|
|
此文章由 jlhan 原创或转贴，不代表本站立场和观点，版权归 oursteps.com.au 和作者 jlhan 所有！转贴必须注明作者、出处和本声明，并保持内容完整
春来草自青 发表于 2017-7-30 11:32 
我同意把圣经的语言看做一种隐喻。如果按照字面的意思来解释，那是无论如何也解释不通的。
实际上各民族 ...
Incorrect. (Below is a draft)
科学、宗教、真理 (Science, Religion, Truth)
以前我曾经写过一篇科学与宗教（《Science and Religion》在“宗教知识课程和漫谈 http://han-jialiang.hxwk.org/?p=193”） 。最近读了两本新书，对这个题目加深了理解。Amir Aczel, "Why Science Does Not Disprove God," William Morrow, 2015. 详细探讨了科学和宗教（犹太－基督教）。下面作几点补充：
1）关于人类起源，进化论，此书有非常详尽的讨论。
2）关于宇宙起源，此书的讨论也非常详细。不过有些地方它牵涉很深的物理学，量子力学的哲学解释，宇宙学，统一场论，String 理论等。虽然我有物理博士，但专业不是这些方向无法判定。
3）书的作者是数学家。他解释了为什么有些数学问题不可解，上帝的存在就在人类知识范围以外。
4）我以前作计算机科学和经济学研究时就感觉到有些客观知识在人的能力之外。这使我断定某次经济学诺奖错误（参考：诺贝尔经济奖、经济学家与投资 http://my.cnd.org/modules/wfsection/article.php?articleid=37842 和引用的文章）。此书明确告诉数学上已经证明一组不可能问题，由德国数学家Georg Cantor引进。
5) 哲学，神学，宇宙学在这些方面相互可以容纳，这我以前知道。一本相关的哲学与神学书涉及这点：Diogenes Allen, Eric O.Springsted, "Philosophy for understanding theology," Westminster John Knox Press; 2 ed, 2007.
另一本书Dallas Willard, "A Place for Truth: Leading Thinkers Explore Life's Hardest Questions," IVP Books, 2010. 价值很高。它汇编了一些著名思想家科学家讲话，文章和讨论。这些多数信上帝，不过也有几个是无神论者。下面摘要一位信仰经历，因为他（Hugh Ross）从追求科学开始认识神的，也因为他曾认真考虑过其它宗教（包括印度教，佛教，伊斯兰教）。
Hugh Ross 生长在一个对宗教不感兴趣的家庭中，但他七岁就开始对科学和宇宙感兴趣并下决心以科学为事业。下面是他的文章摘录：
In my last year of high school, I thought that for the sake of intellectual honesty I should at least look at the different holy books and religions of the world to prove to my personal satisfaction that they were indeed what I assumed them to be, humanly crafted frauds. The scientific method of analysis was familiar. That’s the approach I took.
I figured that the Hindu Vedas would be the place to start, given the ancientness of Hinduism. Indeed I didn’t have to read too many pages of the Vedas before I discovered several scientific absurdities. The general rule of thumb I was using is that when we look up at the cosmos—in fact, when we look out in any field of scientific endeavor—we discover consistency, beauty and harmony. There’s freedom from contradiction. So my assumption was that if the God that created the universe decided to communicate with us human beings in a direct fashion, that communication would have those same characteristics. But for things of human origin, we can expect human feelings and ideas to creep in, and that’s what I looked for. I looked for those human perspectives. So when I read about civilizations of humanity on the surface of the sun, I just chuckled to myself and thought, Well, I guess the Hindus of three thousand years ago weren’t aware of how warm it is on the surface of the sun. When they spoke about time being eternal, while the big bang theory was telling us that time was finite and had a beginning, and when they made incorrect statements about the moon and the planets, I thought, Well, I don’t have to consider this any further. I was most interested, however, in what the Buddhists had to say, because I grew up in Vancouver’s Chinatown, and outside of atheism or agnosticism, Buddhism was the dominant religion of my neighborhood. But it didn’t take very long for me to discover that the Buddhists borrow their cosmological content, their doctrines about the origin of the universe, from the Hindus. A big ball of verbatim. So I said, If that’s Buddhism, then that cannot be from a divine source, either. It must be of human origin.
