John's Faith
and Science Page
Cartoon with permission from "Planet Earth and Beyond" by Relph, Dunlop et al, Newhouse, 1995
An article on Science and Religion by Doug Hayhoe
Science and Faith: a
close embrace?
April 2006
Introduction
This article was
first prepared for a TSCF conference workshop in July
2000 then adapted and expanded for the August 2000 issue of Stimulus magazine.[1] I updated it for a presentation to the University
of Auckland OCF on October 18th 2002, and again in 2004, 2005 and 2006. This is
my main written contribution to the long-running debate about how Christian belief and
science should relate,[2] although I feel I really need
a couple of decades to work through the topic first. Such a vast and contentious subject
calls for humility, careful reasoning and openness to new ideas.
Many of the people I know who are active in the world of science hold an attitude of contempt towards Christianity. My suspicion is that this contempt is aided by the pious introspection that characterises much of church life, and the brash attempts at evangelism and apologetics that typify some Christian groups.
I am convinced that
much of the polarisation between science and faith is due to well-publicised groups at two
extreme poles who have been active over the last few decades. Young Earth Creationists
such as the late Henry Morris and Ken Ham teach that all was created recently by God, with
most scientists mistaken about the true facts, while anti-theistic evolutionists such as
Richard Dawkins and the late Carl Sagan see God as quite unnecessary, and ourselves as
alone in the cosmos to work out our own destiny.
The widespread
adoption of such polarised presentations in the Christian and secular media respectively
over the last 30 years or so has widened a quite unnecessary division between science and
faith. In my view there is no final conflict, though given our imperfect knowledge there
will be no immediate solution either. In between the extreme views are many others,
including those who see no need for a connection between science and faith, theistic
evolutionists who see no conflict between their science and their faith, and old-earth
creationists who doubt the efficacy of mutation and selection as a mechanism for change.
Young Earth
Creationists
The fundamentalist
position taken by Young Earth Creationists (YEC), that the creation accounts in Genesis 1
and 2 are to be taken literally, is a major cause of ridicule from non-believers, who see
that the two accounts differ markedly in the order of events, and possess obvious poetic
structure.
Many thoughtful
critics of YEC see huge contradictions in the implications of virtually instant creation,
e.g. distant galaxies being created in a single day, complete with beams of light, each
billions of light years long. The evidence of geology is plain to them millions of
years of slow processes such as continental drift, erosion and seasonal fluctuation,
peppered with catastrophic events such as earthquakes, floods volcanoes and meteorite
impacts. David Wilkinson makes the point: a recent survey of teenagers showed that
one third of those who rejected Christianity did so because they thought that Christians
believed in a seven day creation some 6000 years ago. [3]
Jonathan Sarfati is a
local and able defender of the position that a literal interpretation of Genesis is the
only option for Christians. I shall use some of his recently published work in an area I
am familiar with to illustrate some of my concerns with Young Earth Creationism.
The
astronomer Hugh N. Ross now seems to be the world's most prominent 'progressive
creationist' (PC). While he is insistent about distinguishing himself from 'theistic
evolutionists' (TEs), Ross adopts the same basic philosophical approach. That is, he makes
uniformitarian (i.e. essentially materialistic, billions of years, etc.) 'science' his authority over Scripture. and Ross's
heterodox canonisation of nature has been thoroughly rebutted by Van Bebber and Taylor. [4] This book
is essential reading for defenders of the biblical world-view, as it answers
point-by-point Ross's earlier theological and historical errors. [5]
My comment: Sarfati
is arrogant in assuming he has "the" biblical world-view and wrong in claiming
that Ross makes science an authority over scripture.
Jonathan Sarfati made
the following claim:
Today we
realize that sunspots are vortices of gas on the suns surface, and appear dark
because they are several thousand degrees cooler. [6]
My comment: Having
sunspots several thousand degrees cooler is a bit of a problem when the rest of the
visible surface is only 6000 degrees. In fact they are between one and two thousand
degrees cooler.
