The Power of Wonder
January 5, 2010
Related topics: Philosophy of Science |
2009 marked both the 400th anniversary of Galileo’s telescope and the 150th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, two events that lead to revolutionary breakthroughs in our understanding of the world. With these scientific discoveries fresh in our minds – as well as the many new ones made this year – it is little wonder that many have also spent 2009 pondering how science relates to faith.
In his editorial for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, William P. Brown, professor of Old Testament at Columbia Theological Seminary in Decatur, offers his thoughts on where the futures of science and faith are headed. As Brown notes, both science and the Bible reflect on “the natural world’s complexity and humanity’s inseparable relationship to it.” In fact, Brown writes that many often overlook our earthly origins entirely, focusing only on the divine components of creation.
Science, then, can help us to focus on different aspects of our existence. According to Brown, “Science has done an incredible service to the faithful: it has enhanced our capacity to wonder. That capacity, according to bioanthropologist Melvin Konner, is ‘the hallmark of our species.’” Not only can wonder lead to new scientific discoveries, it can also inspire our religious thinking.
Brown concludes:
“As I thank God for the glorious, life-sustaining world in which we live, I also remember with gratitude Galileo and Darwin. They have revealed a few of the great wonders of God’s ‘other book.’ May it continue to be read with care.”
For the latest comments, subscribe to our Comment RSS feed. See a comment that violates our Commenting Guidelines? Use the "Report Inappropriate Comment" tool in the upper-right corner.
January 7th 2010
Very nice words Kathryn!
Reply to this commentJanuary 7th 2010
Mere_Christian wrote: “Where is the hope of the Gospel in the works of Christian BioLogos authors?”
If you have ears to hear and eyes to see and a heart that discerns, MC, you’ll eventually discover it. No doubt, it is there! Kathryn’s words (and questions) give a direct answer to your question.
BioLogos is completely open about its religious orientation. On the homepage, it says: “We believe that faith and science both lead to truth about God and creation.”
Saying “Darwin was an anti-Christ” is as ridiculous as Sam Harris’ views of ‘faith.’ Can you not recognize this?
What positive contribution can you make to ‘science, philosophy and religion’ discourse that moves beyond simply attacking Darwin?
There are educational programs in various locations now offering courses on ‘science, philosophy and religion’ and I suspect that very few of them villainize Darwin, but rather respectfully include him as a significant figure in the conversation. Nobody (reasonable) is asking you to worship Darwin!
Reply to this commentJanuary 7th 2010
@Gregory #1881
Darwin is the secularist messiah. Venerated in celebration and deed. Freeing all from darkness. That’s simply the way he and Darwinism are portrayed throughout academia and society as a whole. B-L guys show us all appropriate belief in our origins is secular enlightenment Darwin-style. Their writings speak to this loudly. I am not making a false accusation. I’m just asking why.
Now, as written by the disciple, an “anti-Christ” is one that believes that Jesus, as the Son of God, did not come in the flesh. Darwin was an atheist and all atheists are anti-Christ’s. The definition is applicable. Where is the un-yoking with these anti-Christ’s by B-L voices? Again, how is that not a fair questioning? When anyone or any group comes along calling Christians to interact, they need to be tested by light of Christian reality. Darwin “ism” is anti to Christian truth. I’m obviously not in the position to challenge B-L scientific positions on slime becoming a piano pianist, but their theology is wanting and is open to challenge. Seeing how Dr. Collins handled the historicity of the Gospels shows BioLogos his pet project is a long way from offering Christians solid orthodoxy. CONT:
Reply to this commentJanuary 7th 2010
CONT:Like I’ve written before, B-L should invite in Dr. Peter Kreeft and other more substantial Christian apologists to be “academic” voices to The Church. Evolution as apologia ends with Adam and Christian reality begins with his genetics. And anyone with conscience knows how truly evil social Darwinism has been. ALL of socities vice and unvirtue can be laid in the hands of Darwinists.
I’d like to see these highly educated B-L guys make some better statements about Christian historicity than trumpeting Darwin as being as important as John the Baptist (and certainly more important than any Apostle Including the add-on Paul).
I lament coming across as antagonistic, but alas, when dealing with the conditioned minds of humanist academics, politically correct reactions are always in their way to hearing a challenge to their cemented-ness. Even the article about the niceness of Evangelicals came across as haughty and higher-than by the Darwinian author. “Aren’t those fundies nice people in their present ignorant conditions of un-darwinism If only they would embrace evolutionarianism, than the flood gates of salvation would usher the saved in.”
That apologia needs challenge. Obviously while keeping things civil.
Reply to this commentJanuary 9th 2010
“Darwin is the secularist messiah.” - M_C
How does this help with communication? All I am left to conclude from it is that you are an extremist. Very few hold to this untenable (due to historical facts) position, other than the likes of Ken Ham and his followers.
First, there is no ‘messiah’ in an atheistic sense. That is, your use of ‘secularist’ seems really just to mean a non-theist. Second, you attribute *way* too much importance to the minority few who name Darwin as such a ‘messianic’ figure. And I will not entertain an answer if you don’t actually think about this but only respond with a knee-jerk, which is what _____’s do.
Why not have pity on Darwin instead, M_C?! Is your heart not big enough? If you’d read M. Bulgakov’s brilliant suppressed book “Master and Margarita” you’d realize that even P. Pilate can be ‘forgiven.’ Darwin after all denied that he was ever an atheist.
Why do you condemn Charles Darwin so abusively at the cost of further exercising your own wonder (title of the thread) in new directions or dimensions?
Reply to this comment