The next holy book I decided to examine was the Qur’an of the Islamic faith. When I got into the Qur’an I began to see a common denominator among holy books. They seem to be written in esoteric poetry. They’re written with a veneer of intellectual elitism, so that if you were one of the great “enlightened ones” you’d understand the meaning. Otherwise, forget it. From my experience in studying astronomy from age seven, that characteristic didn’t fit. In the record of nature,nature, everything is open, direct and ready for investigation to anyone who cares to look. It’s not esoteric. So the fact that I saw this vagueness gave me some concern. My greater struggle with the Qur’an was how much of it I had to read to find something stated specifically enough that it could be put to the test. So I probably read more of that document than of the Hindu writings. Finally, I did find some testable statements, such as one to the effect that the stars are closer to us than the planets. I knew that was incorrect. More frequently, the Qur’an places historical events in the wrong geographical location. I had studied enough geography to see that some statements were off by one or two thousand miles. So I put the Qur’an aside.
The next set of books I began to look at were the Mormon texts. Mormonism is similar to Islam: it rests on a latter day prophet and a latter day set of books. In examining those texts I found that the book of Mormon claimed supernatural inspiration based on its ability to predict future history. It was marginally impressive that Joseph Smith predicted a future civil war, and yet in the context of 1830, others were making the same prediction. They were newspaper reporters. But what he said in detail about the coming civil war was clearly incorrect. For example, he predicted that all the European nations would participate in that war as belligerents. The truth is, not one of them did. From my assumption that the One behind the cosmos wouldn’t make any errors, I rejected that book from consideration.
Searching the Bible for Errors
Finally, I picked up a Bible. It had become mine when two businessmen in dark suits came into my public school classroom, placed two boxes on my teacher’s desk and left without saying a word. In those two boxes were Bibles. I still pack around that gift from the Gideons I picked up at age eleven.
Maybe it’s just as well that the book stayed in my bookshelf for six years. It was written in Elizabethan English. If I had tried to tackle it at age eleven, I might have treated it as a foreign language. But in the Canadian school system Shakespeare is part of the junior high and high school curriculum. I had read more than a dozen plays and memorized hundreds of verses before I had a chance to pick up the Bible. So when I started reading through it, it wasn’t a foreign language, and immediately I could see its uniqueness.
This was not esoteric poetry. There was no hint at “hidden” meanings. Unlike other holy books, in which I had to read for hours and hours to find something that could be put to the test, virtually every page had six, seven testable statements—in fact, the first page, Genesis 1, gave me more than thirty different statements that could be put to scientific and historical testing.
That possibility encouraged my scientific bent. In fact, that first night I spent three-and-a-half hours studying Genesis 1 because of the wealth of data that could be put to the test. As I ran down the page I found eleven creation events and three initial conditions, all put in the correct chronological sequence, and all correctly described from a modern scientific perspective. Having studied astronomy since I was seven, I had been exposed to numerous creation myths from around the world, and I was able to recognize that the Bible was far ahead of the slightly realistic Enuma Elish of the Babylonians. That account mentions thirteen creation events, and two of the thirteen are correct. The Bible scored fourteen for fourteen.
The other thing that impressed me was that the Genesis creation account reflected the scientific method. It begins with a statement identifying the frame of reference. Then it lists the initial conditions. Next it lists a sequence of events, and it concludes with a statement of final conditions. I was amazed by its structure until ten years later when I read the writings of a Scottish theologian, Thomas Torrance, who explains that the Bible is the source of the scientific method. |
|
E&E -- 无油无面粉零难度 -- 香橙杏仁蛋糕 (2011-12-12) 闲夏采薇 
楼主:椎名道哥
发表于 2017-7-27 20:49