Another claim:
According
to Gods Word, the Bible, the sun did not always light the earth. It wasnt made
till Day 4 of Creation Week, while the earth was created on Day 1. This refutes ideas like
God used evolution and God created over billions of years, because
they all assert that the sun arose before the earth. For the first three days of
existence, the earth was lit by the light created on Day 1 (Genesis 1:3), while the
day/night cycle was caused by the earths rotation relative to this directional light
source. [7]
Comment: Creating some extra earth-illuminating light source for the first three days of creation is not very convincing. Ignoring multiple independent lines of evidence for the age of the Universe because it does not fit one's favoured interpretation of Genesis is most illogical.
Another
reason for the moon is to show the seasons. The moon orbits the earth roughly once a month
causing regular phases in a 29½ day cycle.
So
calendars could be made, so people could plant their crops at the best time of the
year. [8]
My comment: Calendars
based on the moon do not keep good track of years (try fitting 29.5 x 12 or 13 to 365.24).
Years are recognised by noting the yearly pattern of sunrise/sunset position or star
positions. Twelve months are marked off until the next yearly marker is seen.
An important feature is that the moon always
keeps the same face towards the earth. If different parts were visible at different times,
the moons brightness would depend on which part was pointing towards the earth. Then
the 29½ day cycle would be far less obvious. [9]
Comment: The terrain
of the Moon is not the major factor in how bright it appears to us. It is the amount of
sunlit surface facing the Earth that matters. If the Moon did spin faster we would notice
very little change in the lighting, though the changing lunar scenery would be most
interesting.
A broader view
Four hundred years
ago the much-maligned Galileo quoted the line The bible teaches us how to go to
heaven, not how the heavens go. Since then a wide range of Christians over the years
including Bernard Ramm, C. A. Coulson, Owen Gingerich, Ian Barbour, John Polkinghorne,
Charles Hummel, Neil Broome, David Wilkinson, T Torrance, Hugh Ross and Alistair McGrath
(to name only a few) have written extensively about the relation of science and Christian
faith from a biblical worldview with a much broader interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 than
Jonathan Sarfati, Henry Morris or Ken Ham will permit.
In my experience,
scientists in general are not intending to either prove or disprove Gods part in a
process, but rather to determine the mechanisms involved. Higher questions of purpose and
meaning are not generally considered within the realm of scientific investigation, though
some, such as Richard Dawkins, have expanded their science into a self-sufficient and
Godless world-view, which can be called scientism, or philosophical naturalism. Christian
thinkers such as John Polkinghorne have used the term Critical Realism[10] where the existence
of an objective reality is foundational, but our knowledge of reality is limited and thus
open to criticism.
In my opinion science
and faith operate in different spheres but they are overlapping spheres. If you try and
imagine a multi-dimensional Venn diagram with 4 non-equal spheres representing spiritual,
mental, emotional and physical aspects of our lives you will get some appreciation of what
I mean. [11] It is
fascinating to me that astronomers and cosmologists seem much more able to accommodate a
range of explanations and faith positions than biologists. Perhaps we get less personally
involved with galaxies than genes.
How science works
An example of the way
science operates can be seen in the way a topic such as the age of the Universe is
approached. Practical problems involved in measuring such a key date ensure that a precise
figure still eludes the most careful researchers. However the notoriously elastic nature
of cosmic ages and distances is reducing due to phenomenal efforts with the most
sophisticated technology available. The recently completed Hipparcos project involved
using a dedicated satellite to measure the position of 100 000 stars, many times each, to
an accuracy of one millionth of a degree, not to mention the 2.5 million ones measured
with slightly less precision. This gave a tenfold increase in the accuracy of distance
measurements out to about 500 light years. All subsequent steps depend upon this first
rung in the cosmic distance ladder, which now extends to the limit of the visible
Universe. As is now common, all the data from this decade long project is available to
anyone direct from the Hipparcos website [12], or on CD. The attention to
detail, and the independent crosschecks give the astronomical community great confidence
in the data. Hundreds of research papers based on this work continue to be published and
debated. This is typical of how science
works. The patterns that become clear from data such as this form the basis for our view
of the physical structure of the Universe.
Religious
involvement in science
For what purpose do
stars and galaxies exist? Such a question cannot be answered within the scope of science.
Science simply seeks to elucidate the mechanisms by which the physical universe functions.
Religious answers to questions about purpose and meaning can and should amplify the
glories of the universe revealed by scientific investigation. As John Polkinghorne says at
the end of Science and Creation:
Einstein once
said Religion without science is blind, Science without religion is lame.
