written because you are not acknowledging any increase in knowledge from the ascent of science.
The people of the past knew nothing about neurons or brain development. (By the past, I mean, say,
from the time of Christ to the nineteenth century). It is no wonder they couldn't conceive of the concepts
that are now before us.
The child's brain develops and is highly susceptible to stories during the first seven years. There is a
strong tendency, as the neurons are creating their interconnections, for a child to absorb the beliefs of her
parent. The child creates a worldview in this manner and modifies it (I believe only slightly, but it could
be drasticallyresearch remains to be undertaken) through later education. Now if the only stories around
prior to the scientific age were stories of religion, there was no way the societies of the past could
understand or promote any alternatives. Today, even though alternatives exist, most kids are still exposed
to religious creation stories and religious morality stories. So it is no wonder most people who have ever
lived believe in God: They haven't had any other education!
But we find ourselves at an interesting place in history. Due to mass media, more and more kids are
being exposed to science. More young brains are being exposed to naturalistic explanations. (Think of the
Discovery Channel for instance, or Bill Nye the Science Guy-a Carl Sagan student from here at Cornell.)
Most often, religious storytelling occurs in households with religious backgrounds. At the same time,
modern kids learn about science. The result is that science and religion get implanted in the kids' brains,
creating a muddled view of both. Look around our society and, behold, that is exactly what we see. The
questionnaires and surveys need to be done, but I think the average modern American has a very muddled
view of both science and religion and mixes tenets from both to create their worldview.
I mean, think of all the people who call themselves Christians and put their faith in the Bible but at the
same moment acknowledge the scientific fact that humans descended from apelike ancestors? I think the
average American citizen is like this. See what I mean? Muddled! The facts of naturalism are too
powerful for people to ignore, but they haven't had time, or haven't had the need, to think deeply about
how that conflicts with the tenets and implications of traditional theology.
We are at a transitional period in the intellectual history of the United States (and perhaps the world).
The average citizen depends less on, and reads less of, the Bible while at the same time is more
knowledgeable about the natural world than ever before. This will continue, and will probably move
theology even farther to the back burner. How many kids today say, "I want to be a Jesuit when I grow
up," or "I want to be a nun," or "I want to be the pope"? Compare that to the kids who say "I want to be a
marine biologist," "I want to be a doctor," "I want to be an astronaut"
It seems that things are changing before our eyes. But first, we have to unmuddle the thinking inherent in
the two systems (theology and naturalism). Theology benefits from muddle. Science cannot work with
muddle. Experiments depend on clarity and are free from "noise." Theology can continue to assert itself in
the face of muddle because at its core is the concept that keeps all its followers in a state of confusion:
"The ways of God are mysterious."
Sincerely,
Greg