Tom Daggett, member of the Young People's Choir, considers whether there is value in taking a scientific approach to Christianity and Religion.
This day in 1496, King Henry VII issued letters to John Cabot (a navigator), authorising him to explore unknown lands.
On the same day, in 1958, the 'Explorer 2' spacecraft launched.
What a way mankind has come within 500 years; from exploring the unknown earth to exploring unknown space. But what about religion?
Surely with the drastic changes to mankind in terms of science, technology, and knowledge, religion has a lot to answer to.
I don't know how we got onto the subject, but some of my friends and I were discussing Noah's Ark during a riveting (a-hem) lesson last Friday.
What Christians would have believed to be true 500 years ago soon turned into something of a laugh in our lesson - the search for the Ark on Mount Ararat has become something classified alongside the Loch Ness Monster.
We came to a more serious discussion, and generally agreed that Old Testament stories are unbelievable, whilst we fully accepted the New Testament.
So what? The fundamental basis of Christianity is accepting Jesus as the Son of God. Science cannot deny the existence of Jesus.
Science cannot deny the inspiration that Jesus has given, and is still giving, to millions of lives.
During Lent, we think of the life of a great man, who taught a troubled world how they could find God in their lives.
The merciless God of the Old Testament who supposedly' flooded the world to strike out evil, through Jesus, can now be our loving Father.
But its not that simple. Knowledge and science have created too much of an objective and rational viewing of Christianity.
Admittedly (as you may have guessed!), I'm with Charles Darwin on evolution, but the problem arises when it's assumed that because factually incorrect, biblical stories are of no worth. Wrong! Much moral value exists in all biblical stories.
Take Noah. Can we not draw from this that if we are to survive, then we are to please God, and respect the followers of God?
Consider the creation story. Can we not deduce the extent of God's love (if we view the story metaphorically, as I do?) In fact, Genesis warns us not to choose knowledge over God, does it not?
I must own up, though. I have been confused in recent years as to the life of Christ. I decided, some time ago, that I would contemplate Christ as a normal man, rather than as Christ the Son of God.
I even decided to take a look at some of the Gnostic Gospels, which depict Jesus as being more 'earthly' than the Church has made out.
But I have come to conclude that Jesus was and is divine.
I was looking too deeply into empirical evidence for various concepts of some Gnostic beliefs.
This is what knowledge has led to; a search for definitive answers. A questioning of faith.
I thought of Genesis, and thought of what my Christian faith has done for me so far.
I decided that I didn't want to sacrifice my faith for insignificant knowledge.
I can feel faith in my heart. I cannot feel knowledge in the same place.
This Lent, just remember that science may well be a paradigm, but so too is faith.
Faith exists.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article