Recently in Problems for Faith Category

A couple of weeks ago I had a brief post asking why the scientific theory of evolution was a challenge for faith, but a scientific theory explaining weather was not a problem. (See here for the post: God, Science, and Evolution (RJS)).  One of the comments on that post leads me to a new question - this one on the Bible, authority, and the role of church tradition in our interpretation of scripture. The commenter said:

What I would find interesting would be a discussion of the kind of categories of biblical literature that we might question now, in terms of their wooden historicity, in light of the weather topic being discussed here.

This is an excellent topic for discussion.  And note - the question is not "What parts of the Bible can we discard" the question is "How do we interpret scripture." The Bible is true - it is the "Word of God" and yet it is contains many kinds of literature, composed in very different historical contexts. We all use judgment in interpretation. There is no such thing as uninterpreted scripture.

What kinds of Biblical literature might not be strictly historical?  Can the Bible contain truth told through story? Does it matter?

Scot has handled most of the discussion on John Walton's (professor at Wheaton) new book, The Lost World of Genesis One: Ancient Cosmology and the Origins Debate, but I am going to jump in with a post on his next two propositions (16 and 17).

The first ten or eleven propositions in this book lay out a powerful approach to the understanding of Genesis One in the context of the original cultures.  The literal approach - assuming a material science and history behind the authorial intent of the text - may in fact distort our understanding of the message of the text.  The remaining propositions deal with the implications or consequences of this approach to Genesis One.

The two propositions we will discuss today build on this background and assert that Scientific explanations of origins can be unobjectionable (Proposition 16) and that the Theology of Genesis One in this view is stronger not weaker (Proposition 17).  I will start with the second - which I find to be one of the key points in Walton's book.

The creeds state "We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth." This belief is common to all Christians - but does this rely on Genesis 1? Is the theology of God as creator strengthened or weakened when we look at Genesis 1 in terms of function?

I will return to consider the next chapters of Conway Morris's book Life's Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe next week. Today I would like to take a brief detour and consider another question. Many authors - Dawkins and others - have made popular the idea that religion, belief in God, and morality, among other things are either natural consequences or by-products of survival of the fittest and the preservation of the Selfish Gene.  Religion has a purely natural explanation. An article a year or so ago in The New Scientist asserted Religion is a product of evolution, software suggests - described the development of a computer program to simulate and thus explain the development of religion.

In his chapter on The Roots of Religion in The God Delusion Dawkins writes:

Knowing that we are products of Darwinian evolution, we should ask what pressure or pressures exerted by natural selection originally favored the impulse to religion. The question gains urgency from standard Darwinian considerations of economy. Religion is so wasteful, so extravagant; and Darwinian selection habitually targets and eliminates waste. (p. 163)

and later in the chapter he gives his own view - religion is a by-product.

Natural selection builds child brains with a tendency to believe whatever their parents and tribal elders tell them. Such trusting obedience is valuable for survival... But the flip side of trusting obedience is slavish gullibility.  The inevitable byproduct is vulnerability to infection by mind viruses. (p. 176)

What role if any does evolution play in the development of religion?

Chapters 2-5 of Simon Conway Morris's book Life's Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe ramble through a description of the rather tight constraints required for the formation of life and the lack of current understanding as to how life appeared.There are many interesting ideas, but the general point or direction is a little obscure.  

First (Ch. 2-4) - we don't really have a clue how life developed on this planet.  The synthesis of organic goo - from simple hydrocarbons to larger polyaromatic hydrocarbons and even amino acids is  straightforward. Such compounds are common in the universe. But this alone does not equal life. Scholars, scientists are working on the problem - but the progress to date is less than spectacular. It is an incredibly complex  and multifaceted problem.

Second (Ch. 5) - the planet on which we exist appears by most criteria to be "odd." The band of conditions required for conditions amenable to the stability of the diverse and interconnected set of structures and reactions that support "life" are stringent and potentially (Conway Morris suggests likely) rare.

What thoughts cross your mind when contemplating the remarkable intricacy and complexity of life and the vastness of the universe? Awe, despair, curiosity, reverence, wonder?

Today I start in earnest a series focused on Simon Conway Morris's book Life's Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe. This book is an exploration of the evidence for evolutionary convergence - the idea that there are islands of stability and that evolution will identify these islands. Conway Morris is  Professor of Evolutionary Paleobiology at Cambridge University. He is also a Christian and puts some effort into integrating his science with a Christian world view. Maggie McDonald commenting on his book in The New Scientist  had no quarrel with his science or the plausibility of his arguments, but ...

