Science vs Christianity

Religion and the History of Science
Source: Wikipedia
In this part Barbour provides an overview of how scientific discovery has had an impact on theology through out the 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. The major scientific discoveries made in the 17th century included those made by Galileo and Newton. The scientific discoveries made by Galileo and Newton began to describe and explain the natural and physical laws by which the earth operates. These discoveries drastically changed the way that man viewed the world and nature. This in turn caused shifts in theological thought. Natural theology emerged, where God was able to fill the scientific gaps and was responsible for the orderliness of nature. The idea of God as the "Divine Clockmaker"( the argument states that design implies a designer) and the beginning of Deism(in the philosophy of religion is the standpoint that reason and observation of the natural world, without the need for organized religion, can determine that a supreme being created the universe) can also be traced back to the 17th century.

During the 18th century the Age of Reason and Romanticism greatly shaped views on science and theology. Deism became very popular during this time among many Enlightenment scholars. Romanticism on the other hand lead to an appreciation of the underlying spirituality in nature and in man, and God's personal relationship with man and nature. This in turn lead to the concepts of moral and religious experience (is the argument from experiences of God to the existence of God), which focused on man's intuition and imagination in relation to their religious experience.

The theory of evolution was developed by Darwin in the 19th century. This essentially eliminated the "God of the gaps"(refers to a view of God as existing in the "gaps" or aspects of reality that are currently unexplained by scientific knowledge, or that otherwise lack a plausible natural explanation) that had come about in the 17th century. Liberal theologians accepted the theory of evolution, and held the opinion that God works continuously through the evolutionary process. On the other hand conservatives still insisted on Biblical literalism, and they rejected Darwin's theory. For the most part theologians began to focus more on the human experience for their basis of theology.

Definitions – from Cambridge Dictionary online (only for reference purpose)

Religion - the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or any such system of belief and worship
Christianity - a religion based on belief in God and the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, and on the Bible
Science - (knowledge from) the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical world, especially by watching, measuring and doing experiments, and the development of theories to describe the results of these activities.

Barbour’s Models relating science to faith
Source: Wikipedia
1. Conflict, stating the disciplines contradict and are incompatible with each other.
2. Independence treating each as quite separate realms of enquiry.
3. Dialogue suggesting that each field has things to say to each other about phenomena in which their interests overlap.
4. Integration aiming to unify both fields into a single discourse.

Doesn’t evolution disprove the Bible?
Source: Timothy Keller – The Reason for God
If ‘evolution’ is…elevated to the status of a world-view of the way things are then there is direct conflict with biblical faith. But of ‘evolution’ remains at the level of scientific biological hypothesis, it would seem that there is little reason for conflict between the implications of Christian belief in the Creator and the scientific explorations of the way which – at the level of biology – God has gone about his creating processes.

Since Christian believers occupy different positions on both the meaning of Genesis and on the nature of evolution, those who are considering Christianity as a whole should not allow themselves to be distracted by this intramural debate. The sceptical enquirer does not need to accept any one of these positions in order to embrace the Christian faith. Rather, he or she should concentrate on and weigh the central claims of Christianity. Only after drawing conclusions about the person of Christ, the resurrection, and the central tenets of the Christian message should one think through the various options with regard to creation and evolution

Bible verses
Genesis 1
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Acts 17
11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. 12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.

Hebrews 4
12 For the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

Romans 1
20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse..

Romans 2
15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.

Hebrews 1
1 In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.

Hebrews 11
1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

2 Peter 1
20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Revelations
General Revelation
- Natural revelation (Romans 1:20)
- Conscience (Romans 2: 15)

Special Revelation
- Bible (2 Timothy 3: 16)
- Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1-2)

My thoughts
Between Christianity and science, do I have to disregard one in order to embrace the other? Yes, I would have to do so if they are in absolute contradiction with one another. Then, both cannot exist together. Are they mutually exclusive? To me, they are not. However, I am not so sure about the relationship between them – integration or dialogue? One thing which I am convinced that: If God is the creator God, does not He the inventor of the laws of all the sciences?

