Boy Scout Sunday


In 1962 and 1963, I lived in Montgomery, Alabama. It was a year of many firsts for me; I began playing the trumpet and I was introduced to or at least became aware of the role of football in Southern culture. It was the beginning of my awareness that equality in this country was perhaps nothing more than words.  It was also when I began to think that God was calling me. When we moved during the summer of 1963 to Denver, I began to explore how I would answer that call. And thus I began working towards earning the God and Country award in Boy Scouts.

As I worked on this award, I was also in confirmation class and during the spring of 1965 I would earn the God and Country award and be confirmed in the Evangelical United Brethren Church. Thus I began my walk with the Lord. It has been a rough walk, done at times without acknowledging His presence in my life but perhaps more times than not knowing that His presence was a distinct part of my life.

There came a time around in 1984 when I began to think about that call and that I really hadn’t answered it completely. You have to realize that earning the God and Country award is more than simply answering some questions and do some exercises each week. It requires more than that, a commitment of heart and soul. And I needed to find a way to fulfill that commitment. So I made a covenant with God to be more active. In the churches where I was a member, I began to be a liturgist, specifically requesting that assignment on the 2nd Sunday in February, Boy Scout Sunday. And to the best of my ability, I have done so every year since then. Of course, from 1999 to 2005, on that Sunday, I was also the lay pastor of the church. And since 2005, if I was not somewhere in the district covering for a pastor, I have posted my thoughts on this blog.

The following is a summary of my sermons/messages/posts for the 2nd Sunday in February, Boy Scout Sunday.

February 14, 1999 – Neon (KY) UMC – “A Scout is Reverent”

February 13, 2000 – Walker Valley (NY) UMC – “Following Directions”

February 11, 2001 – Walker Valley (NY) UMC – “Two Roads”

February 10, 2002 – Walker Valley (NY) UMC – not on file

February 9, 2003 – Tompkins Corners (NY) UMC– “A Scout is Reverent”

February 8, 2004 – Tompkins Corners (NY) UMC – “A Scout is Reverent”

February 6, 2005 – Tompkins Corners (NY) UMC – “The Mountaintop Experience”

February 12, 2006 – “Seek The Truth”

February 11, 2007 – “A Brief Discourse”

February 10, 2008 – “What Have We Learned?”

February 8, 2009 – “The New Paradigm”

February 14, 2010 – “That Transforming Moment”

February 13, 2011 – “It’s about Commitment”

February 12, 2012 – “To Leave the World A Better Place”

February 3, 2013 – “Removing The Veil”

February 9, 2014 – Sloatsburg UMC – “The Master Lesson”

February 8, 2015 –  did not post a blog for this Sunday

February 14, 2016 – “Where Are We Going?”

February 12, 2017 – “The Past Can Never Be Our Future”`

February 11, 2018 – “A Reminder” and “Find God In The Details”

February 10, 2018 – “The Path You Walk”  and “The Confluence Between Religion and Science”

The Path You Walk”



This will be the “Back Page” for the bulletin at Fishkill UMC this coming Sunday, 10 February 2019 (5th Sunday after the Epiphany, Year C). This Sunday is Boy Scout Sunday and Evolution Weekend. My piece for Evolution weekend is “The Confluence Between Religion and Science” and will be posted later this week.

As many of you know, the 2nd Sunday in February holds a place special significance in my heart and in my life.  On February 14, 1965, I formally began my walk with Christ as I became a member of the 1st EUB Church of Aurora, CO.  Slightly over 1 year later, I would begin the walk that would lead to my Ph. D. in Science Education.

Of course, back then, I really didn’t know where those paths would take me.  But, over the years, one thing became clear.  You cannot walk two distinct paths; either you walk one and ignore the other or the two paths merge into one.  But to choose one path over another means that your life will be incomplete.

Paul always made, at least for me, a logical argument for believing in Christ.  After all his encounter with Christ was a great deal different from the disciples.  And Isaiah, in the OT reading for today, makes a subtle argument for education and the consequences when one was not willing to learn.  As Jesus selected those who become the disciples, he told them that they would be using their skills in a new way.

The same is true for each of us.  We start off walking many different paths, not sure of where they might lead.  But when those paths merge with the path that we walk with Christ, we know where we are headed.  On this path, we will meet others who also walk with Christ.

But we will also meet many who are lost, have no idea where they are going and are seeking Christ.  With our skills and talents, we can help these individuals began their walk with Christ.