I would say Religion without science is confined; it fails to be completely
open to reality. Science without religion is incomplete; it fails to obtain the deepest
possible understanding. The remarkable insights that science affords us into the
intelligible workings of the world cry out for an explanation more profound than that
which it itself can provide. Religion, if it is to take seriously its claim that the world
is the creation of God, must be humble enough to learn from science what the world is
actually like. [13]
Personal
involvement in science
Michael Polyani [14] claimed that all knowledge
was personal, as all knowledge involves personal commitment. This undermines the claim to
objectivity made by many in science.
Christopher Downs in
his essay Hostile Science [15] calls for Christians working
in science to quit the silence about their personal belief and integrate the personal and
professional sides of their lives.
My most vivid memory
in this area of personal-professional seperation is a conversation I had with a school
counsellor who had been an executive member of an evangelical union at university, but now
felt she should keep her faith separate from her work. I grieved for the
children she worked with, many of whom would have welcomed a spiritual dimension in
working through their problems.
In another personal
incident during the first Aids Awareness Week in New Zealand I was roundly
criticised by my Head of Department for daring to bring religion into my science
classroom. My crime was to put on my high school classroom blackboard the message
Stop AIDS save sex for marriage. I still consider it was not primarily
a religious statement I made, but it certainly highlighted the difference in world-views
held by the two of us.
These experiences
made me vow that I would not hide my light under a bushel, nor would I be
cowed by those who insist on the separation of personal and professional aspects of life.
One of my cherished memories from my teaching career was the day I was asked to pray
during the regular school assembly at a time when two members of the school community had
died.
Over the years I have
come to see that the more integrated all aspects of my life are, the more whole I am. For
me science is a fascinating search for truth always looking for evidence of how
things truly are yet never achieving perfect knowledge. I guess this makes me a
Critical Realist.
In my job at the
Stardome[16] I was primarily a
populariser of astronomy standing as a link between the scientists and the ordinary
people who want to know more about how the Universe ticks. I needed to fairly represent
what I read and heard from those near the cutting edge of knowledge over a wide range of
areas.
As a science teacher in a Christian school I made some efforts to help reduce the suspicion towards science felt by many in the Christian community.
A great sadness to me
is that many in the church are so inward looking. They are involved with the search for
personal piety while those around them, often living in the same street or working in the
same building, are unaware of those in their midst who are children of the almighty
Creator. Surely if our faith is real we should translate this higher knowledge we have to
those around us who want more meaning in life. We stand between God and the people around
us. We can be barriers to belief by our silence or our poor witness at work and home.
Conversely we can be channels of blessing to all those around us. I suspect that is why
God does not whisk us straight off to heaven once saved. Of course in order to be good
channels we need good knowledge; of the one we represent, of those we talk to, and of the
creation we live in. This knowledge I speak of is not so-called facts, it is more akin to
wisdom.
Christian philosopher
Howard J. Van Till says:
I have a
dream that some day the forgotten doctrine of Creation's functional integrity will be
recovered; that it will once and for all displace all variants of the God-of-the-gaps
perspective; that the empirically derived confidence in the concept of genealogical
continuity will no longer give apologetic advantage to the proponents of anti-theistic
naturalism; and that the whole enterprise of scientific theory evaluation will no longer
be distorted by counterproductive entanglement with the authentically religious debate
between theism and atheism. When that happens, the declarations of atheistic
purposelessness offered by Jacques Monod, William Provine, or Richard Dawkins and company
will have to be defended on their religious merit alone. They will have lost the services
of science, once held hostage by strident preachers of materialism, and once held in
distrustful suspicion by a misguided portion of the Christian community.
[17]
In The
Voyage of the Dawn Treader [18] C. S. Lewis manages a
beautifully succinct correction of the materialist Eustace:
In our
world, said Eustace, a star is a huge ball of flaming gas.
Even in your
world, my son, that is not what a star is but only what it is made of.
An annotated
reading list
I would now like to
highlight a range of books, websites, and articles I have found helpful in thinking about
this topic.
