God and River Monsters
Intro
The general belief that the scientific method has radically changed the world from its previously primeval state is a modern conceit, but is, at least in part, observably true. This simplified conception of the evolution of reason, and by extension, the evolution of modern culture, has compelled us to view pre-scientific cultures as primitive. The reality is, as usual, a good deal more complex.
The ancient Egyptians, Aztecs, Persians, Babylonians, among others, fashioned magnificent architecture and built thriving, multicultural cities. They devised methods of irrigating desert land in order to create lush environments, conceived of the atom, created logical systems of philosophy that posited ideas that we would think of us as post-modern. They had remarkably complex mathematics, including calculus and the concept of zero—and found methods of dealing with the spread of bacteria even though they had no understanding of microbes.
They logically inferred, from what could be observed, reoccurring patterns that were expanded into methods of problem solving that were the essence of science thousands of years in advance Rene’ Descartes or Louis Pasteur.
The short piece below was written in correspondence with one of our most highly regarded New Testament scholars, and began with the question of faith in the "modern" world. A short coda follows.
The general belief that the scientific method has radically changed the world from its previously primeval state is a modern conceit, but is, at least in part, observably true. This simplified conception of the evolution of reason, and by extension, the evolution of modern culture, has compelled us to view pre-scientific cultures as primitive. The reality is, as usual, a good deal more complex.
The ancient Egyptians, Aztecs, Persians, Babylonians, among others, fashioned magnificent architecture and built thriving, multicultural cities. They devised methods of irrigating desert land in order to create lush environments, conceived of the atom, created logical systems of philosophy that posited ideas that we would think of us as post-modern. They had remarkably complex mathematics, including calculus and the concept of zero—and found methods of dealing with the spread of bacteria even though they had no understanding of microbes.
They logically inferred, from what could be observed, reoccurring patterns that were expanded into methods of problem solving that were the essence of science thousands of years in advance Rene’ Descartes or Louis Pasteur.
The short piece below was written in correspondence with one of our most highly regarded New Testament scholars, and began with the question of faith in the "modern" world. A short coda follows.
God and River Monsters - Thank you for your well written and thoughtful post on such a difficult subject. I appreciate the clarity of your writing and your obvious desire to communicate. This particular subject has been on my mind a lot lately. The question of how we integrate the search for objective, external truths, within the various traditions and the general world view of the church? Perhaps better understood as, how much of our belief is true, and how much is a very personal projection of our need to answer what might be unanswerable questions. This is especially true of the tendency towards overly neat, systematic theologies—and in the broader context the very nature of religion itself.
A few weeks ago I was watching “River Monsters” on the discovery channel. In case you're not familiar with the show; it’s hosted by Jeremy Wade, a British biologist and extreme angler. Wade travels to some of the most exotic locals on earth examining myths regarding monstrous freshwater fish. In almost every instance there is a logical basis for these stories, one that isn’t very far removed from the truth.
In one program he spent a week on a small island, inhabited by a tribe of exceptional, but unorthodox fishermen. In their culture they practice a blend of Christian and ancestral forms of worship, one where sharks are treated as sacred. Wade desires to catch a shark without conventional fishing gear, using only a hand line. On his first attempt he almost catches one, but it escapes. On his second try, one of the tribal elders uses a large rattle made of bones that is rattled in the water to attract the shark—presumably, a supernatural method that is intended to call the spirit within the shark. Inevitably, Wade is successful in catching a six-footer, made all the more difficult because the small, narrow, canoe that he and the elder are fishing from is barely big enough to hold the two of them, let alone a six foot, angry, shark.
The point of all of this isn’t how one catches dangerous fish in a small canoe, but, is really about the method used in attracting the shark, by rattling bones in the water—which is apparently done by these expert fishermen because it works! The question, of course, is why? Sharks have what are called Ampullae of Lorenzini along their snout and bodies, which detect minute vibrations in the water—something that is unknown by the tribe. They have, however, observed a truth and applied a kind of elementary science to solve their problem. Does the blessing come as the result of the shark’s electronic sensors—or as the result of the rattling of bones?
I realize that this is a fairly circuitous route to my question, which is, how we integrate our faith into the search for rational explanations; and the belief in the religious tradition of what is essentially an ancient world view and culture? Are we rattling bones in the water—or have we observed the one great eternal truth? Thanks, once again for your enormous output, it has most certainly been a blessing to me!
A few weeks ago I was watching “River Monsters” on the discovery channel. In case you're not familiar with the show; it’s hosted by Jeremy Wade, a British biologist and extreme angler. Wade travels to some of the most exotic locals on earth examining myths regarding monstrous freshwater fish. In almost every instance there is a logical basis for these stories, one that isn’t very far removed from the truth.
In one program he spent a week on a small island, inhabited by a tribe of exceptional, but unorthodox fishermen. In their culture they practice a blend of Christian and ancestral forms of worship, one where sharks are treated as sacred. Wade desires to catch a shark without conventional fishing gear, using only a hand line. On his first attempt he almost catches one, but it escapes. On his second try, one of the tribal elders uses a large rattle made of bones that is rattled in the water to attract the shark—presumably, a supernatural method that is intended to call the spirit within the shark. Inevitably, Wade is successful in catching a six-footer, made all the more difficult because the small, narrow, canoe that he and the elder are fishing from is barely big enough to hold the two of them, let alone a six foot, angry, shark.
The point of all of this isn’t how one catches dangerous fish in a small canoe, but, is really about the method used in attracting the shark, by rattling bones in the water—which is apparently done by these expert fishermen because it works! The question, of course, is why? Sharks have what are called Ampullae of Lorenzini along their snout and bodies, which detect minute vibrations in the water—something that is unknown by the tribe. They have, however, observed a truth and applied a kind of elementary science to solve their problem. Does the blessing come as the result of the shark’s electronic sensors—or as the result of the rattling of bones?
I realize that this is a fairly circuitous route to my question, which is, how we integrate our faith into the search for rational explanations; and the belief in the religious tradition of what is essentially an ancient world view and culture? Are we rattling bones in the water—or have we observed the one great eternal truth? Thanks, once again for your enormous output, it has most certainly been a blessing to me!
Coda - Many of our most cherished scientific theories may be no truer than this “primitive” tribe’s theory of why the rattling bones of bones actually summons sharks. Einstein’s theory regarding the elasticity of the fabric of time and space is a good example of a modern conceit. We really have no idea if space is a thing that has elastic properties, only that if it does, it can help us to understand planetary motion and this intangible thing that we euphemistically refer to as gravity.
If we are to be fair, however, these same principals should apply to the rest of our beliefs, including our religious traditions. It seems idiotic to demand openness from others while closing the door to anything that smacks of heresy regarding our spiritual beliefs. Any God sufficiently great to create this remarkable universe, with it's staggering beauty and intricate nature, would have to be much more than the one dimensional monster portrayed by many of our religious traditions. And, it would seem obvious that as our knowledge of the universe expands, our vision of God must reasonably expand with it
Mark Magula
If we are to be fair, however, these same principals should apply to the rest of our beliefs, including our religious traditions. It seems idiotic to demand openness from others while closing the door to anything that smacks of heresy regarding our spiritual beliefs. Any God sufficiently great to create this remarkable universe, with it's staggering beauty and intricate nature, would have to be much more than the one dimensional monster portrayed by many of our religious traditions. And, it would seem obvious that as our knowledge of the universe expands, our vision of God must reasonably expand with it
Mark Magula