~~Tony Mitchell

“The Confluence Between Religion and Science”


This weekend is Evolution Weekend and the following are my thoughts on the nature of religion and science. My previous posts for this weekend can be found at “Evolution Weekend”

For the better part of my life, I have lived near either a river, the mountains, and sometimes both.  At the present time, I live near the Hudson River and near the Adirondacks.

But during high school and college and for some years after graduation, the river of interest was “Old Man River”, the Mississippi River.  And when I would drive from Memphis to St. Louis and then onto Kirksville, I would look for roads that paralleled the Mississippi.  These roads lead me past the confluence of the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, just south of Cairo, Illinois.

Confluence of Ohio and Mississippi Rivers at Cairo, IL
Figure 1 – photo from https://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/images/6261/confluence-of-ohio-and-mississippi-rivers-at-cairo-il

I remember the first time I come to this spot and saw the two great rivers merging into one and continuing southward.

https://ohioriverparksproject.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/il-alexander-cairo-confluence-the-confluence-600-8-high.jpg?w=1000&h=

Figure 2 – The Confluence – The Ohio River on the left, the Mississippi River on the right.  The Ohio River is larger.  https://ohioriverparksproject.com/the-parks/confluence-of-the-ohio-and-mississippi-rivers/

The thing about moving water is that chooses the path that it wants to flow, carving a path out of the rock and soil   If we follow the Mississippi, just before we get to Baton Rouge and New Orleans, we find what is called “The Old River Control Station.”

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/44/Old_River_Control_Structure_Complex.jpg/800px-Old_River_Control_Structure_Complex.jpg

Figure 3 – The Old River Control Structure at the juncture of the Mississippi River and the Atchafalaya River. In this photograph, the Mississippi River runs along the left and curves away to the right in the distance. The Atchafalaya River meets the Mississippi

At this point on the river the Mississippi wants to shift its course and join with the Atchafalaya River.  The Old River Control Station was constructed to keep the Mississippi flowing to the Gulf of Mexico through Baton Rouge and New Orleans.  This insures that industries located in Baton Rouge and New Orleans will not lose their access to the Gulf of Mexico and created substantial economic damage.

If we see religion and science as two streams of thought, then we can see that, sooner or later, they will merge into one stream.  It requires a greater effort to keep them separate than it does to allow them to merge.

And just as regular streams of water meander over the terrain that it passes through, so then do our own streams of thought concerning religion and science.  We call that curiosity.

As I noted in “A Dialogue of Science and Faith”, many early scientists were as interested in religion as they were in science.  Now, as the processes of science were codified, it became apparent that while one could understand what it was that God had done, it would not be possible to find God (even if He were in the details).

But instead of seeing this split negatively, one should see it positively.  It should be apparent that one cannot answer all the questions of the universe from science or religion alone but as a combination of the two.  Through the combination, we have a better chance of getting the answers or at least knowing where one might find the answers.

As we look at the lectionary readings for this Sunday, we find Paul, trained as a lawyer, making a logical argument for the existence and power of Christ.  His decision concerning Christ came not actually knowing Jesus as so many others did but in the evidence that comes from what they did.

And God reminds Isaiah of the consequences that come when one is unwilling to learn.  When Jesus picked his disciples, he told them that they would take the skills they already had and used them in a different manner.  (Adapted from “The Path You Walk”.

When we try to keep science and religion as separate streams of thought, we spend more time and energy keeping them apart.  If we were to allow them to merge, that time and energy could be used to expand our understanding of this universe, this planet, and its inhabitants.

It has never been the task of science to find God (even the early scientists only wanted to understand who God was) but, rather, use the skills that God has given us to better understand this place we call home.  And God never meant that religion would answer the questions of science but help us understand how to use science in ways that help rather than hinder (something we tend to forget at times).

I am not sure where society is on this stream of thought I have constructed.  It seems that many, both in religion and in science, are at the “Old River Control Station”, valiantly trying to keep the streams apart.  I would hope that we are further upriver where the streams come together, creating a broader and deeper understanding of the world, the universe and the people.

“Finding God in The Details”


This is not necessarily a post for Transfiguration Sunday (11 February 2018) as much as it a post for Boy Scout Sunday and Evolution Weekend; “A Reminder” serves that purpose.  Still it helps to realize that this weekend is a marker in my life.