NZ websites
www.stalbans.org.nz from St Albans Presbyterian
Church in Palmerston North contains a range of articles, including essays on science and
faith by Christopher Downs.
www.christianity.org.nz carries articles by Dick Tripp on Christianity
The Christian Faith
and Action Trust (http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~faithact)
was formed in 1995 with the aim of providing activities and materials that promote the
consistent application of Christian faith and action in all aspects of our lives. Their
purpose is to develop an integral perspective on the whole of life that is rooted in the
Scriptures. Chris Gousmett is one spokesman.
The DeepSight Trust (www.deepsight.org)
is the New Zealand wing of the wider Gospel & Culture movement. Its primary
focus is on Christian critique of national culture. Harold Turner was a key spokesman.
A pair of NZ sites is
due to skeptic Vicki Hyde. The now archived NZ Science Monthly magazine, (http://nzsm.spis.co.nz/) featured no nonsense reporting
and debate for a decade 1990 -2000, and carried a range of comment and counter comment on
science-faith matters. The NZ Skeptics society http://skeptics.org.nz
) links to a range of sites, publishes a leaflet arguing against YEC. Its August 2000
conference in Dunedin was titled Creationism a battle for the mind in our
schools.
Sites around the
world
The British
Christians in Science (CIS) group (www.cis.org.uk) is a solid evangelical
organisation, whose members have written a lot that is not on the web some of the
books they list there are essential reading for serious students of this field.
Authors aligned with this group include Arthur Peacocke and John Polkinghorne, a Cambridge
Professor of Physics turned priest writer and philosopher. David Wilkinson and R J Berry,
wrote Real science, real faith which contains the testimonies of 16
professional scientists who discuss their science and their personal faith. The CIS letter
to the British Prime Minister on Young Earth Creationism in
Schools in May 2002 summarises many Christian scientist's misgivings about YEC.
The American
Scientific Affiliation (http://asa.calvin.edu/ASA/) is a large
organisation of scientists who see no major conflict between mainstream science and
Christian faith, unlike the young earth creationists. They publish many interesting
articles here. It is loosely affiliated with CIS
The evangelical
American Reasons to Believe organisation ( www.reasons.org ) was founded in 1986 to
remove the doubts of skeptics, strengthen the faith of believers and demonstrate that
science and the Bible complement one another. Hugh Ross is its leading light.
Christian Leadership
Ministries, the faculty outreach and training arm of Campus Crusade for
Christ International sponsors www.origins.org . The site contains many
interesting articles eg The Church of Darwin by Phillip E Johnson, and various
debates.
Access Research
Network (http://www.arn.org/)
contains many intelligent design articles by writers such as Michael
Behe, William Dembski, David
K. DeWolf , Mark Hartwig, Phillip
Johnson, Stephen Meyer, Paul
Nelson, Robert C. Newman, Nancy
Pearcey, Charles Thaxton and Jonathan
Wells.
www.discovery.org
is an American pro-creation site whose sponsors are not very obvious.
The Institute for
Creation Research (ICR) (www.icr.org) is the home of Young Earth
Creationism. It was founded by Henry Morris. Members hold to a literal 7-day recent
creation, with Noahs Flood as the cause of most geological features. Their books,
videos and radio presentations are widely distributed through NZ churches. Their teachings
are now widely disparaged both by Christians such as Hugh Ross, and all evolutionists. I
find their work disturbing, in that they do not engage in open discussion with others of
opposing opinions, they seem to ignore well-established observations and they require a
literal reading of Genesis 1.
www.answersingenesis.org
is organised by Ken Ham, and has Australian, US and UK links. It is closely affiliated
with ICR.
Three sites by
scientists interested in creation/evolution are valuable for their independent critiques
and their wide range of links to all sides of the discussion a feature absent from
most of the Christian sites.
Don Lindsay writes http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org .
After 17 years around universities, and 17 years in the computer industry, I am both
a scientist and an engineer. My major computer science interests are computer
architecture, operating systems, compilers, and technology forecasting. As you can guess
from my publications, I've been paid to do
all of these. I'm currently part of the open-source world, writing compilers in Silicon
Valley. I have been writing for years, so this archive now has 240 web pages and over 100
images. My long-time Web hobbies are debating Creation/Evolution, Scientology and UFO / psychic
stuff. He is critical of intelligent design writers such as Behe.
