Wednesday, March 15, 2006

A Revealing Question

I asked a friend (who is a Christian) recently, "Why don't you believe in the doctrine of transubstantiation?" (This is roughly the idea that the communion bread and wine actually transform into the literal body and blood of Christ.) His answer? Because he distrusts Catholic theology. Why? Because it is superstitious and has been proven false on numerous occasions by science.

This answer reveals something critical about his worldview. Any guesses as to what I'm talking about?


Blogger wiploc said...

Does it have to do with "non-overlaping magisteria"?

In _Tales of the Rational,_ Pigliucci diagrams different views whether science can complement or contradict religion, on page 78. On the horizontal axis, he places the level of conflict between science and religion: "same worlds," "different worlds," "conflicting worlds." On the horizontal axis, he places the fuzziness of the god concept: "Personal god," "Naturalistic god," "Deism."

He places Plantinga and Craig in the Same Worlds/Personal god space. Neo-Creationists Behe, Dembski, and Johnson go in the Personal God/Conflicting worlds space. Gould, Shermer, and Scott go in the Deism/Separate worlds space.

It's an interesting idea, illuminating, even if I don't necessarily agree with it. Would we place your friend in the same world column or the conflicting worlds column? I don't see any way to tell; all we know is that he doesn't go in the separate worlds column.


9:32 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home