On the 2nd Sunday in February 1965, I was confirmed and received into membership with the 1st Evangelical United Brethren Church of Aurora, Colorado (now 1st United Methodist Church of Aurora).  A little over one year later, I was accepted in the High School Honors Program of Northeast Missouri State Teachers College (now Truman State University).  In June of 1966, I choose to become a chemistry major.  Each of those decisions defined the path that I would take over the coming years.

The simplest and easiest way to summarize my beliefs is found in what is commonly called the Wesleyan Quadrilateral, “Wesley believed that the living core of the Christian faith was revealed in Scripture, illumined by tradition, vivified in personal experience, and confirmed by reason (The United Methodist Church Book of Discipline).  And since I see my faith in living and real terms, it is it is better to describe the relationship between the elements in a 3-dimensional tetrahedral – The Wesleyan Tetrahedron – rather than a 2-dimensional square (hey, I’m a chemist, remember!)Tetrahedron

Perhaps I spent more time 50 years ago focusing on my education and I know that I certainly have spent several years wandering in the wilderness, as it were.  But even if it were not a dominant part of my life, my faith has been as much a part of my life as have been my chemistry studies.

And that brings forth the questions, “Can one be both a scientist and a Christian?  Can one both appreciate the beauty and wonder of creation and still ask how it all came into being?”

Today, there are those who see science as a threat to religion, and especially Christianity.  And there are those who see religion, and especially Christianity, as nothing more than superstition and meaningless today.  There is, I believe a comment on one of my early posts on this blog that questions the validity of my PhD. in Science Education considering my being, at the time, a lay pastor in the United Methodist Church.  I can assure you, gentle reader, that my PhD. is a valid one and that I have done research in both chemistry and chemical education.  Those interests are very much part of my life today.

But there was a point in my life when I was asked to provide long-term pulpit supply for a number of churches and it was a very valuable experience (see the notes with “Who Will Work For The Lord?”.)

After I left the pulpit, but did not give up lay speaking, I discovered that there was a connection between my chemistry and lay speaking ministry.  In “A Dialogue Of Science And Faith” I discovered that Robert Boyle and Joseph Priestley, both chemists, were also heavily involved in matters of faith as they were in matters of science.

And while detractors today may say otherwise, scientists from Copernicus and Galileo to Boyle and Newton and onto this day have never sought to prove or disprove the existence of God, only to understand what He has done.

Perhaps the one defining characteristic of humankind is its curiosity.  From the very beginning of our consciousness, we have looked at the world around us and wondered “why?”  And our answer to this, at once the simplest and most complex of all questions, has lead us to seek beyond the horizon and to the stars and see answers in our soul, even if we are not sure what we were looking for or if we would know the answer.

And we would could not find the answer in the physical world, we often turned to the supernatural or spiritual world to find the answer.  But just as easy as it easy to find the answer in the physical world, it is often just as hard to find the answer in the spiritual realm.  And so, in our own way, we create simple spiritual answers to the most complicated of questions.

When the star that is called Sirius first appeared in the spring, we knew that river was going to flood, and it would be time to prepare.  But instead of tying two physical occurrences, we saw it as a sign from the gods.  When the rains didn’t come, we blamed the rain god.  We knew that if the crops didn’t come in as expected, perhaps we needed to appease the god of crops.  Of course, today we have scientific explanations for most, if not all, the physical phenomena that once was attributed to spiritual or supernatural forces.  But even so, we still search for explanations for good and evil, truth and beauty, and the most important question of all times, why are we here in this time and place.

This search for the answers has lead us in many different paths.  When the writer of Genesis wrote that Adam was given the task of naming all the plants and animals in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 2: 19 – 20), Adam became, other things, the first biologists.  And when Abraham was told to count all the stars (Genesis 15: 5), he took on one of the tasks of an astronomer.

Understand that the Bible is and should never be considered the same as a biology, chemistry, physics, or geology/earth science textbook.  From the very day that the first writer put the words of Genesis on papyrus, it has been about our relationship with God.

The Psalmist looked the world around him and at the skies above him and saw the Glory of God,

I look up at your macro-skies, dark and enormous, your handmade sky-jewelry,

Moon and stars mounted in their settings.  Then I look at my micro-self and wonder,

Why do you bother with us?  Why take a second look our way?

Yet we’ve so narrowly missed being gods, bright with Eden’s dawn light.

You put us in charge of your handcrafted world, repeated to us your Genesis-charge,

Made us lords of sheep and cattle, even animals out in the wild,

Birds flying and fish swimming, whales singing in the ocean deeps.

