Skip to main content

A return trip

I haven't yet read any of Houston Smith's books, although I have looked over one or two on Amazon. I tend to back away from looking at other religions right now because I'm drowning in ignorance about my own. That means for the time being I think my time is better spent there. But if I'm given enough time I imagine the day will come when taking a look around will be enjoyable. I liked a lot of what Smith had to say in this article, although - I have to concede - he does overdo it and go a bit marshmellowish. For the most part, though, this is similar to some of the things I've been advancing here:
In the new The Soul of Christianity: Restoring the Great Tradition (HarperSanFrancisco), Smith ruminates about the beliefs, contributions and prospects of the world's largest faith. In the end, what he advocates is essentially a modernized and tolerant interpretation of the shared faith of Christianity's first thousand years, before it broke into Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant branches. But that's the end point. The start lies elsewhere, with Smith's premise that the future of Christianity and the other great faiths hinges on keeping proper limits on science - meaning religious people should not concede that scientific knowledge is the only kind. The outspoken senior statesman acknowledged in an interview with The Associated Press that he's no expert, but said notable scientists who are friends of long standing have taught him about the oft-baffling aspects of nature and our limited knowledge of the physical universe. Over the past several centuries, empirical observation and laboratory experiments have produced huge benefits for health and removal of drudgery, Smith said. Problem is, as a result "we gave science a blank check, by which I mean we turned all truth over to them." Science is not omnicompetent," he insisted. "Our physical senses are not the only senses we have." As his book puts it: "No one has ever seen a thought. No one has ever seen a feeling. Yet our thoughts and feelings are where we primarily live our lives." His book says "discounting invisible realities" is the "modern mistake" promoted by an intolerant secularism that says only empirical, scientific knowledge is valid. ... "The university today is uncompromisingly secular," he lamented, noting his own half-century as a professor, most recently with the University of California, Berkeley. In American society, "religion is everywhere, except in the intelligentsia, the people who rule our country, and in the media," he said. ... The result: "The mainline churches have surrendered too much to modern secularism. The language they preserve - but the fire isn't in their souls." Smith's new book argues that liberal Christianity has turned religion into mere morality, leaving churches with "nothing to offer their members except rallying cries to be good. ... The authority of religion has waned along with the mystery of the sacred."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reuters joins CNN on the bench

Makes room for CanWest to join the majors Kudos to CanWest for calling a terrorist a terrorist . Many, including The Last Amazon , will be happy to hear it. Reuters is among the worst of the major western news services, where I would also place the BBC and the CBC. Unsurprisingly, Reuters is not happy about the changes CanWest made to Reuters wire stories: Our editorial policy is that we don't use emotive words when labeling someone," said David A. Schlesinger, Reuters' global managing editor. "Any paper can change copy and do whatever they want. But if a paper wants to change our copy that way, we would be more comfortable if they remove the byline." Mr. Schlesinger said he was concerned that changes like those made at CanWest could lead to "confusion" about what Reuters is reporting and possibly endanger its reporters in volatile areas or situations. "My goal is to protect

Where credit is due

A good'un from Sawyer Brown . Thank God for You Well I've been called a self-made man Girl don't you believe it's true I know exactly how lucky I am When I'm gettin' this close to you It's high time I'm giving some praise To those that got me where I am today Chorus I got to thank momma for the cookin' Daddy for the whuppin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you A strong heart and a willing hand That's the secret to my success A good woman - I try to be a good man A good job - Lord I know I've been blessed I'm just a part of a greater plan It doesn't matter which part I am Chorus I got to thank momma for the teachin' Daddy for the preachin' The devil for the trouble that I get into I got to give credit where credit is due I thank the bank for the money Thank God for you

A very limited form of inquiry

Real Clear Politics is carrying commentary on James Q. Wilson's WSJ article on ID (got that?). Wilson, the respected social scientist, gets it mostly right when he says that ID is not science because it can't be tested: So ID is not science. Does this mean that science, in any way, implies the non-existence of God? No. Does this mean that belief in God is irrational and that we should all be "free thinkers"? No. Does this mean that it is impossible to arbitrate between various theories of the existence/non-existence of God and come to some reasonable conclusions? No. Does this mean that we cannot say that humanity is meant to exist? No. In other words, rationality outside of science is quite possible, and has been around for a long time. How do you think humanity invented science in the first place? We surely did not do it scientifically. Science as we know it is the product of millennia of philosophical debate -- from Aristotle to Lakatos. Science depends upon phi