Our second question in the ethics survey asked this - using a slightly round about way. Participants were asked to respond to the following statement:
The Bible is primarily a spiritual book which does not have much relevance to modern medical practice
The results were interesting:
While the majority of church goers (n=117) disagreed with the statement, an interesting minority did not. One in five church members felt that the Bible was not relevant for medical practice. When the people who are not sure are added to this number, we see that almost a third of the members feel the Bible is not relevant for medical issues.
The conference delegates (n=34), on the other hand overwhelmingly affirmed that they saw the Bible as key to their medical work. Only a single person was not sure of this with 97% of the delegates affirming their view the scripture is important for medical practice.
Two interesting thoughts come out of this:
1) Given that many church goers do not see the Bible as being important - is this a product of their own churches and faith journey, or is it because of the dominant humanistic environment we are in?
2) While all the participants professed that the Bible was important for them and their medical practice - is this really seen in the day-to-day actions?
What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment