Monday, September 19, 2011

Some thoughts on science and religion

The conflict between science and religion, in a nutshell:

1)      Historical facts happened.
2)      A profound reality resulted.
3)      The historical facts were forgotten.
4)      Over time, the people realized that the profound reality was even more profound than they had realized.
5)      Profound realities can only be understood through stories.
6)      The historical facts were no longer available to the storytellers.
7)      Over time, new stories developed to help people understand the old, profound realities, which are themselves far more important than the historical facts.
8)      The new stories gradually became old stories.
9)      Because the stories continued to help people understand the profound realities, the stories became sacred and indispensable.
10)  Some important historical facts were recovered, and others were understood for the first time. They didn’t match the sacred stories.
11)  Some people concluded that since the sacred stories didn’t match the historical facts, the sacred stories must be worthless.
12)  Other people concluded that since the historical facts didn’t illuminate the profound reality in a way they could recognize, the historical facts must be incorrect.
13)  Most people forgot that neither the historical facts nor the sacred stories are as important as the profound realities, which arose from mostly forgotten historical facts, but which can be best understood through the sacred stories.



  1. I understand where you are coming from here and it gives me something to ponder. I'm not sure I believe that the profound realities are BEST understood through sacred stories always. I think sometimes science has a lot to offer us concerning profound realities. I don't want to be limited to sacred stories only even if science and stories disagree. I want the choice to explore both and live within the ambiguity.

    I am sure I said this better the first time. ;-)

    Thanks for the thought fodder!

  2. Definitely a good point, Chrysty! See also the conversation on Facebook, which became quite extensive. I don't know if I'll ever get around to revising this, but it did turn out to be good thought fodder, indeed.