Fantastic Article by Stephen Barr, professor of Physics over at First Things about the need to end the Intelligent Design discussion.
Some Highlights:
”The ID movement has also rubbed a very raw wound in the relation between science and religion. For decades scientists have had to fend off the attempts by Young Earth creationists to promote their ideas as a valid alternative science. The scientific world’s exasperation with creationists is understandable. Imagine yourself a serious historian in a country where half the population believed in Afrocentric history, say, or a serious political scientist in a country where half the people believed that the world is run by the Bilderberg Group or the Rockefellers. It would get to you after a while, especially if there were constant attempts to insert these alternative theories into textbooks. So, when the ID movement came along and suggested that its ideas be taught in science classrooms, it touched a nerve. This is one reason that the New Atheists attracted such a huge audience.
None of this is to say that the conclusions the ID movement draws about how life came to be and how it evolves are intrinsically unreasonable or necessarily wrong. Nor is it to deny that the ID movement has been treated atrociously and that it has been lied about by many scientists. The question I am raising is whether this quixotic attempt by a small and lightly armed band to overthrow “Darwinism” and bring about a new scientific revolution has accomplished anything good. It has had no effect on scientific thought. Its main consequence has been to strengthen the general perception that science and religion are at war.”
And then this:
“I suspect that some religious people have embraced the ID movement’s arguments because they want “scientific” answers to the scientific atheists, and they know of no others. But there are plenty of ways to make a case for the reasonableness of religious belief that can be persuasive to many in the scientific world. Such a case has been made by a growing number of research scientists who are Christian believers, such as John Polkinghorne, Owen Gingerich, Francis Collins, Peter E. Hodgson, Michal Heller, Kenneth R. Miller, and Marco Bersanelli. I have addressed many audiences myself using arguments similar to theirs and have had scientists whom I know to be of firm atheist convictions tell me that they came away with more respect for the religious position. Religion has a significant number of friends (and potential friends) in the scientific world. The ID movement is not creating new ones.”
All right, as promised, here are further thoughts on my statement that Theology is self correcting.
I think of all the reactions to the PZ interview, this one probably suprised me the most. To me, it’s self evident, but from how everyone reacted, I realized this was not the case. Here is a further explanation.
Sadly, the night of the video interview, we were really pressed for time. PZ had a long day and we had other guests to interview. I’m sure that PZ (and the rest of you) would have liked more clarification to the statement. It certainly needed more clarification.
When I said that theology is self correcting, I meant that it has in built system for correcting errors. Science, as we all know has a simliar system. However, it might be rightly argued that each system is different, because each discipline is different. I think this is true, to some extent. My interest is not in those differences, but in how the systems might be simliar. I think those systems are similar in two ways: An appeal to an established tradition and vehicles for self correction.
Let’s deal with the established tradition part first.
First, let’s look at science. For those who argue that science comes at a scientific problem completely “objective” and without any regards to work that has happend before, is completely ignorant of the scientific process. In fact, I know of no self respecting scientist who makes this argument. As Sir Isacc Newton put it, “If I see further, it is because I have stood on the shoulder of giants”. His point is that scienctific inquiry does have a history and does have authories that must be considered in the scientific pursuit. True, those authorties are often stuck down, but they are still consulted.
We obviously have gone beyond some of those authorties and have expanded on others. Even more, the scientific method is a hard and fast authority that all scientists must obey if they are to do good science. They respect the scientific tradition that has come before and seek to build on it through the scientific method.
Christians have that established tradition as well, but it’s always being corrected. To illustrate, alllow me to use the first two chapters in Genesis. Believe it or not, the church has wrestled how to really deal with Genesis one and two. It’s only in the 20th century that six day, twenty four, ten thousand years for the age of the earth, has become a test for Christian orthodoxy. The historical picture is much more complicated. Early church fathers, like St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas have long argued that Genesis 1 and two should not be taken as a literal six twenty four hour periods. Both had different arguments as to why this was the case and both of them scientifically wrong. Their arguments were widely considered in their day as being scientifically possible. At least, in the scientific understanding of the day.
