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!
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
A few years ago, the Presbyterian/Reformed campus ministry hosted in their annual symposium an Anglican priest/former physicist (whose name escapes me at the moment) addressing “intelligent design,” using the strong anthropic principle among other arguments. There were a couple of university professors at hand to respond to him. After his excellent presentation, the physicist said, in essence, “Yes, that is quite sensible. Good arguments.” The professor of religion said “This is the old argument from design. That was debunked centuries ago. Yawn.”
It was fascinating that the “religious” person was the one who could not believe, and the “scientist” had no problem with it.
“the identity of Jesus is something that must be learned through long-term discipline.”
How true!
It sounds like an interesting book.
I'm not surprised that a physicist was open to a religious presentation and a religion professor blew it off. Religion departments tend to treat their subject academically, and any faith statement (especially from a Christian perspective) is immediately suspect. I've also heard evolutionists make faith statements about Darwinism and still believe they are speaking science. Humans are certainly an odd species!
John Polkinghorne is an Anglican priest-physicist whose works I would like to add to my burgeoning list of books to read, because he seems to have a good grasp of both science and theology.
Yes, it was indeed John Polkinghorne. I'm glad you knew who I was talking about.
Post a Comment