God, brilliant Lord, your name echoes around the world.  (Psalm 8: 3 – 9, The Message)

And how was it that Jesus could use the habits of foxes and birds or know how mustard seeds and grow in his parables if He had not studied science when he was growing up.

Science can give meaning to what we see in this world, but it cannot explain why it is here.  Science can never explain there is good and evil or why there is suffering and pain in this world.

Science can never show you God; it can only show you, through nature, the works of God.  Science has always been driven to know things about the world in which we live.  Scientists from Copernicus through Newton and even into these days used the process of science to understand the works of God, not disprove the existence of God or displace God.

Science gives us the opportunity to know what is happening in this world; it is up to our faith to know why it is happening.  It is our faith that will provide the guidance that we need to use what science shows us.  It is through our faith that we can discern the path that we should take, to use our scientific discoveries for good.

Science can open avenues of research whose answers will help feed the people of this planet and cure sickness and disease, but science cannot eliminate injustice and oppression.  For all that science can do, it cannot do all things.  And for those things that science cannot do, you must have faith, faith in things unseen, faith that will lead you to find ways to use the knowledge that you gain from science.

We look at the world around us and wonder why and how.  As we ask how things came to be, we find ourselves marveling at the works of God.  And as we begin to understand the works of God, we began to understand ourselves just a little bit better.

A Reminder


This will be the back page for the Fishkill United Methodist Church bulletin for February 11, 2018, Transfiguration Sunday (Year B).  This is also Boy Scout Sunday and Evolution Weekend (I will have something else posted this week that focuses on those topics.)


Several years ago, I was headed to a college in northwest Missouri.  Driving across the plains of northwest Missouri that day and nearing Conception Junction, I saw a cathedral rising from the plains about ten miles away.  It wasn’t what I had planned but I had to see what this was.  After all, when does God check your schedule when he has something for you to do?

Conception Abbey postcard from 1908 postcard – By Unknown – postcard, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=19493851

Conception Abbey was built in the late 19th century to provide the local Irish and German immigrants of the area a spiritual home.  That day, it served as a reminder that I had made a covenant with God in 1965.

A covenant with God is not a promise but an agreement one makes with God; It is an agreement that each party will do something.  Throughout the ages, God always keeps His part of the covenant; we are often the ones who forget what we said we would do.

Seeing that cathedral, literally rising from the plains, reminded me that I had made a covenant and that it was time to fulfill my part of the agreement.  As I continued my trip that day, I began to think about how I could fulfill that covenant I made in 1965.  How could I use my skills and talents that I had been given and developed over the years?  In one sense, I am here today because of the sudden appearance of the Presence of God in my life.

Each of us, in one way or another, has had that same moment, where God suddenly appears to us.   How will you respond?

~Tony Mitchell

The Past Can Never Be Our Future


A couple of things about this piece – I am posting this on Boy Scout Sunday, which has a special meaning for me.  This is also Evolution Weekend, the celebration of Charles Darwin’s birth (see Evolution Weekend for a list of my posts.) That this is the same weekend as Boy Scout Sunday is also of special significance for me.

Please note that this post will not be a debate on “nature versus nurture.”  But if we are to have a vision for our future, we must first understand our past; I know it is a cliché but one must remember what the poet and philosopher George Santayana said, “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it” (“Reason in Common Sense”, p. 284, volume 1 of The Life of Reason).

The other day I watching the last part of a show on Public Television dealing with genealogy and DNA.  This, coupled with some other shows that I have watched on this topic and similar television stations, prompted the following thoughts.

First, if you have your DNA tested, you will be surprised by the results.  Because, as it turns out, our DNA contains elements of the past that we would have never imagined.  For example, many people with European backgrounds will be surprised to know that some 20% of their DNA is from Neanderthals (At least 20% of Neanderthal DNA Is in Humans).  This research points out, that genetically, we are a diverse population.  And this will be very disturbing for some people because the purest strands of DNA, the ones with the least number of sources come from Africa.  As I said, some people will have problems processing that tidbit of information.

Now, if it were affordable, I would like to take advantage of that testing, if for no other reason than to prove or disprove some thoughts about my own heritage and ancestry.