Flash forward to the present day. As many of you know, the hard core YEC’s have only been around since the Scopes trial and really didn’t start gathering steam until the 1960’s. Many conservative theologians are begining to push back against the YEC’s intepretation mostly due to how the text functions. They have argued that the YEC position is not even a very biblical one, much less a scientifically valid position to take.
Notice how this worked. Look at the established YEC tradition in this country. Comparing it to older tradition in the church. Comparing it to a hard core standard (the Bible and Science). End result= YEC position being corrected by theological discussion.
Side Note: Some will argue it’s science that prompted this discussion in the first place. This is true to some extent, but it also doesn’t tell the whole truth. As noted, the debate on whether Genesis 1 and 2 is a literal time frame has been happening WAY before the current evolution/creation debates. So, this is only partially true.
All that to say, this particular question is far from being settled in the Christian world and it’s in the process of self correcting through understanding the text, scientific investigation and good old fashioned theological debate. We argue through academic theological journey’s (yes, there are a ton), sermons, blogs, and every place you could possibly imagine. It’s true Christians have a tradition. I would argue that this is not unique to any academic discipline and certainly is true of science. Despite the PZ comments, theology DOES have a peer review process. You write a paper. Submit it to an academic journal and then other theologians get to tear into your work. It it exactly like the scientific process? No, and it shouldn’t be. However, that’s not the same thing as saying it doesn’t have one at all.
These are short thoughts, but I’m hoping to say more as all of you push back. Please note, I’m not saying that self correcting in science is the same as in theology. However, that doesn’t change the fact it happens in both disciplines.
Yes, as I said, atheists speaking at a Christian conference. Come and check out Jubilee February 19-21 in Pittsburgh, PA.
It turns out, writing 67,000 words in two months take a lot out of you. Stay tuned.
Here is part one of a blog interview that I did. Enjoy. Or cast stones.
I’m done. 66,00 words. Here is the final paragraph:
So, to end, I steal a quote from the blessed Patrick, a minister to Irish pirates, “But I beg and beseech all those who believe and fear God, whoever comes across this writing and takes the trouble to read it through, namely, the writing of Jonathan, a sinner who, wrote it down in Columbus, Ohio, that no one every say I have accomplished any great thing or that I did anything on my own. But rather, know and believe it to be the undeniable truth that it was the gift of God.”
This is my confession.
Just wanted to share one of the most honest things I have ever written.
After the book store (at the Creation Musuem), I couldn’t take anymore. I left my group and went outside. I watched the atheists mill around the grounds outside. I watched the Christian families eat their picnic lunches by the beautiful lake. It seemed like two races of aliens, neither of which I could join.
I didn’t know what to think about the whole experience. I felt alone. I felt confused. Everything I felt the past year of working with atheists and being a Christian minister crashed down on me at that moment. I felt isolated from the atheists because of my firm belief in God. There are times when atheists have described me as “almost one of them” because of my love for science and reason. I make it a point to adamantly deny this statement. It amazes me to think that some people would think that my faith would cave that easily, especially in light of most of the atheist objections to Christianity I consider highly unconvincing. I mean, I realize it’s their way of saying they like me, so I try not to be rude about it. But, I tell them I won’t be joining their ranks any time soon, and sincerely doubt I ever will.
And yet, I also felt isoloated from my fellow Christians who walked the grounds at the museum because I thought there view of Genesis entirely mistaken. I consider their view bad exegesis and more of a product of the culture war mentality en vogue among many conservative Christians who come to the Creation Museum. Even worse, I felt if they knew that they would question my belief in God and would question how faithful I’m really am.
It’s happened to me more and more since I started working with atheists. Christians ask me all the time about my faith and they take the time to warn me about the dangers to my faith. They give me worried and concerned looks as if they are afraid I’ll drop my faith with the right atheist argument. These are people who are friends of mine and should know better.