Having discussed with friends, conflicts are existing between two (age of the universe was 13 million years old, dinosaurs existed before men, impossible to have water during the formation of the world due to intense heat, water is essential for the formation of life, scientists are looking backward using extrapolations). A conclusion by ML, we should not forget about the core of Christianity which is about Jesus Christ although we have these conflicts. Ultimately, people are saved not by believing of disbelieving evolution but having faith in Christ.

Bible’s Buried Secrets

I am troubled after watching the BBC TV programme – Bible’s Buried Secrets. This programme has 3 episodes and presented by Dr Francesca Stavrakopoulou who is not a believer of Christianity herself. So far two of the episodes have been released and can be watched from BBC iPlayer.

Episode 1. Did King David's Empire Exist?
To me, the way she presented the evidences in this episode seems to be taking a very objective view. Why I think she was objective? This is because I think she let the evidence leads her to the conclusion(s). Also, she appeared to be very close to the Mainstream / Middle scholarship.

Therefore it sounds quite convincing to me that the Kingdom of David was not such a great one. Anyway this did not disturb me so much because it is not directly related to my fundamental faith/belief.

The objective view of her and the interest in the topics led me to continue watching the second episode.

Episode 2. Did God Have a Wife?
In this episode she put forward 3 claims:
1) Abraham was serving a pagan god -El
2) Israelites was not embracing Monotheism but Polytheism
3) Asherah as the goddess/wife of god

In this episode, she sounded more like a Sceptical scholar. One reason I think she is sceptical is because the evidences did not seem to be very convincing to me for her to make the claims/conclusions. Some of the ways she interpreted the Old Testament also seems to me very unreasonable and unacceptable. Lastly, a very disturbing statement to me appeared towards the end of the episode- “A pure monotheism is impossible” . This episode has a much more intense influence on me because it does relate to my fundamental belief of God.

My thoughts
As she was a PHD theology scholar of Oxford University, I just simple cannot leave the matter behind as if nothing has happened. I think she has a very creditable education background in particularly her expertise in the study of the Old Testament. Perhaps her education training also helps her to examine the evidences from a very scientific ways of taking the Archaeological and Historical point of views.

This is why I write to you to hear about your opinions. I hope you would allow me to ask two questions:
1) Are these questions/problems have already been existed in the academia for quite some time already (only recently being raised up by Dr Francesca)?
2) Was she taking an objective view or just being very sceptical?

Episode 3. The Real Garden of Eden
Just finished watching the last episode by Dr Francesca. Although I am not very convincing about the speculation of the real geographical/physical location of the Garden of Eden, but there are still some issues that trouble me. It is quite convincing to me that the Book of Genesis was written between 10th to 5th century BC instead of 1600BC by Moses. It happened that the Book of Genesis appears as the first book in the Bible. The implications are Adam and Eve were not the first man and woman, it is about the falling of a king/Adam instead of the fall of humanity. It troubles me in two ways:
1) Original sin
2) Creation of the world and human
The Book of Genesis provides the foundation for the two points above simply cannot stand if the descriptions are not about “the beginning”.

Blind men and an elephant

70-73
Is there anything out there?
Imagine that a group of people was born in one locked room and lived all their lives within it. These people have frequent discussions about the world outside. One day the argument gets more heated than usual.

Anthony
Anthony starts it all off. He tells the group that he has been studying the room for years and is at last ready to publish his findings. Careful investigation of the contents has revealed an intricate design. Could that washing machine, for example, with its five different cycles, really have come into existence by change? Does it not rather point to someone, or something, outside the room who made it and put it there? But, he has to acknowledge, no one has ever seen anything excepts what exists inside – so it is possible that there is nothing else. We just cannot know.

Bernard
By this stage Bernard is very frustrated and cannot hold it any longer. ‘There you go – nailing your colours to the fence again. Stop being so woolly! The trouble is that you are blind to reality. We can be absolutely certain that there is something out there. My mother brought me up to believe that the world outside is inhabited by big giants and little pygmies, and I have never had any reason to doubt it. The truth is that the giants put our ancestors in here years ago and have kept us locked up ever since, but the pygmies are determined to release us, and one day they will.’