When you look at my family tree, there are four branches.  The most dominant one is probably the one that extends back to Germany in the 16th century.  It would appear from the records that were discovered that constructed this branch that we, as a family, may have known Martin Luther personally for the records indicated that some twelve of my ancestors were or are Lutheran ministers.  Perhaps it was this hidden genealogy that played a part in my choosing to be involved in lay ministry through the United Methodist Church.

But I came to this ministry through the Evangelical United Brethren Church instead of the Lutheran Church.  And even though there is a shared German heritage in these denominations, there are those in the Lutheran Church who would view me as something of heretic for choosing a different path.  But that, as you will see in the coming paragraphs, is perhaps one marker of my life today.

The other dominant, though shorter, branch on the family tree leads to the hills and hollows of Appalachia.  I don’t know as much about this branch as I do the German branch but the signs on this second branch say that I am of the Scotch-Irish tradition.

The Scotch-Irish of America are among those whose families moved from Scotland to Ireland because English authorities encouraged Scottish families to move to Ireland, in part because of conditions in Scotland and in part because the English authorities wanted more of a presence in Ireland.  Later, the English authorities decided that to be in a position of authority one had to be a member of the Anglican Church, which many of those Scots living in Ireland were not.  From this began the move to America, a move to escape religious persecution where a government felt it had the right to tell others how and what to believe.  And again, I can see in my past another strain of rebellion.

I would like to write more about the other two branches of this tree but those branches end rather abruptly, clothed in a seemingly impenetrable darkness.  It may be with modern technology and perseverance along with society’s penchant for record keeping that this darkness can be removed and that my siblings and cousin will come to know more about what is for the moment, “familia incognito”.

And while there may be a genealogical basis for my rebellious streak, one can also become a rebel despite one’s genetics or family history just as easily.  And in fact, it is probably easier to do it than one might think (see, for example, “I Am a Southern-born Evangelical Christian!  What Are You?”

My choice to become a member of the Evangelical United Brethren church was not so that my ancestors could call me a heretic; rather, it was a choice of convenience since 1st Evangelical United Brethren Church of Aurora, Colorado (now the 1st United Methodist Church of Aurora) was the closest church to where I lived and it fit into the pattern of church attendance my family followed at that time.

My choice to enter lay ministry of the United Methodist Church was made before I knew of my family’s ministerial history.  Perhaps the only part of my own past that directly influenced the path that I would walk was the decision in the summer of 1966 to become a chemistry major at Northeast Missouri State Teachers College (now Truman State University).  (This, by the way, was also an unconscious act of rebellion because it did not fit the pattern that my father would have preferred; but that is for another time and place.)

The point must be made, and I feel that this is true for everyone, it is not necessarily one’s past that determines one’s future.  The Greek philosopher Heraclitus wrote, “No man steps in the same river twice, for it’s not the same river and he’s not the same man.”

When you look at the river of time, you see a changing image; one that is not fixed in the past.  But what you see can determine what you do.

I grew up at a time of great creativity.  The Soviet Union’s 1957 launch of Sputnik spurred a demand for increased mathematics and science education.  As I noted in “Liberal Arts and Science Education in the 21st Century”, there was development of curriculum materials that focused on experimentation, rather than the traditional method of rote memorization.  It was a process that required the development of higher-level thinking skills.

653px-bloomscognitivedomainFigure 1 – Categories in the cognitive domain (Bloom’s Taxonomy) – Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001

And alongside this change in how science and mathematics were being taught came a similar expansion of what I shall call the creativity aspect of social relations.  No longer was there an acceptance of the traditional social status quo but a demand for an explanation of why people were treated equally in a world which proclaimed equality was the norm.  (Or as George Orwell wrote in Animal Farm, “while all are equal, some are more equal than others.”)

I know that my questioning of Southern traditions began when I could see differences in the ways schools operated during the period from 1962 to 1966 when I moved from Alabama to Colorado to Missouri to Tennessee.

In 1968, Senator Robert Kennedy sought the Democratic Party’s nomination to be President of the United States.  Throughout that campaign, he used variations on the following George Bernard Shaw quote,

“You see things; and you will say, “Why?”  But I dream things that never were; and I say, “Why not?”

And in questioning some of those traditions, I began, in my own way, to ask “Why?” and “Why not?”

There are those today who would rather we not ask why but to simply take their word as the final authority on the matter, seemingly in both science and faith.

It should be noted that the opposition to Darwin’s theory of evolution is relatively modern.  At best, it arose because religious authorities, having accepted the primacy of the Bible, could not accepted a reasoned and developed idea about how life evolved on this planet.  But on at least one occasion in His ministry, Jesus told those around him to look at what they saw.  If we are not to look around us at the world in which we live, how will we ever be able to make this a better place?

