in a way not attacking and tearing down their faith. Of course, if their faith is in something unsupportable, like a superstition or a personal interpretation of scripture, then this electronic safe house would not support their faith. Admittedly it would be very hard to crate such a non-biased based platform. The Matrix discussed in Chapter 1 (016.html) has the potential of growing into a taxonomy automatically linking alternative answers to questions about faith, even within the context of specific religious traditions, and of science and of their relationships. This is the same type of thing currently being done with projects like the bibleandscience.com review quoted above.
|
paradoxes