Dr. J. Craig Venter , who was being interviewed on 60 Minutes, had written a genetic code for a new kind of bacterium, created corresponding DNA, and demonstrated that the bacterium could live and reproduce. The interviewer asked, "Do you believe in God?" "No," he said. "I believe the Universe is far more wonderful than just assuming it was made by some Higher Power."
But did he not contradict himself? The latter statement seems the clearest way of saying that he does indeed believe in God. It is reminiscent of the refusal of strongly-believing early Jews to speak the name of God.
When we say, "I believe in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord..," do we unthinkingly place limits on God according to our human experience?
"Almighty" invites use of the equivalent, "Higher Power," because it makes reference to might. This word reflects our human insecurity, our pre-occupation with hierarchies and bullies of all sorts. It comes out of life's fray and has little to do with the creation that went before.
"Son" implies close resemblance. The apostles saw before them a Man, and Thomas explored the distinctions among seeing, touching and believing. The ways Jesus transcended being a man are to the the point, being wonderful in ways we cannot understand. We say "Son" for lack of a better word to describe Jesus' closeness to God, His identity with God for our Christian purposes. We struggle with its implication of gender while realizing that gender is just one attribute of life while life is just one attribute of creation.
"Lord" again references hierarchy, specifically feudal hierarchy, which was a somewhat civilized version of the kinds of relationships we see in street gangs. It rightly calls for our fealty and obedience. But this word, too, is anthropomorphic. Man was created in God's image, but, just as we cannot make a statue from a drawing without making some assumptions, we cannot rightly imagine God in man's image.
As Venter's laboratory did something previously done only by God, we are tempted to think (without evidence) that God did it in a similar way. Perhaps man (including woman) has been taking on more attributes in the image of God. Has our imagining of God kept pace?
I am a Presbyterian. This is my mother's family's traditional affiliation; it is mine because it is both faith-filled and reasoning. The truths of the Apostles Creed are, for me, true by my choice to concur with the religious truths contained in the Bible and thus true by definition. My search for religious truth does not interfere with my search for scientific truth. There is only one scientific truth that is true in the same way that the religious truths are true; that is Occam's Razor.
If Christian experience were based on language alone, I would not be a Christian. Music brought me to Christ as language could not do. How many additional modes of communication shall we need to imagine God with a richness befitting the complex lives we now live, a richness that will reach our neighbors whom mere words and music cannot reach?
No comments:
Post a Comment