Bridget
Bridget protests immediately. ‘You’ve got it all wrong’, she says. ‘You speak about “the truth”; let me tell you what it is. There are no pygmies, just giants – loads of them. And they are not our enemies – they don’t even know we are here. But they will do when the great earthquake happens and opens a hole in the wall so that we can be free.’

Beatrice
Beatrice laughs loudly. She cannot disguise her contempt for such primitive faith. ‘Grow up, your two’, she says. ‘Why can’t you face reality and recognise that there is nothing out there – there never has been and never will be.’ That is when the dispute really gets going.

Maurice
Maurice listens for a while and then loses patience. ‘Calm down! There’s truth in what you are all saying. I have to say I prefer to think of it rather differently. I like to think there is something out there. In fact, only yesterday I shut my eyes and tried to picture what it might be and a very clear image came into my mind. I say green people with white spots on their foreheads. The way I see it, they aren’t giants – I don’t like the thought of them at all – far too intimidating. No, they are our size, of not a little smaller; and very friendly – that’s what I like to believe. But if you want to see things differently, that’s fine – lets all be tolerant of one another and stop this awful bigotry.’

What are we to make of those different points of view? How can Bernard and Bridget be certain that their belief correspond to reality? And how can Beatrice know that there is nothing outside? They are all making dogmatic statements about something of which they cannot be sure. Maurice may be eccentric, but at least she is more humble. He acknowledges that his is not the only way of looking at the question. But only Anthony is being entirely reasonable. He sticks with the facts and refuses to go further. For those who have spent all their lives in a single room, any statement about the outside cannot be more than guesswork.

Anthony – Agnostic
Bernard – (believer)
Bridget – (believer)
Beatrice – Atheist (believer)
Maurice - Mystic

74
Those who are trapped inside a single room all their lives cannot by themselves discover the truth about what lies outside, if there is anything at all. But what if someone from outside came to visit them? Then they would have ‘certain knowledge’ – they would know the truth. This is the great claim of Christianity.

118
He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot lose.

Source: Distinctives – Vaughan Roberts (2000)

There's A Place For Us - Carrie Underwood

There's a place out there for us
More than just a prayer or anything we ever dreamed of.
So if you feel like giving up
Cause you don't fit in down here
Fear is crashing in close your eyes and take my hand.

We can be the kings and queens of anything if we believe.
It's written in the stars that shine above
A world where you and I belong
Where faith and love will keep us strong
Exactly who we are is just enough
Yes there's a place for us there's a place for us.

When the water meets the sky
Where your heart is free and hope comes back to life
Where these broken hands are whole again
We will find what we've been waiting for
We were made for so much more

We can be the kings and queens of anything if we believe.
It's written in the stars that shine above
A world where you and I belong
Where faith and love will keep us strong
Exactly who we are is just enough
Yes there's a place for us
Now there's a place for us

So hold on now hold on
There's a place for us

We can be the kings and queens of anything if we believe.
It's written in the stars that shine above
A world where you and I belong
Where faith and love will keep us strong
Exactly who we are is just enough
Exactly who we are is just enough
There's a place for us

Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPdSw2kGnOQ

The chicken or the egg?

20
It’s the egg. All chickens hatch from eggs, because the beginning of this life cycle for a chicken starts with its egg. From what we know of evolutionary science the explanation is as below. A bird that was closely related to the chicken in evolutionary terms laid the egg. Let us call this close ancestor to the chicken a “bicken” so as to save confusion. So the bicken laid an egg that contained a very sight mutation of itself, and by mere chance the animal inside that egg was the very first chicken. The first chicken hatched out into a brave new world where its particular DNA would flourish.

As the chicken has be a subspecies of the bicken, due to the fact a bicken gave birth to it, they must be able to interbreed. So the chicken would go on to breed with other bickens and many of their offspring would inherit the distinctive DNA that made them chickens. After a period of time due to natural selection the chickens would come to replace the bickens, thus removing the evidence of where the first egg came from. It was not so much flash of light and a chicken appeared, but the rise of the chicken was created by intricate workings of nature.

