The United Church of Christ announced Tuesday the launch of its new web-based advertising campaign to reach out to scientists to end the age-old rift between the religious and scientific community.
Efforts toward reconciliation include the purchase of ads on more than 30 popular science-oriented blogs for the month of February. The ads aim to promote both a pro-science, pro-faith message.
“Our hope is to begin to move the church to the place where its public image, public witness and public identity is one of a community of faith that is eager to engage science and to welcome and honor scientists,” said the Rev. John H. Thomas, the UCC’s general minister and president, in a statement.
The 1.2 million-member UCC said the science campaign is part of its “God is still speaking” initiative, which seeks to reach out to groups of people that have been marginalized by the church, either intentionally or unintentionally.
“And, frankly, when it comes to persons engaged in scientific inquiry – geneticists, mathematicians, chemists, engineers, science teachers and students – the church has a history of communicating disinterest, distrust and even hostility,” Thomas noted.
The UCC’s latest outreach to scientists comes alongside the release of a Pastoral Letter on Science and Technology – authored by UCC head Thomas and a nine-member working group of scientists and theologians – that calls the church to “open themselves and our theology to the momentous conceptual changes of our time.”
The pastoral letter, “A New Voice Arising,” will be distributed in February to each of the UCC’s 5,700 local churches. Materials will accompany the letter with suggestions on how churches can host opportunities to study and share about science-related topics in small groups.
The UCC is considered the most liberal Protestant denomination and was the first mainline denomination to endorse gay “marriage” in 2005. Last year it welcomed a Dallas gay megachurch, Cathedral of Hope, to its denomination. The Cathedral claims some 4,300 members and describes itself as the “world’s largest liberal Christian church with a primary outreach to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.”
Conservative Christian critics have said the UCC makes up for its lack of Christian evangelism by political activism.
“Is there a more-left wing Protestant denomination in America than the Episcopal Church? Yes! The 1 million member United Church of Christ (UCC) has lost nearly 1 million member over the last several decades,” wrote Mark D. Tooley, director of the United Methodist committee at the Institute on Religion and Democracy, in a column last year.
Recently, UCC received more media attention following its member, Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) bid for the White House.
Three prominent scientists have endorsed the pastoral letter: Alan I. Leshner, chief executive of the American Association for the Advancement of Science; Charles Townes, a UCC member who received both the Nobel and Templeton prizes for physics; and Ian G. Barbour, a physicist and theologian who won the 1999 Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion.
"In the same way that UCC states that it cannot ignore the context in which it functions, neither can the scientific community ignore its societal context," Leshner said. "For this reason, we see a dialogue between science and religion as vital."
Comments
ebc, “Since all miracles are impossible, they conflict with science.”
Duh huh, what is science, but a theory of knowledge based on certain presuppositions? If miracles were scientifically based, they wouldn’t be miracles now would they? If you want to believe in super-natural selection, that’s your prerogative, but don’t patronize us with this bit about science having all of the answers. And don’t pretend to be a theologian, just because you have read a few half-baked claims on the internet.
“Evidence for structural difference/ descent does not constitute evidence for the mechanism by which structural transformation took place.” -David L. Wilcox
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/fte/darwinism/chapter13.html
Apropos to Rev. John H. Thomas's call for engagement between science and religion, God has been proven to exist based upon the most reserved view of the known laws of physics. For much more on that, see Prof. Frank J. Tipler's below paper, which among other things demonstrates that the known laws of physics (i.e., the Second Law of Thermodynamics, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the Standard Model of particle physics) require that the universe end in the Omega Point (the final cosmological singularity and state of infinite informational capacity identified as being God):
F. J. Tipler, "The structure of the world from pure numbers," Reports on Progress in Physics, Vol. 68, No. 4 (April 2005), pp. 897-964. http://math.tulane.edu/~tipler/theoryofeverything.pdf Also released as "Feynman-Weinberg Quantum Gravity and the Extended Standard Model as a Theory of Everything," arXiv:0704.3276, April 24, 2007. http://arxiv.org/abs/0704.3276
See also the below resources for further information on the Omega Point Theory:
Theophysics http://theophysics.gigacities.net
http://geocities.com/theophysics/
"Omega Point (Tipler)," Wikipedia, January 23, 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Omega_Point_%28Tipler%29&oldid=186311623
"Frank J. Tipler," Wikipedia, January 5, 2008 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_J._Tipler&oldid=182407923
Tipler is Professor of Mathematics and Physics (joint appointment) at Tulane University. His Ph.D. is in the field of global general relativity (the same rarefied field that Roger Penrose and Stephen Hawking developed), and he is also an expert in particle physics and computer science. His Omega Point Theory has been published in a number of prestigious peer-reviewed physics and science journals, such as Reports on Progress in Physics (which is the leading journal of the Institute of Physics, England's main professional body for physicists), Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (one of the world's leading astrophysics journals), Physics Letters B, the International Journal of Theoretical Physics, etc.
Prof. John A. Wheeler (the father of most relativity research in the U.S.) wrote that "Frank Tipler is widely known for important concepts and theorems in general relativity and gravitation physics" on pg. viii in the "Foreword" to The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (1986) by cosmologist Prof. John D. Barrow and Tipler, which was the first book wherein Tipler's Omega Point Theory was described.