A similar site is
maintained by Gert Korthof at http://home.wxs.nl/~gkorthof/index.htm
. His introduction links to a detailed review and comments by others about a range of
works from across the spectrum, including Fred Hoyle, Philip Johnson, Michael Behe,
William Dembski, Lee Spetner, Michael Denton, Stuart Kaufman, John Maynard Smith and
Richard Dawkins, to mention a few.
In the same tradition
are zoologist Wesley R. Elsberrys pages at http://www.antievolution.org . He
describes himself as a creationist evolutionist. His classification of views, his
inclusion of a wide range of leading figures from different positions, and his extensive
links to articles from many points of view make this site refreshingly educational.
Books By NZ
Christians
Neil Brooms How
Blind is the Watchmaker[19] is an answer to the claim
of Richard Dawkins in The Blind Watchmaker[20] that Darwin made it possible
to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. Neil is a biomechanics researcher at Auckland
University.
John Morton was
Professor of Biology, University of Auckland, Lay Canon of Holy Trinity Cathedral,
Auckland and Fellow of St. John's Theological College, Auckland. He wrote Man,
Science and God [21] in 1972.
Harold Turners The
Roots of Science [22] makes a good case for
theology and science to work in partnership. He decries the dualism (matter
spirit split, with spirit more important) of Greek thinking, and the Unitive view
of tribal religion (Divine, human animal and Earth all together reborn in the Gaia
movement). He argues that the Hebrew duality (Divine personal creator
appreciated creation) where the two are distinguished but not separated is a better way.
The three New Zealanders above all contributed to a Science and Christianity Festschrift in honour of John Morton and Harold Turner [23] held under the auspices of the University of Auckland Centre for Continuing Education in April 2001. This one-day seminar featured presentations from several local evangelical scientists and theologians.
In 2004 Telos
Books, P.O. Box 56 167 Dominion Rd, Auckland, New Zealand, published
A Seamless Web: Science and Faith, Ed
Graeme Findlay,
A booklet from NZ and Australian Christian scientists, one in a series of four. The
writers continue a long tradition of scientists, theologians, historians and others who
have sought to demonstrate in their lives and in their work and writing, the fact that
faith and science go together. The following NZ and Australian scientists shared their
personal positions in this booklet:
John Stenhouse, Otago University Senior History
lecturer and Templeton prize-winner - Science, Religion and History
Jeffrey Tallon, Industrial Research Ltd and Victoria
University, also superconductivity pioneer - Scientific and Religious Truth
Geoffrey Stedman, University of Canterbury -
Orthodox science and orthodox Christianity: a physicists perspective
Jonathan Clarke, Geoscience Australia - The
Earth as Sign and Wonder, as Gift and Responsibility
Graeme Findlay, University of Auckland, pathology
lecturer - Just Glorified Apes?
Andrew Shelling, lecturer, University of Auckland -
The New Genetics and Christianity
David Given, Curator, Christchurch Botanic Gardens -
The Greenness in Christianity
Ian Hore-Lacey, General Manager, Uranium Information Centre,
Australia - The Role of Science in the Stewardship of Gods
Creation
Gareth Jones, University of Otago, Professor of Anatomy,
bio-ethicist - When did our lives as Human Beings Begin?
John McClure, Associate Professor of Psychology, Victoria
University - Science, Psychology and Christianity
Nicola Hoggard-Creegan, Lecturer, Bible College of New Zealand
- Theology is Enhanced
by an Evolutionary Understanding of the World
Stephen Pattemore, United Bible Society Translation Consultant
- Language, Communication and the
Bible
God Created The Heavens and The Earth,
Donald Nield, Telos Books,
Gods Books Genetics and Genesis,
Graeme Findlay, Telos Books,
Convincing evidence of genetic continuity across species.
Evolving Creation, Graeme Findlay,
Telos Books,
I liked them so much I bought extra copies to give away.
Dick Tripps
The Complementary Nature of Christianity and Science [24] is one in a series of
booklets about Christian faith; Dick makes a well-reasoned, easily readable case that
Christianity and science need each other. He sketches the historical development of
scientific and Christian thought in non-technical language.
