To begin with, we must appreciate the fact that science and religion have been perceived to be conflicting concepts since time immemorial. While religion and science cannot be disentangled from the reality of God and creation, there is a sharp contrast between scientific discoveries and most of the biblical doctrines.
We will write a custom Critical Writing on The interview by Francis Collins on The Language of GOD specifically for you
301 certified writers online
Although Francis Collins is assertive that religion and science can co-exist and that there is no conflict between the two entities, it is factual that the two concepts conflict each other severally. Throughout the interview, the author reiterates that he is a strong Christian believer and that he cannot abandon his faith in God just because of being a specialist in DNA.
He argues that he has passion for science. Nevertheless, true Christians believe that the Bible represents the spoken word of God and that every answer about life’s challenges is found in the Bible. From this perspective, Christian believers have been left in a state of dilemma for centuries especially when they have to correlate scientific ideas and religious doctrines.
From the first question in the interview, Collins outlines that the concept of evolution did not jut spring from space (Beliefnet 4). It was God’s plan for evolution to take place. Even if God planned for evolution, he must have outlined it in the Bible.
Evolution should be treated or perceived as a unique scientific aspect that goes against the ideals of creation. In fact, the scientific theory which asserts that all living species have a common ancestor should be further investigated. Even though the perspective on the origin of living species has been received with overwhelming mixed reactions, it should not weaken the contents of the Bible.
The author notes that there is no missing link between science and religion. However, it is surprising to observe that the creation theories from both perspectives differ remarkably. For instance, the Biblical account of creation asserts that God created the earth and everything in it.
Creation took a total of six days and on the seventh day, God took a rest. On the other hand, the theory of evolution was put forward by Charles Darwin in1859 in his book The Origin of the Species. According to this theory, all the living species emanated from a common creature. However, the species have evolved (transformed) gradually with the passage of time.
A case in point is the evolution of man from other primates such as monkeys and baboons. Sincerely peaking, these are vivid differences that need not to be expounded in any length.
Although Collins seem to insinuate that we are yet to study adequate scientific facts in order to appreciate the truth, it does not auger well with any other Christian believer to be told that man originated from apes. The biblical account of creation is straightforward. Therefore, we may appreciate the contribution of science to humanity on other platforms but not on creation.
Secondly, is it true that God planned the process of evolution and that it was not a random undertaking? Well, this may be beyond our ordinary human understanding in as much us we should give God all the credits for creating the planet and life in it. Nevertheless, the author does not give any evidence of his claim. If God really planned for evolution, why is there a sharp contrast in creation theories?
Better still, why is this plan not accounted for in the Bible? Even though science may have some outright responses to such inquiries, Christians are not mandated at all to believe in science at the expense of biblical doctrines.
As already mentioned above, the spoken word of God can only be found in the books and chapters of the Bible. Additionally, Christians may still posit that scientific revelations are not inspired by any entity (relies on human knowledge per se) while Biblical doctrines were inspired through the prophets of God.
Christians are still o the right track of pursuing their faith even though the author observes that he is sympathetic to fellow Christians who think that evolution has damaged their faith towards creation. In fact, the study of DNA and the vital applications of scientific knowledge should be taken as unique ways of worshipping God. Science allows a broader way of worshipping God (Beliefnet 4).
Is it possible to reconcile evolution with the Bible? According to Collins, God planned for evolution to take place. Nonetheless, this may not be a satisfactory response to this question. Perhaps, evolution should be viewed as the gradual transformation of living creatures. This is indeed an inevitable process in life. Even huge rock boulders undergo the process of weathering that eventually reduces them into smaller particles.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
Hence, evolution can only be reconciled with the Bible if its meaning and content are duly revised. For example, the evolution theory on creation is still controversial and will always remain that way among Christians. Therefore, creation theory according to evolution should be expunged from science in order to fully reconcile the two divides.
In addition, Collins is quite categorical that it was the plan of God to create human beings for the sake of his own glory. This cannot be disputed because God used evolution to meet his broad objective on humanity.
Even though most Christian believers think that evolution is a far-fetched scientific concept that does not meet the Biblical threshold, the author is of the opinion that evolution did not take God by surprise since it was part and parcel of his plan towards life (Beliefnet 5).
This is perhaps the reality on the ground because even if Christians have not appreciated the theory of evolution in totality, scientific knowledge is largely applicable in the modern life.
Finally, we ought to concur with the author that the myriads of discoveries that have been made in the field of science should be uniquely used to appreciate and worship God as the Supreme Being. In fact, the wonders of creation exemplify the nature of God in totality.
Moreover, the extent at which DNA applications can be put into practice should be gauged. Designing babies of our choices through DNA options contravenes the purpose of God towards mankind. It is the worst form of criticism that humanity can offer to God. Interfering with genetic makeup confirms that we are not contended with the natural choice of God.
To recap it all, it is vital to reaffirm that science and religion are broad concepts that should be treated with utmost caution. However, religion should always be given precedence over science because its doctrines are almost indisputable.
Beliefnet. Interview with Francis Collins. Center for online and distance education. Simon Fraser University (n.d): 4-6. Print.