Riverwood Presbyterian Church

Faith and Science

Nomenclature and Classification as Scientific Truth

by Tim Lien

Last week, in Chester England, scientists revealed the five Komodo dragons that were born in captivity to Flora, their mother (also a Komodo dragon.)

Nothing is exceptional about this fact, except that Flora had not been exposed to a male Komodo—thus, making this, essentially an asexual and “virgin” birth. You can read all about it here.

Scientists were shocked when this happened, because there had not been a documented occurrence of this kind among Komodo dragons. So, before this event, scientists could forcefully say: “Komodo dragons do not asexually reproduce. They never have. They are not among the species that can participate in the process of parthenogenesis (asexual reproduction) And they never will.” But then Flora went and got asexually impregnated.

So to explain this puzzling turn of events (which stymied true explanation) respected scientists simply changed their current frame of reference and allowed for parthenogenesis to occur within the species of Komodo dragon.

Interestingly enough, Science has generally followed this pattern: 1) Refuse to accept the unknowable and non-tangible. 2) If it has to be accepted due to overwhelming tangible evidence, then name it. And by naming and classifying it, you limit it. You limit the occurrence of Phenomena. (Incidentally, naming is a powerful tool throughout the biblical record.)

And so, dear Science, I would like to submit a scientific designation for something you deem unknowable, so that together, we can limit its occurrence and change the current scientific framework: theotokos: mother of God, or if that is unsuitable, perhaps, Incarnationus Deum: the incarnation of God.