I know I shouldn’t get irritated by it. I know that it is pointless to feel exasperated by twaddle. But when Lord (yup, Lord) Sacks starts heaping up strawmen, I really do feel like saying enough is enough, fer gawd’s sake.
Let’s just examine what he is reported to have said:
“There is a difference between science and religion. Science is about explanation. Religion is about interpretation. The Bible simply isn’t interested in how the universe came into being.”
Erm, hello? The Bible simply isn’t interested, because it states how it happened. The fact that it’s nonsense seems to have passed by its readers who think they know how to interpret its fantasies. Its mind was made up by the original writers.
And Religion is about interpretation, eh? Tell that to those who think that the Bible is God’s inerrant law.
And of course, there’s a warning:
Sacks also said the mutual hostility between religion and science was one of “the curses of our age” and warned it would be equally damaging to both.
Enquiry is not a curse. The fact that your folklore feels under threat is not equally damaging to both..
And Lord Sacks rounds off with:
“But there is more to wisdom than science. It cannot tell us why we are here or how we should live. Science masquerading as religion is as unseemly as religion masquerading as science.”
Science is not masquerading as a religion, except in your worldview, Lord Sacks. And that is simply because the results of scientific enquiry are undermining the strawmen set up by your interpretation of sacred texts. Texts that were written by human beings trying to do the best (or the worst) that they could in less enlightened ages.
And of course, Moses speaks for Lord Sacks.