The leading quantum physicist in the world, Prof. David Deutsch (inventor of the quantum computer, being the first person to mathematically describe the workings of such a device, and winner of the Institute of Physics' 1998 Paul Dirac Medal and Prize for his work), endorses the physics of the Omega Point Theory in his book The Fabric of Reality (1997). For that, see: http://theophysics.gigacities.net/deutsch-ends-of-the-universe.html
ebcdic:
God Word has never failed. Its the same Word that was preached beyond two thousand years ago. It was the same Word proven on the cross. It is the same Word today. God Word is still going forth (future). Jesus is salvation to those who believe and follow His example.
In beginning (God's time), God(force) created (motion) the heavens(space) and the earth (matter). These are the guiding principles of all of science without them there is no science. Check with any scientist and see if time, force, motion, space and matter are not fundementals.
Questions: If science cannot prove something does it make it wrong? And if science cannot prove where man for the universe came? How reliable is science? ebcdic please answer these three by your admission the Bible is made up?
This is called a made up story. It's completely against science. If you people want to believe in an anti-science religion, I don't care, but you could at least be honest about it. This wild claim that christianity has no conflicts with science is lying. It's lying to yourselves and it's lying to everyone else.
So I guess you are made up too because science cannot tell you where you derived. Science has neither proven where the universe came. It has a lot of theories. But theories aren't proof; they just what they are defined as conjectures and speculation. You can weave any number of facts together you choose but that doesn't make it right.
ebc,
To the Christians who assume the Genesis account of Creation conflicts with science, I would say that either the scientific perspective is wrong, or their understanding of the Bible is wrong. In either case, there is no insurmountable contradiction between science and Christianity.
Regarding the case of the science teacher, a true Christian would never threaten another human being, even if the case was much more serious. What you are observing is cultural Christians who do not understand their faith. In any case what happens in society is not of any consequence to my point, I only said that science does not refute Christianity, and it does not.
You assume that scientists do not have time to deal with Christians, which is very funny considering the vast amount of time Richard Dawkins, the atheist poster boy, has spent dealing with Christians, and how much time angry "scientists" spend arguing against Christians.
(Yes I copied and pasted, because you did not address the points I made)
Oglefam, yes, I'm sure there is only one correct answer to every question. Your examples explain how wrong answers were corrected, but your examples don't change the fact those questions had only one correct answer. My point was people can't pretend science is an opinion. If evidence shows all life evolved, people can't ignore that evidence and call evolution an opinion. They can't claim magical creation, which has no evidence at all, is equal to evolution, which has a mountain of evidence.
TheHuron137, Of course I agree with you. All holy books are a collection of made up stories. Only the brainwashed could believe the nonsense in the bible, the koran, the torah, or the book of mormon.
to crc
To say the bible has never been wrong is ludicrous. To assert things like that reminds me of mormon and islamic apologists who say the same thing about their holy books. By the way Isaac Newton was an anti-trinitarian. Look it up.
ebcdic
"To every question there is always only one correct answer." Are you sure? Many years ago the world was believed to be flat. At the time it was the correct answer. Many years ago the sun was believed to revolve around the earth. At the time it was the correct answer. Many "facts" thought to be correct have been changed over the centuries. Who is to say that in 100 years all of the correct answers now will have changed?
Genesis conflicts with science, I don't care how it's interpreted. The Noah's Ark myth conflicts with science. Since all miracles are impossible, they conflict with science.
"For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is"
This is called a made up story. It's completely against science. If you people want to believe in an anti-science religion, I don't care, but you could at least be honest about it. This wild claim that christianity has no conflicts with science is lying. It's lying to yourselves and it's lying to everyone else.
Why did the law not bring you to faith?
Scientist please wake up. The Bible has never been wrong. And many like Isaac Newton drew on it in their contributions to science. Verses like the following are repeated through out scripture, not just one or two places; even Jesus said the following so I know it is true and not some allegorical explanation. By the way when Jesus spoke in parables to the people you can always tell.
Exodus 20:11
For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.
“Our hope is to begin to move the church to the place where its public image, public witness and public identity is one of a community of faith that is eager to engage science and to welcome and honor scientists,” said the Rev. John H. Thomas, the UCC’s general minister and president, in a statement.
People honored the Pharisees, but Jesus called the vile serpents. So honor scientist for what purpose?
When did science prove there was a God? How does it prove righteousness, holiness, just, honest and faith? How does it prove the Spirit?
ebc,
To the Christians who assume the Genesis account of Creation conflicts with science, I would say that either the scientific perspective is wrong, or their understanding of the Bible is wrong. In either case, there is no insurmountable contradiction between science and Christianity.
Regarding the case of the science teacher, a true Christian would never threaten another human being, even if the case was much more serious. What you are observing is cultural Christians who do not understand their faith. In any case what happens in society is not of any consequence to my point, I only said that science does not refute Christianity, and it does not.
You assume that scientists do not have time to deal with Christians, which is very funny considering the vast amount of time Richard Dawkins, the atheist poster boy, has spent dealing with Christians, and how much time angry "scientists" spend arguing against Christians.