I appreciate the concern. I know it’s supposed to make me feel better because people are concerned about me. Truthfully, it doesn’t really make me feel that way at all. It makes me feel isolated when I’m around other Christians. It makes me feel as they think I’m some sort of faith bomb that will go off at any moment spraying them with shattered faith debris.
Of course, this is probably all in my paranoid imagination. I tell myself this isn’t the case, but it’s hard to feel different. Even as I write this book, I feel the tension at times. That tension has led to a new brand of spiritual pride that could be described as “I know better than everyone elseitis”.
C.S. Lewis talks about this in the Screwtape Letters. Screwtape is talking about Wormwood’s patient hanging out with witty, urban nonbelivers on Saturday and then going to church with his fellow Christians the next day. Screwtape writes this,
“Your patient can be made to take a positive pleasure in the perception that the two sides of his life are inconsistent. This is done by exploiting his vanity. He can be taught to enjoy kneeling beside the grocer on Sunday just because he remembers that the grocer could not possibly understand the urbane and mocking world which he inhabits on Saturday evening; and contrawise enjoy the bawdy and blasphemy over the coffee with these admirable friends all the more because he is aware of a deeper, spiritual world within him which they cannot touch. You see the idea-the wordly friends touch him on side and the grocer on the other, and he is the complex man who sees around them all. Thus, while being permanently treacherous to at least two sets of people, he will feel, instead of shame, a continual undercurrent of self-satisfaction.”
I realized at that moment I was in serious danger of doing exactly what Screwtape described. My danger wasn’t that I would lose my faith. My problem wasn’t that I had become overly critical of other Christians. My issue had become that my pride had taken over against both Christians and Atheists. I had become perfectly treacherous to two groups of people and had grown to love the feeling. This had been the real part of my relunctance to attend the Creation Musuem. I had been afraid that I would have to pick a side and lose my superior status.
So, in the midst of all that, I prayed. I prayed that God would forgive me of my arrogant heart towards my fellow believers. I asked God to forgive my silent scorn of atheists. I I prayed that God would make me more open, more honest, more loving. I prayed that God would help me not to be so in love with myself and my own cleverness.
Read. Think. Discuss.
The Thomas Society of Quincy, Illinois
cordially invites you to join a conversation about The Big Questions.
WHAT: This spring, we’ll be reading two a community reading group bestsellers: Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion and Timothy Keller’s The Reason for God
WHY: Serious reflection causes serious questions
WHO:Discussions will be facilitated by Matthew Jordan, Ph.D., Visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy at Quincy University. anyone who would like to participate.
March 4—May 20, every other Thursday, 7:30—9:00 p.m.
WHERE:
Room ___ of Francis Hall, Quincy University
SPONSORED BY:
The Thomas Society, Quincy’s Socrates Café, the Quincy University Division of Humanities, Faith Presbyterian Church
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
email the Thomas Society thosoquincy@gmail.com
So, are you a Christian college student who wants a little more out of your weekend conference? Are you an atheist college student who wants to figure out these weird Christians and listen to Hemant Mehta in one weekend?
Then, look no further than the CCO’s Jubilee Conference. We have some great speakers that include Hemant Mehta and Ashley Paramore two bonafied atheists. Oh, and not to mention the lame pastor who runs this blog will be speaking there. I mean, really? They are going to let him speak? What’s their problem?
To make up for that lack of judgement, we have cool speakers like David Dark, Steve Stockman and Makoto Fujimura. These speakers talk about their Christianity and their area of work, whether it’s art, helping the world or writing.
Anyway, if you are interested in going, you can check out the website or email me.
Hey Everyone,
If you are in the Columbus area, I’m going to be speaking at Ohio Wesleyan University tomorrow night at 8:00 PM. The title of the talk will be, of course, “A Chaplain of Pirates: My Life Among The Atheists”. Everyone is invited.
So, for you linear types:
Location:Bishop Cafe, Hamilton-Williams Campus Center, Ohio Wesleyan University, Deleware, Ohio,
Time: 8:00 PM.
Talk: A Chaplain of Pirates: My Life Among The Atheists
