Jesus is More Interesting than Darwin

Last week I finally made myself finish Kenneth Miller’s Finding Darwin’s God. After numerous debates with young-earth creationists and intelligent design enthusiasts, Miller knows their arguments and has the data to demolish them. Yet he can’t counter his atheistic science colleagues with anywhere near the same fluency, using mostly the strong anthropic principle (the idea that several universal constants are such that life can exist; any slight deviation of any of them, and we would not be). He also sees an opening for God to nudge things along through the inherent uncertainty of quantum physics. He affirms his faith in miracles, including the resurrection of Jesus, but without the weighty evidence and careful reasoning he uses against the anti-evolutionists. So why should his colleagues believe him? In short, Miller’s science has a lot more intellectual vigor than his faith.

Last week I also read a brief article by Beverly Roberts Gaventa and Richard B. Hays, taken from a new book they edited, Seeking the Identity of Jesus: A Pilgrimage. I liked what I read, so I bought the book. It’s the product of a collaborative effort called “The Identity of Jesus Project,” involving some sixteen scholars of various backgrounds who met periodically over a three-year period. Although differences remain among them, they all agree on some pretty basic issues, such as Jesus makes sense only within the context of the history of Israel, and his identity is reliably attested and known in the canonical Bible. No Jesus Seminar or Gnostic gospels (Thomas, Judas) for these people! The most intriguing statements are that Jesus is inherently a disturbing, destabilizing figure and that the identity of Jesus is something that must be learned through long-term discipline. I am very much looking forward to reading this book. Now if I can just find the time to do so in the midst of a busy semester!