And while many will say that it was the Catholic Church that was opposed to Galileo’s depiction of the cosmos (based on what he had observed), it was the academic establishment who opposed his ideas, simply because they were counter to what they were teaching.  This academic establishment pushed religious authorities to declare Galileo a heretic because that was the easiest way to get him out of the way.

It should also be noted that the notion of the “Big Bang”, confirmed by physical observations, was initially opposed by the scientific community because it was like the Creation story in Genesis.

If we are not teaching our children how to think and evaluate, how then can we even begin to envision the future?  And I am fully aware that in doing so, we are encouraging our children to think independently and without our input.  And this causes great concern for some because it brings into question what they have been teaching their children all these years.

My only response to this is that if you have been teaching your children through strict adherence to a set of guidelines and without explanation, you had better be willing to accept defiance and rebellion.  And you had better begin questioning just what it is that you believe.  Is your faith and belief system strong enough to withstand questioning?

My understanding of evolution and the “Big Bang” only enhances my belief in God, for when I see the wonders of His work, I can only begin to wonder how it all took place.  And, as it is written in Genesis, I was created in God’s image, then I was created to be a questioning and inquisitive individual.

I look at my heritage with an understanding that is where I come from.  But my heritage can never tell me where I am going.  Nothing from our past or our present can give us any insight into what our future will hold.  But it is what we do today that will allow there to be a future.

We must be working for a better understanding of the world around us, for a better understanding of the other people with whom we share this world, and for a better understanding of how we came to be on this planet.

The future will always be the last “great unknown” and getting there will not be easy but, with the tools and abilities that we have been given, it ought to be fun.

Where Are We Going?


A Meditation for 14 February 2016, the 1st Sunday in Lent (Year C). This is also “Evolution Weekend” and Boy Scout Sunday. The meditation is based on Deuteronomy 26: 1 – 11, Romans 10: 8 – 13, and Luke 4: 1 – 3

I was going to use what I thought was a quote from Lewis Carroll,

If you don’t know where you are going, any road will take you there.”

But, according to http://philosiblog.com/2011/07/13/if-you-dont-know-where-youre-going/, that is only a paraphrase of the actual conversation between Alice and the Cheshire Cat:

Alice: “Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?”

The Cat: “That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,”

Alice: “I don’t much care where–”

The Cat: “Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,”

“–so long as I get SOMEWHERE,” Alice added as an explanation.

The Cat: “Oh, you’re sure to do that, if you only walk long enough.”

So where are we going? Are we going to wander aimlessly about until we get somewhere? Or should we stop and consider where it is that we would like to go? Today is the 1st Sunday in Lent, that season of the church year when we begin or renew our own personal journey of preparation and repentance. There is also some personal significance for this day for me.

It is Boy Scout Sunday. On this Sunday in 1965 I began my own personal journey with Christ. This is also Evolution Weekend, the celebration of Charles Darwin’s birth and the role that science and faith jointly play in our life. For me, these two events serve as markers in my professional and personal careers and the interaction in both the secular and sectarian world.

There are many today who feel that you cannot live in both worlds, that you must choose one over the other.

There was a discussion on Facebook recently about why it was that there was such a strong conflict between science and religion.

There are those who say that the battle between science and religion is as old as the Scriptures. Others say that you must choose between explanations based on divine intervention and explanations based on logic and reason.

There are those who see any idea of religion as mere superstition and outmoded, overtaken by the enlightenment of the ages. But there is still evil in this world and no degree of enlightenment or understanding of the natural world is going to explain or create ways to remove it.

Somehow, we must find a way to live in a world where science, which is very good at explaining how things work, and faith/religion, which offers an explanation of what it all means, not only co-exist but work together (http://www.rabbisacks.org/books/the-great-partnership-god-science-and-the-search-for-meaning/).

Why does it seem that so many people would rather “burn the bridges” that connect the two worlds than make sure that there is an open and available path between them?

Ian Barbour, 1999 Templeton Prize winner, offered the idea that there were four prevailing views concerning the relationship between science and religion:

  1. That they fundamentally conflict,
  2. That they are separate domains,
  3. That the complexity of science affirms divine guidance, and
  4. Finally — the approach he preferred — that science and religion should be viewed as being engaged in a constructive dialogue with each other.