Christopher Downs Essays
on Science and Christianity [25]
are similarly
readable. He is a team leader at a Crown Research Institute
Bill Peddie did his PhD
thesis on the effect of creationism in NZ, University of Auckland, around 1995.
Bill was featured in
a Listener magazine article on April 22, 2000, entitled Gods classroom
How religion is challenging science in New Zealand Schools. Young Earth Creationist Lew Meyer, biologist John
Morton, and a range of science educators were also quoted. The article was generally
dismissive of creationists and shocked at the thought that religion was creeping into
science classrooms, but finished seemingly approving of John Mortons theistic
evolution.
A few books from
the rest of the world
Ian G Barbours
Religion in an Age of Science [26] is an in-depth treatment of
the topic.
Science and
Religion, an Introduction [37] by Alistair E McGrath is a
thorough and careful history of the interaction between science and Christianity. In it he
outlines the ideas of key players including Aristotle, Barbour, Calvin, Darwin, Dawkins
and Davies. McGrath avoids pronouncing judgement in most cases, preferring to simply
outline the development of thought.
In 2005 Alistair McGrath published "Dawkin's god - genes, memes and the meaning of life" (Blackwell, Oxford). In it he courteously and effectively counters Dawkins arguments.
Francis Schaeffer
wrote both Genesis in Space and Time [28] and No Final
Conflict several decades ago as an evangelical treatment of the problem of how
to interpret Genesis.
John
Polkinghornes Science and Creation [29] is a widely quoted and
even-handed treatment on how the scientific and theological worldviews relate to each
other.
Hugh Rosss The Creator and the Cosmos [30] is a very readable book showing how the evidence of science, and astronomy in particular points to a creator. See also his www.reasons.org site.
He has often been attacked by Young Earth Creationists, and has recently (2004) written "A Question of Days" to answer these folk's arguments, show the harmony between the Bible and science, and plead for less attacks by Christians on other Christians.
Rev Robert Evans is
perhaps the most famous supernova discoverer in the world. He achieved this by spare time
observing while a practising minister in Australia. His unpublished 147 p treatise An
Evangelical World-view Philosophy [31] has several chapters that deal with the
relationship between science and Christianity.
Being A Christian in Science, Walter R.
Hearn, IVP,
I had an interesting conversation with the author at the 2003 ASA conference in
Telling Lies for God - Reason vs Creationism,
Ian Plimer, Random House, Australia, 1994
Aussie geology professor attacks young earth creationists mercilessly. Much of his concern
seems well based, though some of his assertions may be unfounded.
Christianity and the Age of the Earth,
Davis A Young,
Davis Young is from Calvin College, Michigan, a highly respected reformed college. I had
the privilege of staying with Larry Molnar, the astronomy professor there in 2003. I did
not meet
The Christian View of Science and Scripture,
Bernard Ramm,
This is a classic and repays reading despite its age!
Science Held
Hostage Whats Wrong with Creation Science and Evolutionism [32] by Howard Van Till, Davis
Young and Clarence Menninga, is just what its title implies. They hold that the object of
science is the entire observable physical universe, and its domain is restricted to its
inherent intelligibility. They examine and finds wanting through failure to consider all
the evidence, creationist positions on dust depth on the moon, changing speed of light,
the shrinking Sun, salt level in the sea and missing rock in the Grand Canyon. Isaac
Asimov is criticised for implying that God is not needed in the Universe. The book posits
two competing folk sciences evolutionary naturalism and scientific creationism, and
critiques both severely. Folk science uses knowledge about the material world to confirm a
world-view. Authentic natural science seeks simply to gain knowledge about the universe.
Sagans Cosmos is seen as an example of folk science. Some tests are
suggested to determine an authors position and the solidity of their argument:
Ø What
categories of questions are of principal concern - the inherent intelligibility of the
physical universe or the requirement of no divine action in the world?
Ø Is the
distinction between origin and formation made clear? Science cannot investigate
ultimate origins.
Ø Is the
distinction between behaviour and governance made clear?
Theists see the
behaviour of the universe as the result of Gods governance whereas philosophical
naturalism or materialism sees matter as self-governing.
For example in the folk science of evolutionary naturalism the processes of cosmic
formation are described as either natural processes or consequences of divine action but
not both.
Michael J.