Source: Adrian Chapman (October 2010). The Meaning of Life: A Dangerous Mix of God and Science

Adrian Chapman (October 2010). The Meaning of Life: A Dangerous Mix of God and Science

18
It is a point of logic that we can never prove a negative. What we mean by this is we can never prove a negative result , rather than a negative statement.
Eg: Negative statement: 1+1≠3
Positive result: 2
Positive statement: 1+1=2
We have shown the positive result of something else so that we can then use reason to deduce that the negative statement must be correct.

23
A theory is a proposed explanation, developed by reasoning, to describe how something works. Within science there are observable facts, but these observations alone can’t help us understand what is causing these things to happen. A theory is someone’s assertion about the underlying reality that causes these observations to occur. So a theory is not a proven fact. But just because a theory isn’t a fact, doesn’t mean we can’t consider it to be most likely true. “Not entirely right but so incredible true”.

27
Our modern culture has been indoctrinated into believing Darwinism means atheism. The problem with this belief is atheists have a habit of pressurizing people who reason with science into felling that they should also believe in atheism. They claim it is more scientific, but surely the more scientific position is agnosticism, with the great example being Darwin himself. An agnostic keeps an open mind about God’s existence until proof can be shown either way.

50
Problem with so much atheistic writing:
1) Here is an example of someone who is being silly.
2) This person believes in God.
3) All people who believe in God are the same.
4) Therefore all people who believe in God must be silly.

73
The more logical position is to consider pain as being created by the nervous system, which our brains are a part of, then the physical stimulus of pain is made into suffering by the conscious awareness of this experience. So we should define a difference between pain and suffering. The pain is a part of the physical nervous system, and the suffering is created by conscious awareness of the pain.

86
Looking for answers to why things are as they are starts with the belief that there is actually an answer. This is the default position of all science. Science starts with the belief that there is an explanation for everything, and then sets out to find that explanation. Paradoxically atheism starts from the total opposite assumption. Atheism starts with the belief that our existence has no explanation. Unless there is some evidence that makes someone believe this, then it seems to be a ridiculous starting point. This is the problem, atheism is good at criticizing others, but it’s completely void of any explanation of it’s own.

87
Often people choose to believe in ideas because they want to believe in them, rather than they actually do believe in them.

104
As sexual selection is driven by tiny preferences, the butterfly effect can explain the huge variations generated in the birds appearance, dance and song. Natural selection alone is unable to explain it, and would lead people to assume life only achieves the bare minimum to survive. But because the principles of chaos interweaves throughout our existence, nature is far more beautiful, wondrous and even frivolous than it needs to be. The reason can look so beautiful is because it’s being sexed up.

124
Genes are selected at random; organisms are selected by natural selection. (oppose to selfish genes)

163
Atheists don’t believe in God, but they like to dictate what God should be like if the did exist.

183
One argument that commonly used for the existence of God is the creation of the universe, or the creation of life itself. People claim that the existence of both the universe and life are only possible with the existence of God. But from our understanding of probability, we know that life started because it is possible. This doesn’t prove or disprove the existence of God, or indeed it ultimately prove God is not needed. The mathematics doesn’t show the exact chain of events but merely that it will happen. Though it is this same logic that proves an ultimate being must exist. The most powerful, intelligent and knowledgeable being that could ever be possible, has to exist. Just because it’s possible.

274
Science without experiment is identical to philosophy. However science without the initial philosophical reasoning, is merely a random experiment. It is like someone trying to find the answer to a mathematical problem, not by reason, but by trying lots of different numbers. Even if they hit the particular numbers that happen to fit their specific problem, if they can’t explain the reasoning of how it works, how can they use that information to work out anything else?

Source: Adrian Chapman (October 2010). The Meaning of Life: A Dangerous Mix of God and Science

As a Christian in China, what should you write/do when filling in any forms that have a ‘religion column’?

