06.08.08
Waters of Creation
I’ve been thinking lately of the ways that the psalter and Genesis think about creation, specifically the roles of the water. The belief that the cosmos is watery and the heavens and below the earth are water are found in Genesis 1 and in psalms. The watery substance of the heavens and below the earth makes the great flood of Noah possible, because the endless waters of the heavens can merely drain into the endless waters below the earth – sort of like a great terrarium.
This is based on observations:
- Heavens are where water comes from in rain and the sparkling sky most resembles light reflecting off water. Think of moonlight sparkling off nearly still water.
- Watery underworld because water soaks into the ground, water springs up from the ground in natural springs; if you dig a well even in the desert you can find water underneath.
- There is so much water underground that wells up and collects on the surface. Land floats on the surface like islands.
Now this is not entirely inconsistent with science, water is one of the components of the atmosphere and there is an aquifer, or water table, under at least most of the land. Of course it doesn’t look like anything biblical writers had in mind. Water in the atmosphere is a minor component and the aquifer is more like a soggy sponge than a vast sea or river. The land actually does float but on a sea of magma.
The importance of water in creation comes from two, I think equal, thoughts. First, literal observations of the world around them with the tools (or lack of tools) that they had. Therefore, it reflects the scientific reasoning of the day. Second, the vital importance of water to early humans. You don’t need to live in a desert to understand how important water is to human existence. No matter where you live: savannah, temperate forest, desert, mountains, you can only travel as far as you can go with your fresh water supply. To walk off in a new direction without a map and a limited water supply is quite a risk. Water is life everywhere on planet Earth. Indeed as we begin to look for life on other planets, we start by looking for water.
Biblical use of ‘the waters’, ‘the Deep’, is a poetic way to refer to the beginning of creation using the material which is most vital for life. When I think of the waters of chaos these days, I think of the Big Bang, which was neither big nor a bang (no sound in a vacuum). I’m not a physicist but from what I have heard (here for example), in that first fraction of a second the material, plasma, created flowed as a perfect fluid – no friction, essentially no viscosity. From that perfect fluid, the first subatomic particles formed beginning the road toward matter as we know it. This fluid that became the gaseous plasma of the cosmos that eventually spawned the first stars is what I think of as the waters of chaos. In a way that gaseous plasma is still the waters of chaos; stars are still being born.
In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, 2the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep, while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. 3Then God said, ‘Let there be light’; and there was light. (Gen 1:1-3)
06.01.08
On Science and Religion from the AAAS
The AAAS is the American Association for the Advancement of Science. This the main organization of all scientists in all fields in the United States. They publish the journal Science, considered to be one of the two top science journals in the world, among other things. If any organization speaks for science as a whole in the US, it is the AAAS.
In this clip you will hear from the president of the AAAS, and from Dr. Francis Collins, Director of the Human Genome project, and from two high school teachers from Dover, PA where the last court battle over teaching creationism in science classrooms was held.
05.18.08
Science and Creation
A few weeks ago I was asked to do a session of my parish’s Adult Forum on the Episcopal Church’s Catechism of Creation, specifically the Science and Creation section. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to fit it in with the end of the semester duties and a whole series of other things. I didn’t want to do it if I couldn’t adequately prepare for it because I think its a very important topic. As a biologist, I’ve often dealt with teaching evolution to general studies students and I fully appreciate how important concepts of creation are to people’s fundamental concepts of theology.
It occurred to me that it would be a good topic for a series of blog posts. Maybe I’ll even manage to work out a few better answers for students.
It is difficult to talk about creation from the point of view both science and theology at the same time. The problem is mostly that of methodology. They are different ways of knowing, as they say. What is evidence to one is not evidence to the other. Both views are taking past each other.
A starting point, I think, is to say that the bible was never intended to be a science text book, nor are science text books intended to teach theology. The authors of the bible did not write anything that specifically contradicted observable nature. What they wrote fit their observations. It is hard for us today to strip away all of our observational aids. We must remember that they did not have eye glasses, much less telescopes or microscopes. The bible contains theological truths but is not scientific proof.
While discussing some fundamentals of the discussion, this may be a good place to discuss the terms ‘theory’ and ‘law’. As basic definitions go, a theory is statement that reflects one or more proven hypotheses and a law reflects a theory that has gained wide acceptance. In practice, laws are seldom put forward and different disciples do so at different rates. Science must always stand ready to revise its theories and laws as new evidence becomes available. Biology rarely proposes laws and the one that do exist have the title for historical as much as scientific reasons. Physics, on the other hand, produces and revises laws a higher frequency.
Let me give a example of a fundamental theory and law. We have cell theory that states that cells are the most basic form of life and that all cells come from pre-existing cells. We also have Mendel’s laws that predictably describe how genes are inherited from parent to offspring. Are Mendel’s laws more solid or widely accepted than cell theory? No, in fact, there are more exceptions to Mendel’s laws than to cell theory. Biologists believe that evolutionary theory rises to the level of law whether or not it has ever been declared by a scientific body. Biologists simply very rarely declare laws. I can’t think of any in modern times. Also, while we are discussing theories, please note that the theory of evolution and theory of natural selection are two separate theories. Natural selection is one of the mechanisms of evolution, but not the only mechanism or factor. Modern evolutionary theory, called Neo-Darwinism, is a melding of Darwin’s theories and Mendel’s laws.
I plan on putting up a series of posts on creation, some inspired by the Catechism of Creation, some will be on more general creation topics.
Note: I reserve the right to delete/refuse any comments that are abusive, non-constructive or simply long. I welcome constructive comments but this is not the place to post an essay in the comments section.