Behes book Darwins Black Box [33] is a key work in the modern
movement to question Darwinism
if you
search the scientific literature on evolution, and if you focus your search on the
question of how molecular machines the basis of life developed, you find an
eerie and complete silence. The complexity of lifes foundation has paralyzed
sciences attempt to account for it; molecular machines raise an as-yet-inpenetrable
barrier to Darwinisms universal reach. To find out why, in this book I will examine
several fascinating molecular machines, then ask whether they can ever be explained by
random mutation/natural selection.
He goes on to
describe the complexity of molecular machines such as eyes and cilia and the complexities
of cellular chemistry. He concludes that they cannot be developed in small steps from
simple precursors. Chapter 11, titled Science Philosophy, Religion, is a
must-read. It describes the reluctance of scientists to consider intelligent design and
the unfortunate history of clashes between science and religion. He concludes that there
is no good reason for science to reject intelligent design, but every reason to reject the
Darwinist idea that living things developed by chance mutations and selections.
Phillip E. Johnson is
a lawyer who examines the arguments between creationism and evolutionists. His Darwin
on Trial [34] shook
a few assumptions when it appeared in 1991. It carries descriptions of the debates in both
the US and UK involving the British Museum, American Scientific Affiliation, and many
others. It is characterised by careful treatment of both sides in each case study. He wrote Defeating Darwinism [35] in 1997 as a guide to
Christians on how to differentiate between science and the materialist philosophy of some
influential scientists.
Intelligent
Design - the bridge between science and philosophy [36] is by William A. Dembski, and
lays out rigorous criteria for recognising intelligent design.
Methodological
Naturalism [38] is an article by Alvin
Plantinga, from the Department of Philosophy at the University of Notre Dame. He examines
the presupposition that science should proceed by methodological naturalism, unhindered by
religious claims. Plantinga has written several important works on theology and science.
Anti-theistic books
In his influential
work The Blind Watchmaker [39] Richard Dawkins attacks the
notion that anything apart from evolution is needed for life to develop, and rubbishes the
idea of God being involved.
Carl Sagan was an
eloquent writer and powerful speaker, who like Dawkins popularised the view that we are
alone in the cosmos. In the beautiful work Pale Blue Dot [40] he expounded the theme that
the human race should seek its destiny in exploring other worlds. In The
Demon-Haunted World [41] he depicted science
as rising above superstition and religion.
Tower of
Babel: The Evidence against the New Creationism [42] by Robert T. Pennock is a
critique of the Intelligent Design movement. See the links on Korthofs site for
Behes and others responses.
Douglas Futuyma wrote
Science on Trial. The Case for Evolution [43] in 1982 and revised it in
1995 as a defence of evolution against creationist attacks. He is the author of a widely
used college textbook on evolution and has been editor of a leading international journal
of evolutionary research.
Concluding remarks
I urge you to read and discuss a wide cross-section of these works. There is a huge debate in progress, especially in the USA, over what can be taught as part of science in schools. The wider debate about the proper place of science and religion in our personal lives and in society as a whole is more significant. We should not just read works by our friends if we are to grow in understanding. If God is truly by our side then we should not fear the truth, or shrink from the hard work of understanding the issues involved.
A book I have found
helpful in outlining the issues and suggesting practical responses is How Now
Shall We Live [44] by Charles
Colson and Nancy Pearcey, It is also available as a video based seminar.
I am heartened by the
re-emerging middle ground among scientists and believers. Don't be put off by that teacher
or friend for whom evolution explains everything, and don't be convinced by the rigid
rules of the young-earth creationists. There is an amazing Universe out there waiting to
be explored, and the more thoughtful Christians doing it the better. There are also a lot
of folk out there who would welcome dialogue with a rational and courteous believer.
You can
contact me at fourtyres at hotmail.com
[2] I did pen some suggestions as to how faith and science
might relate in the textbook by Relph, Walker, Vallender and Dunlop; Planet Earth
and Beyond, New House, 1994.