Background of China
By DF
Technically, China in the last 15 years practices a religious policy of tolerance up to the point the central government thinks it acceptable. This is to be distinguished from the religious freedom in the West. So in China, it is perfectly legal to be a Christian and join government recognised churches called 3-self churches - self propagate, self-govern and self-sustain. It was a strategy and concept initiated by foreign missionaries before China turn Communist. They, together with local Chinese church leaders, recognised Chinese churches needed to be on its own feet and it should aim to achieve the 3-self aims in the long run.

Since the Communist took over, the government made the best out of such concept - kicking out foreign missionaries, cutting all contacts, particularly financial and cultural ties with churches from abroad. The government asserts control over church leadership and maintains that religious belief is a positive force only if it does not go out of control. And the control comes from the state, for which they set up a Bureau of Religious Affairs or similar name that ensures all churches follow the same line. Those who refuse to co-operate will be fined, locked away and church property confiscated. But still, especially in rural area, underground house churches were fast replacing the formal, government controlled churches.

During the 60s and 70s, when extreme leftist ideaology became the norm, the perception of religions changed from a positive force if under state control to a totally destructive and negative force. It is like opinion and drugs. It makes people weak (dream about future in heaven rather than facing up hard realities in real life). Hence all religions had to be eradicated. As a result, churches, mosques and temples were pulled down or turn to be warehouses. Clergy were sent to factories. Religious texts burnt. This hard line policy makes Chinese Christians turn inward in their religious expression (this also encourage people to meet in houses and set up even more underground churches). Without the support from churches outside China, they develop its own form of Christianity - focus on prayers, bible reading and endurance in hardship.

Since early 80's the central government recognises the hard-line attitude towards religions, particularly Christianity, only make Christians more subversive. So they re-started the religious policy based on tolerance and harmony. It is therefore no major risk to say you are a Christian on application form (against the predominate Communist and atheistic ideaology). On the other hand, the 'tolerance' is only a mask. Ultimately the state (or the Communist party) will rule supreme.

Wikipedia
Freedom of religion in the People's Republic of China is provided for by the country's constitution; however, the Government, possibly because freedom of religion demands freedom of assembly,[original research?] restricts religious practice to government-sanctioned organizations and registered places of worship. The constitution forbids religious practices that cause "disruption" or "harm" to society.

Christianity has been a growing minority religion for over 400 years. Growth has been more significant since the loosening of restrictions on religion after the 1970s within the People's Republic. Religious practices are still often tightly controlled by government authorities. Chinese over age 18 in Mainland China are permitted to be involved with officially sanctioned Christian meetings through the Three-Self Patriotic Movement or the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Associations.

Background of Malaysia
Wikipedia
Freedom of religion is enshrined in the Malaysian Constitution. First, Article 11 provides that every person has the right to profess and to practice his or her religion and (subject to applicable laws restricting the propagation of other religions to Muslims) to propagate it. Second, the Constitution also provides that Islam is the religion of the country but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony (Article 3).

Malaysia: Youth Struggle to Follow Jesus
Source: http://www.kidsofcourage.com/spotlight/35-spotlights/173-malaysia-youth-struggle-to-follow-jesus
1) Salmiah, a Malay Christian said:
"I never met a Christian when I was growing up. I only heard rumors about Christians from my father and my Muslim friends. They told me lies. They said, ‘Christians are bad people. They will kidnap you.’
I got a Bible from a friend. But my parents ripped it away from me and burned it. They kept food from me and would not allow me to talk to anyone. I ran away, and now I am a Christian. I still must hide from my family."

2) Maria
Maria, a teenage Malay Muslim, began studying different religions. At 18 she became a Christian. She did not even tell her family about her new life in Christ.

Maria secretly talked to a news reporter from a cell phone in her car. The reporter was from the BBC News in Great Britain. Maria told the reporter about her struggles.

Maria’s church is scared that they might get in trouble for allowing her to come to church. They asked her to sign a statement. The statement said that the church had nothing to do with Maria’s decision to become a Christian. “If the authorities come, they are not going to stand up for me,” Maria said of her church. “I have to stand up for myself.”

