In today's society, science and religon don't have to be mutually exclusive.
Religion in America is in trouble, and science can help save it. Conventional wisdom suggests otherwise, saying that science is more likely to kill religion than to rescue it. I’m convinced that science is the last best hope for religion in the modern world.
The God Wars pit those who believe in a supernatural God that commands and controls from outside the natural order against those who accept rational thought and scientific research as the final word. For centuries, people have tried to arbitrage the difference between these competing worldviews. Today, more and more people are concluding that we ultimately have to choose. In this ongoing battle of Faith v. Reason, reason now appears to be winning: the majority of Americans either have no religious affiliation or, even if affiliated, see a conflict between being a devout religious person and living in the modern world.
This conflict is real, but unnecessary.
Until about 500 years ago, people thought the Earth was at the center of the solar system. But Copernicus looked into the night sky and discovered otherwise. In more recent centuries, scientists have come to another conclusion of similar magnitude: in our universe, the fundamental laws of nature have existed from the very beginning, they apply everywhere, and they do not change.
As humans, we continually revise our answers to cosmic questions, and I believe now is the time to revise the answer to the question of God. This is where science can show the way forward. Rather than ignore it, we need to take everything we know into account in order to discover the God we believe in and decide how we need to live. But like the view of the universe as Earth-centered, I believe the view of God that requires us to suspend disbelief needs to be left behind.
It won’t be easy. The belief in a supernatural God is longstanding and has broad appeal, not to mention evolutionary origins. Our ancient ancestors survived because they understood the world in terms of cause and effect; they understood themselves as agents who could cause things to happen. If they followed cause and agency far enough upstream, they would reach a first cause that stood outside the universe, which they dubbed God.
But people didn’t respond to Copernicus by saying that if the earth isn’t the center of the solar system, then the solar system doesn’t exist. When people ask me whether I believe in God, my answer is yes. But I’m convinced that today’s atheists are 100% half right. I, too, don’t believe in the supernatural God they don’t believe in. Traditional religionists are also 100% half right. Just because God isn’t supernatural doesn’t mean that God is a fantasy and religion is a farce.
I did not come to this answer quickly or easily, however. As a former Conservative Mennonite from a long line of Mennonite preachers, I’ve struggled since my youth with this question, which I work to untangle in my writings, sermons, and book God Revised: How Religion Must Evolve in a Scientific Age.
Seeking God, finding faith, and participating in a religious community is more than a personal exercise. If we fail to adapt, our increasingly empty houses of worship will become a sad symbol of a deeper vacancy in our lives and our culture. We’ll each be left increasingly alone with our spiritual hunger and our longing for a place to belong. Self-centered entertainment will increasingly substitute for moral education. Political expediency and religious zealotry will increasingly triumph over a commitment to common good.
In our modern world, we need to understand where we belong – that deep connection to everything that is present in our world, as well as all that is past and all that is possible. For this reason, a revised understanding of God isn’t an optional aspect of life today. I believe it’s necessary – not to explain everything we don’t know, but to make meaningful sense of everything we do know.
The Rev. Dr. Galen Guengerich is senior minister of All Souls Unitarian Church in New York City, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and author of God Revised: How Religion Must Evolve in a Scientific Age (Palgrave Macmillan, 2013).
I read your commentary re Atheists and religion with pleasure. This subject needs more attention, and, somehow, the wars, degradation and turmoil in our modern world community must be seen as part of the mis-definition of religion, God, Jesus (Joshua) etc.
George Maendel
Former Hutterite Community member.
I too believe that it is imperative to take a a rational approach to religion.
I have been analyzing religion from a cognitive perspective for several years, using an extension of the method applied by the cognitive science of religion. For instance, instead of trying to determine whether or not God exists, I have been examining how the mind forms a concept of God, how cognitive development relates to various concepts of God, and how a concept of God affects personal and social behavior.
I have found that a cognitive approach makes it possible to separate the content of religion–which is valuable, from the attitude of religious fundamentalism–which is destructive. You can see the topics which I have recently been covering on the forum page of my website.
And–I am also a Mennonite.
This is the great point, I see loads of atheists who seem to think all smart consumers are atheists and all of dumb folks are religious. This is usually incorrect as possible pretty easily find stupid atheists and smart Christians. Furthermore, it makes whole body about people being either stupid or smart, I’m sure essentially most people are smart about certain topics and dumb about others.
As a former Mennonite (60+years) and a Unitarian-Universalist for the past eight years, I too no longer find the traditional god-hypothesis necessary (probably not even useful) for my spiritual composure; however, for many reasons, I still find belonging to a social/spiritual community of fellow “seekers” very helpful.
Well, before anything else: Just because the man believes in God doesn’t ipso facto make it true. And second, what’s his repeatable evidence?
Thank you for an interesting thesis. However, I might add that we do not simply live within the paradigm of rational science-based knowledge. Other profound questions abound. Does the universe, and with that, the course and meaning of humanity, have a purpose? Is the trajectory o humanity and all that is meaningful to our lives on a course of improvement, betterment, indeed salvation? Or are we “heading for the cliff” such as ecological or nuclear annihilation? And can science save us? Or do we need “help” and “rescuing” from an outside “transcendent source?”
As a scientist and theologian (and with significant Mennonite influence, by the way), I see different domains of knowledge at work,yet with convergence. Religion is justifiably losing some of its potency because it over-reached into areas not of its singular domain.For example, religion should not tell us how old the universe is. On the other hand, science over-reaches outside its domain when it implies that it assuredly will bring about a brighter future.
On a personal basis there are experiences of epiphany that confirm and solidify my belief in God, and times of “drought” when I question. This “dialectic of doubt and belief” I believe is the essence of a living faith. I carry on, with hope.