[3] David Wilkinson, God, The Big Bang
and Stephen Hawking, Monarch, 1993
[4] Mark Van Bebber and Paul S Taylor,
Creation and Time: A report on the Progressive Creationist Book by Hugh Ross, Eden
Communications, 2000
[5] Jonathan Sarfati,
Expose of NavPresss new Hugh Ross book: The Genesis Question, found at wwwanswersingenesisorg/docs/4128asp
22/7/00
[6] Jonathan Sarfati,
The Sun our special star, First published in: Creation Ex Nihilo 22(1):2730 December
1999 February 2000 and found at http://wwwanswersingenesisorg/docs/4180asp on
22/7/00
[7] ibid
[8] Jonathan Sarfati, The Moon: The light that rules the
night, First
published in: Creation Ex Nihilo
20(4):3639, SeptemberNovember 1998 and found at http://wwwanswersingenesisorg/docs/3747asp
on 22/7/00
[9] ibid
[10] John Polkinghorne, Science and Theology, an
introduction, SPCK, 1998
[11] Wesley Elsberry has an interesting Venn diagram to illustrate overlapping circles of thought at http://www.antievolution.org/people/wre/essays/ea.html
[13] John Polkinghorne, Science and
Creation, SPCK, 1988
[14] Michael Polanyi, Personal
Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy, Harper and Row, 1964
[15] In Christopher Downs, Essays on
Science and Christianity, available from St Albans Presbyterian Church, Palmerston North,
or at www.stalbans.org.nz , 1999
[16] Aucklands StarDome Observatory and Planetarium
on One Tree Hill. www.stardome.org.nz Ph 09 624 1246
[17] God and Evolution: An Exchange First Things 34 (June/July 1993): 32-41 Found at http://www.firstthings.com on 22/7/00
[18] C S Lewis, The Voyage of the Dawn
Treader, Puffin, 1965
[19] Neil Broom, How Blind is the
Watchmaker, Ashgate, 1998
[20] Richard Dawkins, The Blind
Watchmaker, Penguin, 1988
[21] John Morton, Man, Science and God,
Collins, 1972
[22] Harold Turner, The Roots of
Science, Deepsight Trust, 1998
[23] L.R.B. Mann ed. Science and Christianity - Festschrift in honour of Harold Turner and John Morton. Papers and discussion from a symposium held in Auckland April 21 2001, University of Auckland Centre for Continuing Education, 2001
[24] Dick Tripp, The Complementary
Nature of Christianity and Science, (c 1995, self-published) available from the author:
Still Point, 42 Zephyr Tce, Governors Bay, RD 1, Lyttleton
[25] Christopher Downs, Essays on
Science and Christianity, self published (1995), St Albans Presbyterian Church, Palmerston
North or at www.stalbans.org.nz
[26] Ian G Barbour, Religion in an Age
of Science, SCM, 1990
[27] Alistair McGrath, Science
and Religion an introduction, Blackwell, 1999
[28]
Francis Schaeffer, Genesis in Space and Time, IVP, 1975
[29] John Polkinghorne, Science and
Creation, SPCK, 1988
[30] Hugh Ross, The Creator and the
Cosmos, Navpress, 1995
[31] Rev Robert Evans, An Evangelical
World-view Philosophy, unpublished, 1994
[32] Howard Van Till, Davis Young,
Clarence Menninga, Science Held Hostage Whats Wrong with Creation Science and
Evolutionism, IVP, 1988
[33] Michael J Behe, Darwins Black
Box, Touchstone, 1996
[34] Phillip E Johnson, Darwin on Trial,
IVP, 1991
[35] Phillip E Johnson, Defeating
Darwinism, IVP, 1997
[36] William A Dembski, Intelligent
Design - the bridge between science and philosophy, IVP, 1999
[37] Alistair E McGrath, Science and
Religion, an Introduction, Blackwell, 1999
[38] Alvin Plantinga, Methodological
Naturalism, article from
http://id-wwwucsbedu/fscf/library/plantinga/mn/homehtml
22/7/00
[39] Richard Dawkins, The Blind
Watchmaker, Penguin, 1988
[40] Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot, Headline, 1995
[41] Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World, Random House,
1995
[42] Robert T Pennock, Tower of Babel:
The Evidence against the New Creationism, MIT Press, 1999
[43] Douglas Futuyma, Science on Trial -
the Case for Evolution, Sinauer, 1982, 1995
[44] How Now Shall
We Live by Charles Colson and Nancy Pearcey, Tyndale, 1999