Maria wants to marry her Christian boyfriend. But her identity card says she is a Muslim. A Muslim woman in Malaysia cannot marry a Christian man. The only way she could marry her boyfriend is if he became a Muslim. But he doesn’t want to do that, and Maria doesn’t want him to either.

Bible verses
Matthew 6
24 “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.

Luke 16
13 “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”

Romans 10
9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.

Matthew 10
32 “Whoever acknowledges me before others, I will also acknowledge before my Father in heaven.
33 But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.
34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
35 For I have come to turn
“‘a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
36 a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’
37 “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me.
39 Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.

Philippians 1
27 Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in the one Spirit, striving together as one for the faith of the gospel
28 without being frightened in any way by those who oppose you. This is a sign to them that they will be destroyed, but that you will be saved—and that by God.
29 For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe in him, but also to suffer for him,

Matthew 10
16 “I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. 17 Be on your guard; you will be handed over to the local councils and be flogged in the synagogues. 18 On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles. 19 But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, 20 for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. 21 “Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. 22 You will be hated by everyone because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.

Opinions from different people
Christian from Hong Kong – DF
It really depends on the context. If one takes a more creative approach, one can argue Christianity is not straightly a religion. Therefore we can fill in the box saying 'none'. It is because we are Christians which means followers of Christ, not membership of the Christian religion.

Christian in China – HR
In that case, I would still fill in Christian/Christianity. The law says that we have religion freedom in China. Filling a form would not affect us in any way. Although the government encourages communists NOT to have any religious belief, some are religious Buddhists. I am still figuring out the impression of Christianity/Christians in China. But I would encourage Christians in China to be genuine, which is something we really lack in China now. My family hopes I could join the governmental departments, which I feel quite against and scary. Please pray for me that God will lead me well.

Christian in China – WW
Mandarin: Ted的问题在国内很严肃，因为人只能服从一个“主”，但是我相信真有信仰的人也会填，就像穆斯林一样。如果是受洗的基督徒，不填，岂不是不认主？
English: Ted’s question is a very serious matter in China because one can only serve one master, but I believe those who have true belief/conviction will also fill in, just like what Muslims will do. If a baptised Christian not filling in, then is he/she not acknowledging the Lord?

Christian in Malaysia (studying/studied in China)– JH
Mandarin: 对于你的问题，我个人觉得，中国基督徒填写自己的宗教是[基督教]并不是什么大问题，主要在于写/看的人，他们的心态是什么罢了。而且又不是什么犯法的事情，因为中国是多宗教的国家。
English: Regarding your question, personally I think “filling in your religion” (Christian) is not a big issue. The main point only lies at the one’s attitude/mind. In addition, this is not against the law as China is a multi-religious country.

3 Principles (by ML)
1) Courage (Philippians 1:27-28)
27 Whatever happens, conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ. Then, whether I come and see you or only hear about you in my absence, I will know that you stand firm in the one Spirit, striving together as one for the faith of the gospel
28 without being frightened in any way by those who oppose you. This is a sign to them that they will be destroyed, but that you will be saved—and that by God.

2) Wisdom (Matthew 10:16)
“I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.

3) Love (Romans 14:15)
If your brother or sister is distressed because of what you eat, you are no longer acting in love. Do not by your eating destroy someone for whom Christ died.

My thoughts
I tried to answer the question directly but I cannot draw any straight conclusion. This is because neither stating your Christian identity nor not stating it shows that you are a real Christian. In addition there is no clear statement in the Bible that commands Christians to declare its religious identity when filling in a form.

However to a certain extent and for some Christians this might affect their relationship with God and with the people around them. One may fell guilty as if committed an act of betraying/denying Jesus after leaving the religion column blank. Also, how will the people around us may be affected when we fill/not fill in our religion status?

Therefore, it seems to me that it involves the struggle between self-conscience and self-intellectual. Intellectually, I am convinced that it is not wrong/’sin’ if I left the column blank. On the other hand, I may feel guilty or feel causing bad impressions to others if I did not fill in the blank. May God grant me wisdom to weight these struggles carefully in order to make an appropriate decision!