Barbour would later write,

This requires humility on both sides. Scientists have to acknowledge that science does not have all the answers, and theologians have to recognize the changing historical contexts of theological reflection” (Obituary of Ian Barbour, New York Times, January 13, 2014)

Albert Einstein offered a similar view that “Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind” (“Science, Philosophy and Religion: a Symposium”, 1941).

We can begin by understanding that this conflict is not as old as the scriptures and that is driven by the need for individuals to control the lives of others. Advocates for a single point of view (be it secular or sectarian) are seeking one thing and that is the power, simple raw power, to control the lives of other people.

When Galileo was tried by the Catholic Church for heresy some four hundred years ago, the opposition to his ideas and the ideas of Copernicus and Kepler did not originate with the church. The opposition came from individuals within the academic establishment of that time. They were opposed to these new ideas because their reputation, status, and power were built on maintaining the Aristotelian view of an earth-centered universe. The church was brought into the argument because the academic establishment convinced members of the church establishment that the changes proposed by Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo would harm the church and threaten their status, reputation, and power.

It was an atheist who called the beginning moment of creation the “Big Bang” because he felt the idea of a beginning moment in time was too much like the opening words of Genesis. His terminology was meant to deride a point in time that he felt did not exist. Unfortunately, the name stuck and his ideas didn’t.

Similarly, opposition to Darwin’s ideas about evolution began in the late 19th century and solely because some in the church establishment saw his ideas as threats to their views. Those who opposed Darwin’s ideas felt that it was in their best interest to limit the information that the people received, probably understanding that the more information a person had, the more likely that they would begin to make decisions on their own. It should also be pointed out the Darwin never considered what he was writing to be an alternate view or replacement for the Creation story in the Bible. Rather, it was, as all theories are, an explanation for what he had observed.

When you look at the history of the church from its early days through the 18th century, you find something totally in opposition to the present attitude. Many in the early church saw the opening words of Genesis as an allegory, written to help the people understand it better (from “How was the Genesis account of creation interpreted before Darwin?”).

If there is to be a coherent and civil discussion about the nature of science into today’s society, be it on the topic of evolution and creation or any other topic (climate change, for example), it must be made with all of the facts and not just a select few. It must be done with an understanding both of the meaning of the Scriptures and the science that is involved.

It should be noted that the Devil has this tendency to only partially quote the Scriptures (or simply misconstrue or change the words of God, such as he did when he tempted Eve in the Garden of Eden). Now, it does not help things when people do the same thing, knowingly or unknowingly. If you do not understand the topic, then it becomes very difficult to talk about it.

The Devil, in whatever form he may take, takes advantage of our ignorance and uses our own ignorance to feed our fears. In the Old Testament reading for today, the people bring their gifts to place before God. Is not our ability to reason and think one of those gifts from God? Should we not be celebrating that gift, should we not nurture and support that gift? Surely, the ability to think, to reason, and to be creative is as important as any other gift we have been given?

Paul, in writing to the Romans, speaks of preparing to greet the Messiah and of the difficulty of living a righteous life through the law only. We must prepare to meet Christ as the Messiah so that we gain a total and complete freedom, a freedom to seek the unknown in the world around us, a freedom to begin making changes in this world that reflect the wonder and beauty of God.

We must begin to see science as a way to the truth of the natural world, knowing that each time we answer one question, we create two new questions. We must understand that our faith gives us the power to seek the unknown and that questioning the world around us does not destroy our faith but makes it stronger.

The prophet Jeremiah wrote of standing at the crossroads and having to make a decision, of deciding which way we are going to go. There are actually three roads at this intersection. One is the path wholly sectarian in nature, a path that leads to discoveries of all sorts. But this road has no understanding of good or evil and discoveries that could do wondrous things can also lead to disaster.

The second path is a secular path but it too is limited, just as it was when Jesus began His ministry in the Galilee two thousand years ago. Life is good because you don’t have to think, for there are those who will do the thinking for you. But such a life has no hope, no promise of anything better, for it is hard enough living with in the structure of a law.

And there is the third path, a path which contains all that we can be. It opens up to us when we accept Jesus Christ as our Savior, for it frees us from the chains of sin and death, it offers an opportunity to have and seek hope, and through the power of the Holy Spirit, we become empowered to reach out and venture into the unknown.

As we began our journey through Lent and to Easter and the Resurrection, which path will you choose? Where are you going?