Contents
At the Speed of Light Towards Ignorance
In a world where science is advancing at a staggering pace, some still seek validation for modern discoveries in ancient texts. This frantic race to find divine confirmation for scientific advancements only conceals a profound misunderstanding of the nature of knowledge and its evolution. Instead of celebrating critical thinking and the accumulation of human knowledge, this approach paradoxically leads us towards a structured ignorance, where faith attempts to supplant reason.
The Illusion of Pre-existing Knowledge
Who hasn’t heard one of those triumphalist speeches from religious scholars claiming that every modern scientific discovery was already present in sacred texts? These declarations sound like a victory, an indisputable proof that the ultimate truth was revealed long before Western scientists discovered it. “Look, dear Muslims, this truth was already in the Quran!” they proclaim, convinced of an absolute truth.
However, it is easy to claim precedence when the truth is already established. This is how some can assert that prehistoric drawings demonstrate an ancient knowledge of the Earth’s roundness. Similarly, mythological stories and ancient texts are sometimes interpreted as premonitions of contemporary scientific discoveries.
Forced and Erroneous Interpretations
Take the example of the atom. Greek philosophers had already formulated the idea of an indivisible particle, but this concept has nothing to do with the atom as defined by modern science. Likewise, any mention of the atom in the Quran does not correspond in any way to current physical reality. What was once perceived as the fundamental unit of matter has now been surpassed by more refined knowledge, revealing an even more complex structure.
In other words, only the terminology has survived through the centuries, but the concepts have evolved. Claiming that the ancients already possessed the knowledge we have today demonstrates ignorance of the history of science and the evolution of human thought.
The Biased Comparison Between Science and Religion
Attempts to reconcile religion with modern science, through books like The Quran and Science or The Gospel and Science, are merely a manifestation of an internal conflict within their authors. On one hand, they recognize the importance of science, but on the other, they remain prisoners of a cultural and religious heritage struggling to evolve.
By seeking to demonstrate harmony between the divine and the laws of physics, these essays ignore a fundamental principle: science is dynamic and subject to constant revision. A theory accepted today may be disproven tomorrow. In this sense, trying to validate religion through science means subjecting it to a knowledge that is in perpetual flux, thereby risking weakening the texts they aim to defend.
A Counterproductive Strategy
This need for scientific validation ultimately harms religion itself. If the laws of physics were to evolve to the point of contradicting certain beliefs, believers would find themselves facing an insoluble dilemma. European history illustrates this phenomenon well: the confrontation between science and theology resulted in a clear separation between faith and reason.
If some wish to preserve the authenticity of their belief, it would be wiser not to attempt to justify it through science. By subjecting faith to the criteria of rationality, they risk seeing it deconstructed by future discoveries.
The Emancipation of Human Thought
The idea that “the ancients knew everything, and moderns are merely rediscovering” is a deception. Intellectual responsibility requires acknowledging the autonomy of human thought and its constant evolution. Humans of the past were subject to beliefs dictated by ignorance and fear, while modern humans are called to rely on reason and experimentation.
We believe that God knows everything, but we cannot prove it. However, we do know that humans know nothing, yet they are capable of learning and evolving. Rather than searching ancient texts for predictions of current discoveries, it is better to recognize that knowledge is the fruit of a human process in continuous progress.
Conclusion: A Misguided Quest for Truth
The amalgamation of science and religion, although appealing to some, is based on a dangerous intellectual illusion. By attempting to prove the validity of religious texts through modern scientific discoveries, we only betray both the essence of science and that of faith.
Science evolves, questions itself, and is built on proof and experimentation. Religion, on the other hand, relies on belief and adherence to immutable truths. Trying to reconcile them by forcing anachronistic interpretations leads to an intellectual dead end and a distortion of history.
Rather than imposing religious validation on human discoveries, it would be more relevant to accept the distinct nature of each domain: science to understand the material world and religion, for those who adhere to it, as a personal spiritual quest. The key is to adopt a critical and rational approach so that humanity progresses in knowledge without being hindered by biased readings of the past.
