I came across an interesting blog post today reflecting on science and religion in the aftermath of the failed apocalyptic predictions of Herold Camping. In the post Time, Duration and Prediction: Some Thoughts After Armageddon, astrophysicist Adam Frank makes the case that the reason we give science such and exalted place in our world is precisely because it has been proven to be such a good predictor of natural phenomenon. Through science we can predict eclipses, hurricanes, and even the likelihood of a person’s risk of disease. As Frank sees it religion has been shown time and time again to be a lousy predictor of natural phenomenon as demonstrated most recently by Camping’s failed claims of the end of the world. Regrettably I think I would have to agree with him on this if only based on all the crazy and failed apocalyptic predictions I’ve seen in my short time on earth.
I tend to think we Christians are at our worst when we try to either predict natural phenomenon or when we try and interpret natural phenomenon on behalf of God. Whenever we expend much of our energy in either of these pursuits we begin to miss the point of simply and humbly following Jesus in the here and now.
- Do you agree with Adam Frank’s post or do you think he’s just trying to make excuses for why we don’t need religion?
P.S. Since I published this yesterday Herold Camping has come out publicly with further insight into why his prediction of Judgement day was right and yet how the end of the world won't really come until this October 21. Read article.