...It's his next step that is difficult to contemplate calmly. If you accept that a sentient species would evolve, then "it is reasonable to take the claims of theology seriously. The choice is yours," he says. I found myself forced to resort to the old "define your terms" tactic to escape the grip of his logic. Read twice.

Dawkins famously claims that the understanding of evolution makes it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. But can this be turned around?

Can the study of evolution - as a mechanism of creation - lead one to take theology seriously? Can it lead to an appreciation for theology as a window on reality rather than an outgrown superstition with natural explanation?

What place can evolution have in a world created by a personal God?The Darwinian paradigm of random mutation and natural selection seems to suggest that the development of life in the universe and sentient beings on our planet is a...

David Bentley Hart, a historian of ideas, Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies , examines "faith and reason" to provide historical context for what has happened with New Atheists.Hart begins by quoting the famous medievalist, Jacques...

David Bentley Hart, a historian of ideas, Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies , examines the foundation upon which the new atheism rests its case. In a word, new atheism stands on modernity.Hart throws sharp punches:...

Strident critics of "religion" today would like us to imagine a society without religion and to begin constructing a society without religion.  David Bentley Hart, in chapter one of his new book, Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable...

The worst society I can imagine is one where Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris get to determine what is good and what is bad and where they get to determine who is good and who is bad. They...

Read this and ponder -- one to keep in mind.Garret's arms twist at sharp angles.  His eyes, vacant and unfocused, stare fixedly away into a void, veiled windows to a soul suddenly plunged into primordial darkness.  His brain fires primeval...

I got this letter last Friday, July 3d, as a comment on a post and I want to post it today to generate a conversation. What is your advice?Dear Scot,I'm not a Christian and don't intend becoming one. However, my...

For those who don't know this, this post is written by our friend "RJS," a professor in the sciences at a leading American university. She regularly posts here about issues intersecting science and faith.Last week in A Fine Tuned...

What do you say to your adult daughter if she tells you she's not convinced of God or that she's at least not on good terms with God? Pastor-theologian Michael Jinkins, in his new book Called to Be Human: Letters...

Nay, fly to Altars; there they'll talk you dead;For Fools rush in where Angels fear to tread.The Fool referred to by Alexander Pope was the literary critic of his day.  Fear not - I intend no literary criticism. Yet the...

SMcK foreword: RJS's question below stunned me this morning. Did God create in such a way that the laws of nature were how he created, so that expecting something outside the laws of nature is looking for the wrong thing?...

A couple of months ago we had two posts based on a book Darwin and the Bible: The Cultural Confrontation - (first, second). This book was designed (with only modest success) to "help readers understand the nature, history, and passions...

I hope the title to this post didn't scare you off because I want to address a serious topic: how we face death. But we can address this from a variety of angles -- like Christian hope or the medical,...

We continue our discussion of Kent Sparks's book God's Word in Human Words (GWHW) moving into Chapters 2 and 3:  Historical Criticism and Assyriology and The Problem of Biblical Criticism. Before diving into the topic of Biblical Criticism, Sparks considers...

A couple of months ago Peter Enns posted on his blog part one of a review and discussion of Kenton Sparks' recent book God's Word in Human Words (GWHW).  Although in writing part one Enns expressed hoped that part two...

We discussed the creation narratives in Genesis 1-3 in a series of posts earlier this year.  The questions on the proper interpretation of Genesis don't stop with Genesis 3 however, and I received an e-mail last week with the following...

We started a discussion a while ago on University Ministry  - a discussion I would like to continue today. And I think the initial question to shape thinking is quite simple:What is the purpose or aim of a College or...

Scot has been presenting a series of related posts pondering the future of evangelicalism and the importance of youth ministry - something that may cover anyone from 12 to 30 or so these days.  There are many aspects to this...

Some Christians are functional deists: they believe in God but their God has very little to do with this world. He's the clockmaker God; made this place and then let it run. On the other hand, some Christians are theological...

Adam Hamilton asks if there will be Hindus in heaven in the 12th chp of his book, Seeing Gray in a World of Black and White: Thoughts on Religion, Morality, and Politics. He opens this chapter with a widely-known (at...

This is the second part of the letter we received the other day. Again, I'm keen on hearing how you would respond to this seeker.Bottom line I would like an absolute truth.  A Fact.  It seems reasonable to me to...

Here is a letter sent to me about a woman struggling with faith, and one of her major questions is a deep, dread-type question: The shocking injustices some experience.Gary Haugen spoke at the service at Willow on the International Justice...